300
Int. J. Internet Marketing and Advertising, Vol. 8, No. 4, 2014
Conceptualising and modelling virtual product experience for online retailers Raed S. Algharabat Department of Marketing, School of Business, The University of Jordan, Amman 11942, Jordan Fax: +96265300801 Email:
[email protected] Abstract: This study aims to define and conceptualise three-dimensional (3D) virtual product experience (VPE) for online retailers. Therefore, this research designed a hypothetical retailer website, which presents a variety of 3D laptop and ring sites that allow participants to control the content and form of the 3D flashes. This research finds that the measurement of VPE should be based on a multi-dimensional construct rather than a unidimensional one. In other words, this research finds that defining and operationalising VPE should be based on the authenticity, perceived diagnosticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment aspects of the 3D product. Results show positive relationships among VPE, attitude to the product and purchase intention. Keywords: 3D virtual experience; authenticity; diagnosticity; compatibility; flow; enjoyment; attitude toward product; purchase intention. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Algharabat, R.S. (2014) ‘Conceptualising and modelling virtual product experience for online retailers’, Int. J. Internet Marketing and Advertising, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp.300–319. Biographical notes: Raed S. Algharabat received a PhD from Brunel University, UK. He is an Associate Professor of Marketing at the Marketing Department, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan. His teaching and areas of interest include: e-marketing (e-)retail and consumer behaviour, the vital, final link of the marketing process for satisfying the end consumer, particularly, 3D virtual models and their impact on consumer behaviour within the online retailer context. He has published a few papers in reputed journals of marketing. He received best paper awards for papers related to e-marketing.
1
Introduction
Online customer experience considers one of the main elements of determining the scope of e-marketing. According to Rafi et al. (2005), online customer experience often enhances the way that users feel, think and do. The authors posit that designing a website should be centred on three stages; functionality, intimacy and evangelism. Furthermore, the authors state that websites which provide customers with the ability to customise and personalise their product online, using three-dimensional (3D) product presentation, often enhance customer experience. Copyright © 2014 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.
Conceptualising and modelling VPE for online retailers
301
The significance of investigating virtual product experience (VPE) lies in its ability to simulate the conventional in-store experience (Algharabat and Dennis, 2010a, 2012; Kempf and Smith 1998). Furthermore, interacting with 3D product presentation, as a main type of VPE, on online retailers’ websites enables potential customers to experience products virtually (Algharabat and Shatnawi, 2014; Jiang and Benbasat, 2005), enhances their feeling (Algharabat and Abu-ElSamen, 2013; Algharabat and Dennis, 2010a, 2010b, 2010c; Klein, 2003; Li et al., 2001, 2002, 2003), conveys relevant information (Jiang and Benbasat, 2005) and boosts customers’ understanding and evaluation of the quality and performance of products sold online (Algharabat and Zamil, 2013; Jiang and Benbasat, 2005). However, we noticed that, in the area of 3D product presentation, previous research has defined and conceptualised VPE based on two approaches. The first one focuses on online product experience and uses terminologies such as authenticity, which reflects users’ physical experience (Algharabat and Dennis, 2010a, 2010b), perceived diagnosticity (PD), which represents consumers’ belief that VPE is helpful for evaluating products’ quality and performance (Jiang and Benbasat, 2005), compatibility, which reflects the consistency of VPE with consumers’ existing shopping habits, product evaluation styles and past experiences (Jiang and Benbasat, 2005) and telepresence, which stimulates customers’ ability to be transformed into another area (Klein, 2003; Suh and Lee, 2005). Meanwhile, the second approach centres on the overall online experience and utilises notions such as flow, which is related to time distortion (Hoffman and Novak, 1996) and enjoyment (Li et al., 2001). Even though we respect previous attempts (Algharabat and Dennis, 2010a; Jiang and Benbasat, 2005, 2007; Kim and Forsythe, 2007, 2008; Li et al., 2003; Suh and Lee, 2005) to define and conceptualise VPE, based on a unidimensional aspect, yet we think that previous research did not get the chance to have a comprehensive definition of VPE. Therefore, previous research described VPE characteristics without attempting to link them together. For example, Jiang and Benbasat (2005, 2007) found that VPE technology composed of two factors; diagnosticity and compatibility. However, the authors did not clearly state how these two types might impact online customers’ experience. Li et al. (2001) have explored the impact of two-dimensional (2D) versus three-dimensional (3D) representations on the creation of VPEs. Furthermore the authors employed a qualitative study, using protocol analysis; the authors defined five critical characteristics of virtual experiences resulting from exposure to 3D product representations. However, the authors were not able to establish any causal linkages with this methodology. Algharabat and Dennis (2010a) define VPE based on the authenticity of the 3D product presentation. However, the authors did not test the impact of diagnosticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment as elements of VPE. Novak et al. (2000) define VPE based on the notion of flow; however, the authors’ study probed broad experiences of flow, rather than specific product experiences. To that end, we noticed that previous research on this area has employed individual constructs to measure VPE. Nevertheless, the main dimensions of VPE are still questionable. For example, should researchers depend solely on notions such as PD, authenticity, compatibility, telepresence, flow and enjoyment to measure VPE or should they use a combination of them? The aim of this paper is to answer this question
302
R.S. Algharabat
empirically. Therefore, based on the prior classifications of VPE, this research defines VPE ‘as a virtual online experience that users can have while navigating a 3D product presentation, which aims to simulate direct product experiences (i.e., conventional in-store experience) and often enhances diagnosticity, authenticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment’. This proposed definition has not been examined in the previous research and we therefore expect that measuring VPE based on this issue will be the contribution of this research.
