Abstract
Purpose
The study aims to analyze the influence of hedonic, utilitarian, and self-esteem motivations on online shopping behavior. Likewise, the mediating role of impulsive shopping and shopping intentions is also analyzed.
Design/methodology/approach
The study was carried out with the results of a survey in which 450 respondents participated, and the data was analyzed by using structural equation modeling (SmartPLS 3.0 software).
Findings
All the hypothesized links were significant and positive except for the relationship of self-esteem motive with impulsive shopping tendency, which was negative as hypothesized. Moreover, hedonic motive had a strong positive impact on impulsive shopping tendency, whereas, in contrast, utilitarian motive had a strong positive impact on shopping intentions.
Practical implications
Managers should focus on functional value rather than emotional value to attract customers who tend to be utilitarian. In contrast, for customers who tend to be hedonic, the product offerings should be visually appealing, stimulating and inspiring, as well as have emotional value.
Originality/value
This study investigates the roles of self-esteem and hedonic motives in impulsive shopping behavior. Moreover, by using the theory of planned behavior, this study highlights the roles of hedonic and utilitarian motives in attitude toward engaging in online shopping.
Propósito
El estudio pretende analizar la influencia de las motivaciones hedónicas y utilitarias y la autoestima en el comportamiento de compra online. Asimismo, se analiza el papel mediador de la compra impulsiva y la intención de compra.
Metodología
El estudio se realizó con los resultados de una encuesta en la que participaron 450 encuestados y los datos se analizaron mediante el modelo de ecuaciones estructurales (software Smart PLS 3.0).
Resultados
Todos los vínculos planteados como hipótesis fueron significativos y positivos, excepto la relación del motivo autoestima con la tendencia a la compra impulsiva, que fue negativa según la hipótesis. Además, el motivo hedónico tuvo un fuerte impacto positivo en la tendencia de compra impulsiva, mientras que, por el contrario, el motivo utilitario tuvo un fuerte impacto positivo en las intenciones de compra.
Originalidad
Este estudio investiga el papel de la autoestima y los motivos hedónicos en la conducta de compra impulsiva. Además, al emplear la teoría del comportamiento planificado, este estudio pone de relieve el papel de los motivos hedónicos y utilitarios en la actitud hacia la realización de compras en línea.
Implicaciones
Los directivos deberían centrarse en el valor funcional más que en el valor emocional para atraer a los clientes que tienden a ser utilitarios. En cambio, para los clientes que tienden a ser hedónicos, las ofertas de productos deben ser visualmente atractivas, estimulantes e inspiradoras, además de tener valor emocional.
目的
本研究旨在分析享乐动机和功利动机以及自尊心对网上购物行为的影响。 而且, 本文也分析了冲动性购物和购物意向在其中的中介作用。
方法
本研究采用了由450名受访者参与的调查结果, 并使用结构方程模型（Smart PLS 3.0软件）对数据进行了分析。
研究结果
除自尊动机与冲动性购物符合假设所提议的负相关倾向外, 其他所有关系均为显著正相关。此外, 享乐动机对冲动性购物倾向有较强的正向影响, 而功利动机则对购物意向有较强的正向影响。
原创性
本研究调查了自尊和享乐动机在冲动性购物行为中的作用。此外, 通过采用计划行为理论, 本研究强调了享乐和功利动机在对参与网上购物态度中的作用。
意义
管理者应该关注功能价值而不是情感价值, 以吸引那些倾向于功利主义的顾客。相反, 对于倾向于享乐主义的顾客, 产品应该具有视觉吸引力、刺激性和启发性, 并具有情感价值。
Keywords
Citation
Indrawati, I., Ramantoko, G., Widarmanti, T., Aziz, I.A. and Khan, F.U. (2022), "Utilitarian, hedonic, and self-esteem motives in online shopping", Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 231-246. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-06-2021-0113
Publisher
:Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2022, Indrawati Indrawati, Gadang Ramantoko, Tri Widarmanti, Izzatdin Abdul Aziz and Farhat Ullah Khan.
License
Published in Spanish Journal of Marketing – ESIC. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence maybe seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
1. Introduction
The market is a network of interactions and relationships that exchange information, goods, services and payments (Dhandra, 2020). Moreover, e-commerce consumers can easily compare prices and information about a product or service (Barta et al., 2021a; Zheng et al., 2019). According to Utami (2018), the phenomenon of impulse shopping, both online and offline, positively impacts marketers, retailers and stakeholders in terms of generated profit and therefore needs to be further explored to gain a deeper understanding of the context (Dhandra, 2020; Utami, 2018). Hedonic shopping motivation is based on psychological needs. Such needs often arise to meet social and aesthetic demands and are also called emotional motives (Emekci, 2019). In contrast, planned buying leads to regular shopping intention and is motivated by the need to use products or services.
Research suggests that self-esteem, which is characterized as a person’s awareness and acknowledgment of his/her positive qualities and intrinsic strengths (Dhandra, 2020), appears to be a factor that influences impulsive buying. Besides, extensive research is available on impulsive buying (Iyer et al., 2020). Among the studies that do exist, some report no association between self-esteem and impulse shopping (Ahmad et al., 2019), whereas others show a negative relationship between the two constructs (Verplanken and Sato, 2011). So, detailed investigations on the association between the self-esteem motive and impulsivity are needed (Dhandra, 2020). Due to these contradictory results, it is necessary to further investigate the factors that may affect this relationship.
