Search results

Consumers may enjoy the information sharing and social support made available when a social media platform is used for pre-purchase research; however, do consumers reevaluate the privacy and security of the platform differently when ordering and payment capabilities are added? As social media systems have evolved into social commerce platforms (SCPs), individuals are often faced with whether to complete a purchase they have been researching or switch to a traditional e-commerce platform to complete the transaction. This research examines consumer trust formation in the SCP channel and how consumer interest and engagement in the channel are maintained and influence consumer decisions to purchase via the SCP.

Based on trust and involvement literature, a research model was conceptualized to capture consumer beliefs about SCP privacy and security and whether the SCP can be trusted, using these inputs into subsequent consumer interest, engagement and decisions on whether to use the SCP for purchasing. The research model was empirically tested using the panel data's structural equation modeling (AMOS) (n = 405). The data showed acceptable reliability and convergent validity, while the original research model provides predictive validity and theory-confirming insights.

Results confirm that consumer perceptions of privacy and security play a crucial role as decision criteria, informing their judgments of whether a new social commerce channel can be trusted enough to conduct purchases. Further, consumer trust supports their interest in the SCP, resulting in enduring and enhanced behavioral use and, to a lesser extent, purchase intent. Still, a majority of this sample declined to purchase using the SCP and rather preferred to transact on tried and trusted traditional e-commerce sites.

This study is among the first to examine trust formation in new SCPs, where consumers are deciding to expand their engagement level from social and informational to commercial.

Social media platforms are a pervasive technology that continues to define the modern world. While social media has brought many benefits to society in terms of connection and content sharing, numerous concerns remain for the governance of social media platforms going forward, including (but not limited to) the spread of misinformation, hate speech and online surveillance. However, the voice of citizens and other non-experts is often missing from such conversations in information systems literature, which has led to an alleged gap between research and the everyday life of citizens.

The authors address this gap by presenting findings from 16 h of online dialog with 25 citizens on social media platform governance. The online dialog was undertaken as part of a worldwide consultation project called “We, the internet”, which sought to provide citizens with a voice on a range of topics such as “Digitalization and Me,” “My Data, Your Data, Our Data” and “A Strong Digital Public Sphere.” Five phases of thematic analysis were undertaken by the authors to code the corpus of qualitative data.

Drawing on the Theory of Communicative Action, the authors discuss three dialogical processes critical to citizen discourse: lifeworld reasoning, rationalization and moral action. The findings point toward citizens’ perspectives of current and future issues associated with social media platform governance, including concerns around the multiplicity of digital identities, consent for vulnerable groups and transparency in content moderation. The findings also reveal citizens’ rationalization of the dilemmas faced in addressing these issues going forward, including tensions such as digital accountability vs data privacy, protection vs inclusion and algorithmic censorship vs free speech.

Based on outcomes from this dialogical process, moral actions in the form of policy recommendations are proposed by citizens and for citizens. The authors find that tackling these dark sides of digitalization is something too important to be left to “Big Tech” and equally requires an understanding of citizens’ perspectives to ensure an informed and positive imprint for change.