2
Research model and hypotheses
2.1 Virtual product experience As a result of the interaction between a product or an environment and an individual, researchers (Li et al., 2001, 2002, 2003) classify product experiences into three types. The first is physical (direct) experience, which permits consumers to interact directly with the presented products. The second is an indirect product experience that often allows consumers to interact with second-hand sources such as static visual pictures. The third is VPE, which allows consumers to interact directly with 3D virtual models. Furthermore, physical experience and VPE combine within virtual reality, such that the latter enhances and enriches product experience because consumers use almost all of their senses when interacting with 3D product presentation (Algharabat and Dennis, 2010a; Klein, 2003; Li et al., 2001, 2002, 2003; Jiang and Benbasat 2005, 2007). A 3D product presentation enables consumers to interact with products and creates a sense of being in a simulated real world (Algharabat, 2014; Algharabat and Abu-ElSamen, 2013; Algharabat and Zamil, 2013).
2.2 Dimensions of the VPE This study believes that, for a VPE to represent a direct product experience, the virtual experience should reflect genuine dimensions that will help users to imagine the illustrated product properly. Previous research on VPE (Algharabat and Dennis, 2010a; Jiang and Benbasat 2005, 2007; Kim and Forsythe, 2007, 2008; Li et al., 2003; Suh and Lee, 2005) defines and conceptualises VPE based on one of the following constructs: PD, authenticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment. However, none of the above research tries to combine PD, authenticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment constructs to produce a combined scale which can be used in the area of e-marketing. Therefore, we suggest the following combined VPE scale, a second-order (Figure 1). The suggested scale is expected to enhance readers’ understanding of this notion. Furthermore, we used the combined scale to examine the relationships among VPE, attitude to the product and purchase intention (PI) (Figure 2).
Conceptualising and modelling VPE for online retailers Figure 1
303
Users’ VPE combined scale: a second order CFA 3D diagnosticity
3D authenticity
3D flow
3D virtual experience
3D compatibility
3D enjoyment
Figure 2
Conceptual framework
Attitude toward product
H1 3D virtual product experience
H2
Purchase intention
2.3 Perceived diagnosticity For a product to be simulated and experienced virtually, it should reflect the diagnosticity of the offline experience. Based on the direct product experience, Kempf and Smith (1998) have used the concept of PD to represent the extent to which consumers believe that a particular experience is helpful for evaluating products’ quality and performance. In the context of online retailers, Jiang and Benbasat (2005, p.117) adopted the notion of PD (Kempf and Smith, 1998) and implemented it to measure VPE. The authors assert
304
R.S. Algharabat
that the concept of PD reflects the perceived ability of a web interface to convey to customers relevant product information that helps them in understanding and evaluating the quality and performance of products sold online. Jiang and Benbasat (2005) posit that virtual control (consumers’ ability to manipulate web product images, to view products from various angles and distances) and functional control (consumers’ ability to explore and experience different features and functions of products) are the main determinants of PD. Therefore, users can exert a high level of control while examining the product virtually. Control levels often add an opportunity for users to customise information flow (Taylor, 2009) and to obtain the relevant information (Liu and Shrum, 2002; Truong et al., 2010). Jiang and Benbasat (2005) assert that PD is the main determinant for VPE. Therefore, in order to have a VPE, users must believe that using 3D presentation will help them to evaluate products’ quality and performance.