Therefore, the current study aims to make a theoretical advance by investigating impulsive shopping tendency, shopping intention and online shopping by employing a single theoretical framework grounded in the theory of planned behavior (TPB) proposed by Ajzen (1985). The current study proposes a simplified model of online shopping that deliberately selects the self-esteem and the hedonic motive as the main motives that compel consumers to make purchase decisions because both of these motives contrast strongly with the third motive investigated, namely, the utilitarian motive. Thus, the model under investigation is expected to provide key insights into online shopping and answer the following specific questions:
Do utilitarian, hedonic and self-esteem motives significantly predict online shopping?
Does impulsive shopping tendency mediate the effects of hedonic and self-esteem motives on online shopping?
Does shopping intention mediate the impact of utilitarian motive on online shopping?
Additionally, the key marketing insight that online shopping tendencies influence online shopping behavior more than impulsive shopping tendencies will help online marketers pay more attention to shopping intention. Besides, the current study will help marketers to understand the differential responses to different products providing experiential (hedonic) and functional (utilitarian) values. Besides, considering the significance of consumers’ varying shopping tendencies, marketers should create marketing cues such as promotional and attractive e-commerce websites by providing only useful and valuable information to encourage potential impulsive buyer customers through visual encounters. Finally, the current study findings will open avenues for future research to explore more factors to facilitate practitioners/marketers anticipate the needs and want of the consumers applying digital technologies and position their products accordingly.
2. Literature review
2.1 Theoretical background
The current study uses the TPB to explain the role of impulsive online shopping behavior due to hedonic, utilitarian motives and consumers’ self-esteem. The TPB is based on three key aspects of human behavior: attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control (Talebi et al., 2020). Also, perceived behavioral control is explained through the mediating role of shopping intention and impulsive buying. In addition, subjective norms are related to the belief of an individual that his/her behavior will be supported by certain other individuals or groups in society (Mobil et al., 2019). In the current study, the existing TPB is extended by proposing that self-esteem supports online shopping and thus can help individuals co-relate with others exhibiting similar behavior in today’s digital age to arouse a sense of accomplishment.
2.2 Utilitarian, hedonic and self-esteem motives and online shopping
Online shopping results from customers browsing e-commerce websites to search for, select and buy goods and services to satisfy their needs and wants (Awais et al., 2022; Casaló et al., 2011; Junaidi and Mira Lam, 2020). However, the stimuli and experiences of customers during the buying process online are somewhat different (Zafar et al., 2020). E-commerce has drastically changed the traditional buyer–seller relationship and the shopping process for many consumers (Flavián-Blanco et al., 2011; Lo et al., 2016; Widyawati and Ariyanti, 2017). Today, in the digital era, consumers can browse and compare endless product catalogs, create wish lists and enjoy powerful features such as search and personalization and social networks (Barta et al., 2021b). In the context of online shopping, the utilitarian motive is related to the purchase of an object for its functional value, whereas the hedonic motive concerns the emotional experiences of the online shopping process itself (Fernandes et al., 2020). In the case of utilitarian browsing, consumers seek to acquire products by using heuristics and through goal-oriented behavior, as well as by considering risk reduction strategies and achieving information search goals (Hamid et al., 2019). When consumers act for utilitarian motives, they tend to try to find the right product without spending a lot of time in the process of searching and evaluating alternatives. The convenience and speed of access to information in the online world, together with a large amount of information available at one click, will encourage consumers to engage in online shopping. Moreover, it can be stated that when using online platforms, consumers tend to buy a particular chosen commodity on time and with ease to avoid feelings of frustration and discomfort (Fernandes et al., 2020). In contrast, the hedonic motive illustrates the buying process about pleasure, luxury and solace and is intrinsically based upon self-interested needs, curiosity, entertainment, self-expression, etc. (Park et al., 2012). Consumers may also be willing to buy online for hedonic reasons. The development of the Web environment, together with the continued use by users, has led to pleasurable experiences during online browsing and even enjoyment during the shopping process (Barta et al., 2021a). In fact, during the pandemic, consumers reported making online purchases because of the instant mood improvement they provided. Therefore, the current study posits that utilitarian and hedonic motives are bound to lead consumers toward shopping behavior as long as these motives serve the consumers’ purpose. Thus, the following hypotheses are formulated:
Utilitarian motive positively impacts online shopping.
Hedonic motive positively impacts online shopping.
The term self-esteem motive in the context of consumers refers to how consumers feel about themselves in relation to buying a particular product or availing themselves of service because consumers tend to purchase a worthy product for themselves to make themselves feel privileged (Mobil et al., 2019). Moreover, Dhandra (2020) has suggested that individuals who have high self-esteem perform actions to further confirm their self-respect, values and standards. The TPB also supposes that a consumer will behave in a certain way to achieve the desired consequences. Therefore, in the current study, the self-esteem motive is expected to lead the consumer to perform online shopping behavior. Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Self-esteem motive positively impacts online shopping.
2.3 Hedonic and self-esteem motives and impulsive shopping tendency
Scholars state that impulsive buying is the cause of the emotional and psychological effects that drive consumers to purchase spontaneously to fulfill their needs (Zheng et al., 2019). Moreover, in marketing, impulsive buying can have the meaning of an unplanned, convincing, complicated and enjoyable shopping behavior (Hasanpoor et al., 2019). Further, a study conducted in an online shopping context by Shahpasandi et al. (2020) showed that flow experience and hedonic browsing significantly influence customers’ impulsive buying. Simultaneously, (Barta et al., 2021b) asserted the significance of hedonic motive in enhancing the impulsive shopping tendency of the online shoppers based on the ease and comfort provided by the digital media channels. Therefore, the following is hypothesized:
Hedonic motive positively impacts impulsive shopping tendency.
Dhandra (2020) found a negative relationship between impulsive buying and self-esteem. Amos et al. (2014) stated that the higher the level of self-esteem, the lower the level of impulsive purchase intention. Moreover, customers who have a higher level of self-esteem tend to have a high level of self-confidence about their decision and personality. Simultaneously, research shows that less confident individuals mostly go for impulse buying (Ahmad et al., 2019). Likewise, Phan et al. (2020) demonstrated that impulse shopping is a compensatory action to prevent negative or insecure feelings. Hence, it can be stated that consumers with higher self-esteem will not opt for impulsive buying. Based on the above findings, it seems that self-esteem and impulsive buying are correlated, but in the opposite direction. Therefore, it is postulated as follows:
Self-esteem motive negatively impacts impulsive shopping tendency.
2.4 Utilitarian motive, shopping intention and online shopping behavior
Utilitarian shopping value significantly impacts consumers’ online shopping (Fernandes et al., 2020). This indicates the significance of the utilitarian aspect in the online shopping experience, which tends to increase the chance of the consumer shifting from having a shopping intention to an actual purchase. Moreover, Harahap and Amanah (2020) assert that utilitarian value, along with trust, has more impact on online shopping than other factors. Also, Shahpasandi et al. (2020) suggest that consumers are more likely to fulfill their motives in the online shopping experience, which further influences their attitude toward shopping behavior. Therefore, according to the available literature and the TPB, if a customer likes something, he/she will feel the urge to fulfill that motive and will not only keep the intention but will actually perform the shopping behavior as well. Hence, it is hypothesized as follows:
Utilitarian motive positively impacts shopping intention.
Shopping intention positively impacts online shopping.
2.5 Impulsive shopping tendency, shopping intention and online shopping behavior
Impulsive shopping tendency refers to a consumer characteristic that leads him/her to undertake the spontaneous, immediate and unreflective purchase of a particular product, and this characteristic is inhibited by the consumer’s personality (Verplanken and Sato, 2011). On the other hand, shopping intention represents the consumer conscientiously choosing to spend money on brands that possess the values and ethos and represent the causes aligned with his/her own (Otero-López et al., 2021). Chan et al. (2017) suggest that consumers develop the urge and motivation before performing impulsive buying. Then, when some product in an online platform satisfies their desire, they display the purchase behavior (Jamali and Baloch, 2019). Likewise, Phan et al. (2020) state that when a consumer browses an online platform, the desire to buy, i.e. impulsive shopping tendency, spontaneously emerges, and thus this engages the consumer in browsing; the more the consumer browses, the more he/she is likely to end up buying a product. Therefore, based on the above literature, it is hypothesized as follows:
Impulsive shopping tendency positively impacts shopping intention.
Impulsive shopping tendency positively impacts online shopping.
2.6 Mediating role of impulsive shopping tendency
Recently, scholars have focused on testing the impacts of hedonic and utilitarian motives on consumer behavior in different contexts (Arul Rajan, 2020) because consumer behavior is the key indicator for understanding purchase decisions (Suher and Hoyer, 2020). In the current study, it is postulated that the hedonic motive triggers the buying process, which determines the consumer’s attitude, i.e. impulsive shopping tendency, toward his/her purchase, which ultimately leads the consumer to perform the purchase behavior in the online marketplace. By examining the mediating role of shopping intention and impulsive shopping tendency, it is expected to provide an underlying motivational mechanism to explain how the three motives (utilitarian, hedonic, self-esteem) influence buying. In addition, by determining whether there is a significant relationship between the mediating and independent variables, the magnitude of the indirect effect can be compared to the direct effect of the independent variables as predictors of online shopping. Consequently, the current study considers impulsive shopping tendency as the underlying mechanism between the consumer’s hedonic motive that leads him/her into actual online shopping. Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Impulsive shopping tendency mediates the relationship between hedonic motive and online shopping.
Research indicates that the need for exceptionality and other basic factors such as price and past orientation induce consumers into impulsive buying (Chinomona, 2019). Further, Zafar et al. (2020) state that the cognitive aspect of the consumer plays an integral part in impulsive shopping tendencies. An extensive study of the literature revealed that although studies explain the direct association of self-esteem motive with shopping behavior (Dhandra, 2020; Mobil et al., 2019). It is expected that impulsive shopping tendency will be the intermediary link between the consumers’ self-esteem and online shopping. Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated:
Impulsive shopping tendency mediates the relationship between self-esteem motive and online shopping.
2.7 Mediating role of shopping intention
The buying process starts with the initiation of the consumer’s search for a product, which further steers the consumer toward the intent to purchase and finally to perform shopping behavior (Casaló et al., 2008; Fernandes et al., 2020). The literature directly correlates utilitarian motives with shopping behavior (Shahpasandi et al., 2020). However, previously the underlying mechanism of shopping intention in between the association of utilitarian motive with online shopping has not been explored. According to TPB, consumers first build motives that make them react in a certain way; in this case, when consumers find a product congruent with their utilitarian factor, they intend to buy it, and to further meet the needs of utilitarianism, they purchase the item and thus complete the buying process. Hence, shopping intention is posited to be the underlying mechanism through which the utilitarian motive influences consumer shopping behavior. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Shopping intention mediates the relationship between utilitarian motive and online shopping.
Figure 1 shows hypothesized links of the study.