2.4 3D authenticity Algharabat and Dennis (2010a) noticed that none of the previous definitions of VPE that use 3D virtual models realistically reflects products’ virtual experience. The authors argue that a 3D virtual experience should be an authentic representation of the physical experience. Furthermore, the authors introduce a new notion that relates to the simulation of VPE, namely, the authenticity of the 3D product presentation. The authors argue that previous definitions that focus on mind transportation (i.e., telepresence and presence) are not particularly well suited to defining VPE because they reflect lack of reality. Therefore, Algharabat and Dennis (2010a, 2010b) define and conceptualise VPE based on the authenticity of 3D product presentation. The authors argue that 3D authenticity is the basis for measuring VPE, which often aids customers’ affective and cognitive responses toward the presented products. Algharabat and Dennis (2010a, p.101) define the authenticity of the 3D product as ‘a psychological state in which virtual objects presented in 3D in a computer-mediated environment are perceived as actual objects’. Furthermore, the authors identify users’ ability to control the content and form of the 3D flash (interactivity) and their ability to see the products with their chosen colours (vividness) as the main antecedents of 3D authenticity. In the same context, Algharabat and Abu-ElSamen (2013, p.264) define 3D VPE as a ‘psychological state in which virtual objects presented in 3D are perceived by consumers as actual objects, which convey to customers relevant product information that helps them in understanding and evaluating the quality and performance of products sold online’. The authors assert that authenticity of the 3D product is the main determinant for VPE. Therefore, in order to have a VPE, users must believe that using 3D presentation will help them to perceive the presented products as actual objects that they can find and with which they can interact.
2.5 Compatibility Jiang and Benbasat (2007, p.457) relied on previous studies (Moore and Benbasat, 1991; Jarvenpaa and Todd, 1996–1997) and defined compatibility as ‘the extent to which consumers believe their online shopping experience is consistent with their existing shopping habits, product evaluation styles and past experiences in physical shopping environments’. Advanced technologies, such as 3D product presentations, often provide
Conceptualising and modelling VPE for online retailers
305
customers with VPE, which is compatible with their physical product experience (Peterson et al., 1997). The importance of compatibility clearly appears on the surface whenever online product experiences are insufficient to enable consumers to evaluate product quality. In the same context, Peterson et al. (1997) suggested that more advanced technologies, such as 3D product presentation, are needed to provide customers with product experiences that are similar to or compatible with their physical product experiences. Prior research (Jiang and Benbasat, 2005, 2007) has revealed that 3D presentations can portray products more concretely and convey more information cues than pallid presentation formats, because 3D technology involves non-verbal language and multiple sensory channels (Lim et al., 2000). Therefore, the more compatible a 3D presentation with users’ past experience, the richer the product information exposed to consumers (Jiang and Benbasat, 2007). Jiang and Benbasat (2007) assert that compatibility of the 3D product presentation is the main determinant for VPE. Therefore, in order to have a VPE, users must believe in the authentic nature of the 3D product and, hence, that using 3D presentation will help them to experience the presented products in a similar way to their physical product experiences.
2.6 Flow Previous research (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Lin et al., 2008; Novak et al., 2000; Pace, 2004) has focused on the notion of flow experience. For example, Csikszentmihalyi (1990) defines flow as a state of consciousness that is sometimes experienced by people who are deeply involved in an enjoyable activity [as cited in Lin et al., (2008), p.42]. Further, Csikszentmihalyi (1990) posits that the notion of flow often creates a state of involvement in a certain activity where people will focus only on such activity and nothing else seems to matter. Novak et al. (2000) studied online consumer experience through a large-scale survey asking individuals to retrospectively evaluate their experiences on the web in order to investigate the antecedents and consequences of flow. Thus, the authors identified both virtual control and telepresence as the main antecedents to consumers’ flow, which the authors consider to be the basis for online customer experience. Pace (2004) presented a grounded theory of the flow experiences of web users engaged in information-seeking activities. The author asserted the following characteristics of flow: 1
curiosity and interest
2
losing a sense of time and external surroundings.