3. Research methodology
3.1 Study design and participants
A 35-item survey was conducted to collect data from students and staff from different universities in Indonesia. Participants were selected based on their English fluency and recent online shopping experience. Previous research indicates that students and the younger generation, especially females, mostly show impulsive shopping behavior due to their need to interact with others, follow trends and fashions and keep up with the times (Badgaiyan and Verma, 2015). The respondents were educated, easily understood, responded to survey items and exhibited online shopping behavior due to frequent smartphone usage and social media apps. Anonymity was ensured to obtain the respondents’ voluntary participation. Initially, 650 active online shoppers were selected to complete the survey. Almost 50 responses were found incomplete, while 125 surveys were not returned in time by respondents. A total of 25 more responses were removed after the initial screening due to inappropriate and incomplete responses. The authors were finally left with data of 450 complete responses with a 69% final response rate.
3.2 Measures
The scales used in the present study were adapted from previous literature, and the validity and reliability of the new scales were tested. The utilitarian and hedonic motives were measured by adapting the scales from Park et al. (2012). Similarly, the self-esteem scale was measured with the scale of Rosenberg (1965), impulsive buying tendencies with that from Rook and Fisher (1995), intentional buying with Venkatesh et al. (2012) and shopping behavior with the scale from Howard and Sheth (1995). As the interviewees had a good knowledge of English and to avoid translation and back translation issues, the language of the survey was kept. All the items were measured on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree.
3.3 Characteristics of the respondents
Demographic analysis revealed that 53% of the respondents were female and 47% were male. In terms of age, 35% were below the age of 25 years, while 41% were between 26 and 30; 14% were between 31 and 40 and 10% were above 40 years of age. While 79.7% of the respondents were students and 20.3% were faculty members and staff. Approximately 42.4% of the respondents had been using online shopping platforms for the past 3 years, 33.2% for the past 5 years, and the remaining 24.4% for more than 5 years. Moreover, the current study sample is truly representative of the target population as it depicts similar characteristics as reported by previous studies conducted in developing nations’ context (Cruz-Cárdenas et al., 2021; Sumarliah et al., 2021).
4. Data analysis and results
Data skewness and kurtosis were assessed for normality and bias (Ali et al., 2018; Noor et al., 2021). The values of skewness ranged from −0.175 to 0.231, and the kurtosis values ranged from 1.129 to 2.110. These results show a normal distribution around the mean value. Common method bias arises if any of the variables account for a very high covariance among all the variables (Agag, 2019). A principal component factor analysis was performed. The results of the analysis revealed that the largest factor was responsible for 36.2% of the variance, and the smallest factor accounted for 21.3% of the variance. As no factor accounted for above 50% of the variance, common method bias was not considered to be a serious problem in the data set.
4.1 Measurement model assessment
To investigate the psychometric properties of the measures, confirmatory factor analysis was conducted using SmartPLS 3. Cronbach’s α and composite reliability (CR) values were calculated to assess the reliability of the measures. Additionally, the convergent validity and discriminant validity of the model was evaluated. As shown in Table 1, the factor loadings of all the items of variables were > 0.60; and the average variance extracted (AVE) of the latent variables was above 0.50 for all the study constructs; hence, the presence of convergent validity was confirmed (Mansoor and Wijaksana, 2021).
As for discriminant validity, Henseler et al. (2015) suggest that the heterotrait–monotrait (HTMT) ratio is a more accurate measurements when using SmartPLS 3. In this regard, the value of the HTMT ratio should be less than 0.85 (Kline, 2015; Mansoor and Paul, 2022). Table 2 shows that all the values for the HTMT ratio were lower than 0.85 for all constructs/variables.
4.2 Structural model: hypothesis testing
The bootstrapping technique was employed to assess the structural paths. To test the hypotheses, 5,000 sub-samples were used. The hypothesized paths are shown in Figure 1. The hypothesized results were confirmed through the ß-coefficient, t-values and p-value. Additionally, model fit indices were assessed. The standardized root mean square residual value was 0.053, which was less than the threshold prescribed in the literature, i.e. 0.08 (Henseler et al., 2015). Also, the Normed Fit Index values were above 0.90, indicating a good model fit (Mansoor, 2021). Overall model fitness or change in the model was measured by the coefficient of determination (R2). The results for R2 showed that there was a 56.6% change in the online shopping behavior of the respondents due to all direct mediating variables, whereas the R2 for impulsive shopping tendency was 48.3%, and for shopping intention it was 20.7% (Figure 2). These results show a good fit for the model.
4.2.1 Direct hypotheses.
The results of hypothesis testing showed that the utilitarian motive (ß = 0.147, p < 0.001), hedonic motive (ß = 0.132, p < 0.001) and self-esteem motive (ß = 0.106, p < 0.001) positively and significantly impact the online shopping behavior. Likewise, the results also revealed that hedonic motive positively impacts impulsive shopping tendency (ß = 0.250, p < 0.001), whereas self-esteem motive negatively impacts impulsive shopping tendency (ß = −0.178, p < 0.001). Also, the utilitarian motive positively impacts shopping intention (ß = 0.198, p < 0.001). Likewise, shopping intention positively impacts online shopping behavior (ß = 0.233, p < 0.001), whereas impulsive shopping tendency positively and significantly impacts shopping intention (ß = 0.191, p < 0.001) and online shopping behavior (ß = 0.165, p < 0.001). Therefore, H1a, H1b, H1c, H2a, H2b, H3, H4, H5 and H6 were supported. The structural model (Figure 2) represents the significance level of all the hypothesized paths based on coefficients.
4.2.2 Mediation hypotheses.
The mediation hypotheses (H7a, H7b and H8) were also supported. An indirect and positive impact of hedonic motive (ß = 0.137, p < 0.001) and self-esteem motive (ß = 0.159, p < 0.001) with online shopping behavior was found in the presence of impulsive shopping tendency as a mediator. Also, an indirect and positive impact of utilitarian motive was found with online shopping behavior (ß = 0.201, p < 0.001) in the presence of shopping intention as a mediator. The results also showed the non-zero value for the lower- and upper-level confidence interval, which supported the significance level of the findings.
5. Discussion and implications
In the current study, three different motives, i.e. utilitarian, hedonic and self-esteem, were investigated to determine their role as predictors of online shopping behavior through the mediation of impulsive buying and shopping intention. The results indicate that online shopping behavior was influenced more by shopping intention than by impulsive shopping tendencies. This key marketing insight will help online marketers pay more attention to shopping intention rather than impulsive shopping tendencies when developing their marketing strategies. Moreover, shopping intention was influenced by utilitarian motives. Hence, to increase shopping intention, marketers should focus on indicators that can increase the online utilitarian motive (Hamid et al., 2019). Further, the current study’s finding is in line with Fernandes et al. (2020) who state that the informative content of online advertising significantly affects utilitarian consumption. It has also been reported that product variations (color, price, design) drive more Web browsing among utilitarian who tend to collect information and compare products when shopping online (Picot-Coupey et al., 2021). Hence marketers should be aware that consumers could respond differently to products that provide experiential (hedonic) and functional (utilitarian) values (Jamali and Baloch, 2019; Karim et al., 2021; Lin et al., 2018).
The results also revealed that shopping intention was affected by impulsive shopping tendency, which was influenced by hedonic motivation. This finding is in line with Mamuaya and Aditya (2018), who found that impulsive buying is predicted by hedonic shopping motivation. Mamuaya and Aditya (2018) also revealed that when marketers want to increase shopping behavior, they have to leverage the indicators that increase online hedonic motivation. These indicators include, for instance, experiential consumption, fun and pleasure (Japutra and Song, 2020), excitement (Hamid et al., 2019), entertainment and relaxation (Park et al., 2012). Chinomona (2019) also asserts that such indicators are needed to stimulate consumers who possess hedonic motivation. Therefore, marketers should create marketing cues such as promotional and attractive e-commerce websites to encourage potential impulsive buyer customers through the utilization of visual encounters.
However, in contrast to hedonic and utilitarian motives, the study found that the self-esteem motive influenced impulsive shopping tendency negatively. These results are in line with Phan et al. (2020), who states that the role of impulse shopping is a compensatory action to prevent negative or insecure feelings. The findings are also in line with Ahmad et al. (2019), who demonstrate that customers who have higher levels of self-esteem tend to have lower levels of impulse purchase intention. Therefore, online shopping stores should focus on the communication of their products’ functional value (Kang and Ogawa, 2017; Li et al., 2020). Recent research related to impulsive shopping tendencies also confirms that perceived value and social collaboration directly impact consumer engagement (Busalim and Ghabban, 2021). Moreover, sponsoring partnerships with fashion influencers in social media could also be a way to make products visible and thus stimulate the interest of impulse buyers. Recent research has also confirmed that consumers also look for psychological and social advantages in purchasing products (Avcı and Yıldız, 2021).
Thus, an important factor that was found to influence online shopping behavior was the self-esteem motive. Therefore, marketers should devise novel strategies to understand customers’ self-esteem levels and advertise accordingly to increase customers’ shopping behavior. Further, the findings are in line with recent research that adventure, authority and status have significant effects on hedonic motivation (Kumar and Yadav, 2021). Study findings encourage designing advertisements that incorporate psychological motivators to influence self-esteem, utilitarian and hedonic motives to significantly impact consumers’ online shopping behaviors. In addition, the importance of utilitarian motives requires marketers to provide only the most useful and valuable information to the consumer to ensure that the product choice phase is as quick as possible, without affecting other aspects such as confidence or comfort with the decision taken.
Besides its various market implications, the current study also makes some theoretical contributions. Hedonic motive can be created by using images, videos and other effects that attract customers to buy new products from various brands. Self-esteem is critical to engaging in this impulsive shopping behavior. It gives a person a subjective feeling of worth and pride by buying the latest fashion items and popularity among social groups. Also, by using the TPB, the current study highlights the role of hedonic and utilitarian motives that form the basis of a positive attitude toward engaging in online shopping behavior, which has rarely been explored in previous studies. The findings will further open avenues for future research to explore more factors that can help marketers/practitioners position their products according to the needs and wants of consumers using digital technologies. A summary of the results and implications is given in Table 3 .
6. Limitations and future research directions
In this study, the data were collected at one point in time. Therefore, time-lagged studies could be conducted in the future to check the consistency and better causality of the consumers’ behaviors. This research only focused on online consumers, so in the future, a cross-comparison study could be conducted among traditional buyers and online buyers to explore the differences in their buying patterns. On the one hand, the sample selection is strong because it consists of online consumers, but it may also have a limitation from an income point of view. Therefore, future research studies may wish to conduct a comparative investigation of the university and corporate or business samples to identify any potential differences. In addition, for the current study, data has been collected from Indonesia, a developing nation. In contrast, it is suggested to replicate the current study with a larger and more geographically diverse sample. Finally, the undertaking of a cross-cultural study is recommended to identify how consumers from different cultures differ in their online shopping motives, tendencies and shopping behaviors.
Figures
Variables, items, source of items, measurement result
| Items | Loadings |
|---|---|
| Impulsive shopping tendencies (α = 0.809; CR = 0.888; AVE = 0.501) | |
| It is a struggle to leave nice things I see in the online shop | 0.661 |
| I sometimes cannot suppress the feeling of wanting to buy something | 0.728 |
| I sometimes feel guilty after having bought something | 0.669 |
| I can become very excited if I see something I would like to buy | 0.678 |
| I always see something nice whenever I visit several online shopping portals | 0.605 |
| I find it difficult to miss discount items | 0.736 |
| If I see something new, I want to buy it | 0.746 |
| I am a bit reckless in buying things | 0.604 |
| I sometimes buy things because I like buying things, rather than because I need them | 0.661 |
| If I buy something, I usually do that spontaneously | 0.816 |
| I buy think according to how I feel at the moment | 0.776 |
| I carefully plan most of my purchase | 0.767 |
| I often buy things without consulting to other people | 0.753 |
| Self-esteem (α: 0.823; CR: 0.849, AVE: 0.529) | |
| At times I think I am very good in many things | 0.758 |
| I feel I have much to be proud of | 0.779 |
| I certainly feel useless at times | 0.686 |
| I wish I could have more respect for myself | 0.692 |
| All in all, I am inclined to think that I am a failure | 0.717 |
| Hedonic motive (α: 0.882; CR: 0.900, AVE: 0.643) | |
| While web browsing, I am able to forget my problems | 0.773 |
| During web browsing, I am very excited, like playing | 0.738 |
| While web browsing, I feel relaxed | 0.819 |
| I enjoy web browsing enough to forget a time out | 0.820 |
| I look around at items on the internet just for fun | 0.855 |
| Utilitarian motive (α: 0.781; CR: 0.845,AVE: 0.522) | |
| I browse to buy better items in price or quality | 0.758 |
| I browse for efficient shopping online | 0.626 |
| I browse the shopping web sites to gather information about products | 0.782 |
| I look around the shopping web sites to comparison shop | 0.719 |
| I browse the shopping web sites in order to get additional value as much as possible | 0.718 |
| Shopping intention (α: 0.801; CR: 0.869, AVE: 0.690) | |
| I intend to continue shopping online in the future | 0.773 |
| I will always try to do online shopping in my daily life | 0.853 |
| I plan to continue shopping online frequently. | 0.862 |
| Online shopping behavior (α: 0.771, CR: 0.804, AVE: 0.506) | |
| I often buy the product online | 0.698 |
| I buy the product online on a daily basis | 0.701 |
| When I need a product, I buy it online | 0.732 |
| I buy the product online almost every day | 0.715 |
α = Cronbach’s alpha; CR = Composite reliability; AVE = Average variance extracted
Discriminant validity (HTMT ratio)
| Constructs | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UM (1) | 0.722 | |||||
| HM (2) | 0.402 | 0.801 | ||||
| SEM (3) | 0.411 | 0.496 | 0.727 | |||
| SI (4) | 0.323 | 0.461 | 0.376 | 0.701 | ||
| IS (5) | 0.491 | 0.450 | 0.438 | 0.352 | 0.83 | |
| OSB (6) | 0.389 | 0.359 | 0.431 | 0.513 | 0.398 | 0.711 |
The diagonal elements (in italic) are the square roots of the AVEs. Where: UM=Utilitarian Motives; HM = Hedonic Motive; SEM = Self Esteem Motive; IBT = Impulsive Shopping Tendencies; IB = Shopping Intention; OSB = Online Shopping Behavior
Hypothesis path results, conclusions and implications
| Hypothesis (result) | Theoretical and managerial implications |
|---|---|
| H1a. Utilitarian motive → Online shopping behavior (supported) | Utilitarian motive, hedonic motive and self-esteem motive predicts the online shopping behavior of consumers |
| H1b. Hedonic motive → Online shopping behavior | |
| H1c. Self-esteem motive → Online Shopping Behavior (supported) | |
| H2a. Hedonic motive → Impulsive shopping tendency (supported) | To increase impulsive shopping tendency, online fashion shops need to be visually appealing, stimulate the senses, present the newest products first etc |
| H2b Self-esteem motive → Impulsive shopping tendency (supported) | Consumers shop online if they feel insecure. In other words, to make themselves feel better, they tend to make an online purchase |
| H3 Utilitarian motive → Shopping intention (supported) | To increase shopping intention, marketers must pay attention to indicators that can increase utilitarian motives |
| H4 Shopping intention → Online shopping behavior (supported) | Marketers should pay more attention to shopping intention than to impulse shopping tendency |
| H5 Impulsive shopping tendency → Shopping intention (supported) | When marketers want to increase shopping behavior, they should pay attention to impulsive shopping tendency which is influenced by hedonic motive |
| H6 Impulsive shopping tendency → Online shopping behavior (supported) | Marketers should pay more attention to hedonic motives to stimulate consumers to increase their impulsive shopping tendencies |
| H7a Hedonic motive → Impulsive shopping tendency → Online shopping behavior (supported) | Marketers should pay attention to the indicators that increase online hedonic motivation. Moreover, self-esteem is critical for consumers to engage in this impulsive shopping behavior |
| H7b Self-esteem motive → Impulsive shopping tendency → Online shopping behavior (supported) | |
| H8 Utilitarian motive → Shopping intention → Online shopping behavior (supported) | Marketers should pay attention to indicators that can increase online utilitarian motive to thereby increase shopping intention |
References
Agag, G. (2019), “E-commerce ethics and its impact on buyer repurchase intentions and loyalty: an empirical study of small and medium Egyptian businesses”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 154 No. 2, pp. 389-410.
Ahmad, M.B., Ali, H.F., Malik, M.S., Humayun, A.A. and Ahmad, S. (2019), “Factors affecting impulsive buying behavior with mediating role of positive mood: an empirical study”, European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 17-35.
Ajzen, I. (1985), “From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior”, Action Control, Springer, pp. 11-39.
Ali, F., Rasoolimanesh, S.M., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M. and Ryu, K. (2018), “An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in hospitality research”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 1571-1592.
Amos, C., Holmes, G.R. and Keneson, W.C. (2014), “A meta-analysis of consumer impulse buying”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 86-97.
Arul Rajan, K. (2020), “Influence of hedonic and utilitarian motivation on impulse and rational buying behavior in online shopping”, Journal of Statistics and Management Systems, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 419-430.
Avcı, İ. and Yıldız, S. (2021), “A research on hedonic and utilitarian consumption behavior of young consumers on big discount days”, Handbook of Research on Applied AI for International Business and Marketing Applications, IGI Global, pp. 559-579.
Awais, S., Yasin, Z. and Raza, F. (2022), “Impact of mobile application compatibility, online shopping and payment on the user satisfaction in Pakistan context: mediating role of social networking site adoption”, Journal of Management Practices, Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 28-39.
Badgaiyan, A.J. and Verma, A. (2015), “Does urge to buy impulsively differ from impulsive buying behaviour? Assessing the impact of situational factors”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 22, pp. 145-157.
Barta, S., Flavián, C. and Gurrea, R. (2021a), “Managing consumer experience and online flow: differences in handheld devices vs PCs”, Technology in Society, Vol. 64, p. 101525.
Barta, S., Gurrea, R. and Flavián, C. (2021b), “The role of flow consciousness in consumer regret”, Internet Research, doi: 10.1108/INTR-08-2020-0482.
Busalim, A.H. and Ghabban, F. (2021), “Customer engagement behaviour on social commerce platforms: an empirical study”, Technology in Society, Vol. 64, p. 101437.
Casaló, L.V., Flavián, C. and Guinalíu, M. (2008), “Fundaments of trust management in the development of virtual communities”, Management Research News, Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 324-338.
Casaló, L.V., Flavián, C. and Guinalíu, M. (2011), “The generation of trust in the online services and product distribution: the case of Spanish electronic commerce”, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 12 No. 3, p. 199.
Chan, T.K., Cheung, C.M. and Lee, Z.W. (2017), “The state of online impulse-buying research: a literature analysis”, Information and Management, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 204-217.
Chinomona, E. (2019), “Modelling the drivers of impulsive buying behaviour: a case of South Africa”, Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, Vol. 11 No. 1(J), pp. 27-38.
Cruz-Cárdenas, J., Zabelina, E., Deyneka, O. and Ramos-Galarza, C. (2021), “Hedonic and utilitarian motivations in predicting the buy intention of technological products: a study in developing and emerging countries”, Paper presented at the International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics.
Dhandra, T.K. (2020), “Does self-esteem matter? A framework depicting role of self-esteem between dispositional mindfulness and impulsive buying”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 55, p. 102135.
Emekci, S. (2019), “Green consumption behaviours of consumers within the scope of TPB”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 36 No. 3.
Fernandes, E., Semuel, H. and Adiwijaya, M. (2020), “The influence of social media advertising on purchase intention through utilitarian and hedonic shopping motivation: a study at beauty care and anti-aging clinic service in surabaya”, Petra International Journal of Business Studies, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 23-36.
Flavián-Blanco, C., Gurrea-Sarasa, R. and Orús-Sanclemente, C. (2011), “Analyzing the emotional outcomes of the online search behavior with search engines”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 540-551.
Hamid, N.A., Cheun, C., Abdullah, N., Ahmad, M. and Ngadiman, Y. (2019), “Does persuasive E-commerce website influence users’ acceptance and online buying behaviour? The findings of the largest E-commerce website in Malaysia”, ICT for a Better Life and a Better World, Springer, pp. 263-279.
Harahap, D.A. and Amanah, D. (2020), “Determinants of consumer purchase decision in SMEs”, International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 3981-3989.
Hasanpoor, H., Tojari, F. and Nikaeen, Z. (2019), “Validation of expanded scale of impulse buying in sports”, Annals of Applied Sport Science, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 21-30.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 115-135.
Howard, J. and Sheth, J. (1995), A Theory of Buyer Behavior, Marketing Classics: A Selection of Influential Articles, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Iyer, G.R., Blut, M., Xiao, S.H. and Grewal, D. (2020), “Impulse buying: a meta-analytic review”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 384-404.
Jamali, M. and Baloch, S. (2019), “The influence of culture and personality on impulse buying”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 20-37.
Japutra, A. and Song, Z. (2020), “Mindsets, shopping motivations and compulsive buying: insights from China”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 423-437.
Junaidi, M.H. and Mira Lam, M.S. (2020), “Online buying behavior among university students: a cross cultural empirical analysis”, Journal of Information Technology Management, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 26-39.
Kang, C. and Ogawa, I. (2017), “Online shopping behavior of Chinese and Japanese consumers”, Journal of Administrative and Business Studies, Vol. 3 No. 6, pp. 305-316.
Karim, N.U., Nisa, U. and Imam, S.S. (2021), “Investigating the factors that impact online shopping and sales promotion on consumer’s impulse buying behavior: a gender-based comparative study in the UAE”, International Journal of Business and Administrative Studies, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 14-26.
Kline, R.B. (2015), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, Guilford publications.
Kumar, S. and Yadav, R. (2021), “The impact of shopping motivation on sustainable consumption: a study in the context of green apparel”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 295, p. 126239.
Li, J., Abbasi, A., Cheema, A. and Abraham, L.B. (2020), “Path to purpose? How online customer journeys differ for hedonic versus utilitarian purchases”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 84 No. 4, pp. 127-146.
Lin, H.-C., Bruning, P.F. and Swarna, H. (2018), “Using online opinion leaders to promote the hedonic and utilitarian value of products and services”, Business Horizons, Vol. 61 No. 3, pp. 431-442.
Lo, C., Frankowski, D. and Leskovec, J. (2016), “Understanding behaviors that lead to purchasing: a case study of Pinterest”, Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining.
Mamuaya, N.C.I. and Aditya, P. (2018), “The effect of the situational factor, store atmosphere, and sales promotion on hedonic shopping motivation and its implication on supermarket consumer impulsive buying in Manado city”.
Mansoor, M. (2021), “Citizens' trust in government as a function of good governance and government agency's provision of quality information on social media during COVID-19”, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 38 No. 4, p. 101597, doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2021.101597.
Mansoor, M. and Paul, J. (2022), “Impact of energy efficiency-based ICT adoptions on prosumers and consumers”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 331, p. 130008.
Mansoor, M. and Wijaksana, T.I. (2021), “Predictors of pro-environmental behavior: moderating role of knowledge sharing and mediatory role of perceived environmental responsibility”, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, pp. 1-19, doi: 10.1080/09640568.2021.2016380.
Mobil, S.S., Kasuma, J., Adenan, M.A., Mejri, N. and Rajan, R. (2019), “Influence of perceived quality and self-esteem on women’s purchase intention: luxury makeup brands”, Journal of International Business, Economics and Entrepreneurship (JIBE), Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 73-79.
Noor, U., Mansoor, M. and Rabbani, S. (2021), “Brand hate and retaliation in Muslim consumers: does offensive advertising matter?”, Journal of Islamic Marketing, doi: 10.1108/JIMA-10-2020-0316.
Otero-López, J.M., Santiago, M.J. and Castro, M.C. (2021), “Life aspirations, generativity and compulsive buying in university students”, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 18 No. 15, p. 8060.
Park, E.J., Kim, E.Y., Funches, V.M. and Foxx, W. (2012), “Apparel product attributes, web browsing, and e-impulse buying on shopping websites”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 11, pp. 1583-1589.
Phan, L.T., Nguyen, T.V., Luong, Q.C., Nguyen, T.V., Nguyen, H.T., Le, H.Q. and Pham, Q.D. (2020), “Importation and human-to-human transmission of a novel coronavirus in Vietnam”, New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 382 No. 9, pp. 872-874.
Picot-Coupey, K., Krey, N., Huré, E. and Ackermann, C.-L. (2021), “Still work and/or fun? Corroboration of the hedonic and utilitarian shopping value scale”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 126, pp. 578-590.
Rook, D.W. and Fisher, R.J. (1995), “Normative influences on impulsive buying behavior”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 305-313.
Rosenberg, M. (1965), Adolescent Self-image, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. Rosenberg Society and the Adolescent Self-Image 1965.
Shahpasandi, F., Zarei, A. and Nikabadi, M.S. (2020), “Consumers’ impulse buying behavior on Instagram: examining the influence of flow experiences and hedonic browsing on impulse buying”, Journal of Internet Commerce, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 437-465.
Suher, J. and Hoyer, W.D. (2020), “The moderating effect of buying impulsivity on the dynamics of unplanned purchasing motivations”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 548-564.
Sumarliah, E., Usmanova, K., Mousa, K. and Indriya, I. (2021), “E-commerce in the fashion business: the roles of the COVID-19 situational factors, hedonic and utilitarian motives on consumers’ intention to purchase online”, International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, pp. 1-11.
Talebi, K., Tanbakouchian, A. and Bozorgi Amiri, A. (2020), “Identifying indicators of model theory of planned behavior in successful small-and medium-sized enterprises”, Iranian Journal of Management Studies (Articles in Press).
Utami, N.N. (2018), “Economic literacy model for teens: does the book based on e-book picture stories as a strategy to avoid impulsive purchase decision?”, Journal of Research in Educational Sciences (JRES), Vol. 9 No. 11, pp. 25-31.
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y. and Xu, X. (2012), “Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology”, MIS Quarterly, pp. 157-178.
Verplanken, B. and Sato, A. (2011), “The psychology of impulse buying: an integrative self-regulation approach”, Journal of Consumer Policy, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 197-210.
Widyawati, K.S. and Ariyanti, M. (2017), “Dependency on smartphone 4G and the impact on purchase behavior in Indonesia”, International Journal of Business and Economic Affairs, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 149-158.
Zafar, A.U., Qiu, J., Shahzad, M., Shen, J., Bhutto, T.A. and Irfan, M. (2020), “Impulse buying in social commerce: bundle offer, top reviews, and emotional intelligence”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 945-973.
Zheng, X., Men, J., Yang, F. and Gong, X. (2019), “Understanding impulse buying in mobile commerce: an investigation into hedonic and utilitarian browsing”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 48, pp. 151-160.
Acknowledgements
The authors of this research would like to express their gratitude to the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of Indonesia for supporting their financial in doing this research.