Hoffman and Novak (1996, p.57) define flow as ‘the state occurring during network navigation which is: 1
characterised by a seamless sequence of responses facilitated by machine interactivity
2
intrinsically enjoyable
3
accompanied by a loss of self-consciousness
4
self-reinforcing.
306
R.S. Algharabat
Furthermore, Novak et al. (2000) have found that flow is a key component for compelling an online shopping experience. Flow experience has been widely used in online environments. Previous studies posit the significant role that flow experience plays in determining users’ online behaviour in many areas such as online banking (Lee et al., 2007), online games (Lee and Tsai, 2010) and mobile instant messaging (Zhou and Lu, 2011). Previous scholarly literature (e.g., Novak et al., 2000) posits that flow experience is characterised by focused attention, complete involvement and an intrinsically enjoyable experience. However, focused attention and complete involvement results in time distortion. Previous research (Ghani and Deshpande, 1994; Hoffman and Novak, 1996; Novak et al., 2000) focused on two dimensions to measure flow experience; enjoyment and time distortion. However, Lin et al. (2008) and Pace (2004) noted that flow should not be considered as the general concept of enjoyment. The authors state that flow could be regarded as an extreme form of enjoyment and it is a more restricted concept than enjoyment. The authors posit that enjoyment experience is broader than flow because customers can have enjoyable experiences without being in flow. Therefore, In order to have a VPE, users must believe that using a 3D presentation will generate a state flow.
2.7 Enjoyment Shih (1998) posits that enjoyment, play and fun are the main consequences of using 3D product presentation. Li et al. (2003) suggest that 3D product presentation can strongly impact users’ affective evaluation, which refers to users’ feelings of pleasure and fun. Kim and Forsythe (2007) find that 3D product presentation provides participants with hedonic benefits. Kim and Forsythe’s (2008) empirical result reveals that users’ ability to rotate a product using the technology of 3D often enhances their hedonic values. In the same context, Lee et al. (2006) find significant indirect effects of the 3D product presentation on attitude and behavioural intention toward online retailers mediated by the direct effects of TAM’s perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and perceived enjoyment. In the same context, Algharabat and Abu-ElSamen (2013) investigate the effects of 3D product presentation on online diamond ring customers. The authors find that 3D product presentation has a significant impact on enjoyment. Therefore, In order to have a VPE, users must believe that using a 3D presentation will generate enjoyment.
2.8 VPE, attitude toward the product and PI Attitudes toward products refer to consumers’ overall evaluations of products [Jiang and Benbasat (2005), p.460]. If consumers believe that a 3D product presentation is authentic and diagnostic to their offline experience (the direct experience), consumers’ beliefs about the online products’ attributes will be stronger (Kempf and Smith, 1998) and they will have more confidence in their own evaluations of product attributes (Smith and Swinyard, 1983; Smith, 1993). As a result, consumers will perceive product information thoroughly and favourably. For example, Algharabat and Abu-ElSamen’s (2013) results reveal that 3D product presentation has a positive influence on attitude toward the presented products. Li et al. (2003) posit that users’ ability to interact with 3D through rotating, customising and zooming in or out on the product has a positive influence on
Conceptualising and modelling VPE for online retailers
307
brand attitudes and PI. Suh and Lee (2005) reported that a 3D product presentation has a strong relationship with product knowledge, product attitude and PIs. Fiore and Jin’s (2003) study reveals that using a highly interactive 3D product presentation has a positive influence on customers’ attitude. Hopkins et al. (2004) state the importance of the new technology in influencing attitude toward the advert, the brand and PI. Li et al.’s (2001, 2002) studies highlight the ability of 3D product presentation to enhance brand attitudes and purchasing intention. Therefore, H1
VPE has a positive impact on attitude toward the product.
H2
VPE has a positive impact on PI.
3
Method
3.1 Stimuli and interface design A hypothetical retailer’s website was custom-designed for this study to test the proposed hypotheses. We designed two websites (laptops and rings) that allow participants to control the content and form of the 3D. Furthermore, we employed a between-subjects design in which our participants can see one experiment. For each website, participants can zoom in or out on the rings or laptops, rotate them and see different parts of them when clicking on them. The 3D sites permit the participants to change the colour of the rings/laptops and see them in their chosen colour. Moreover, the 3D sites allow participants to obtain information about the rings/laptops’ attributes (i.e., weight, size, visual clarity, price, warranty, special effect features, etc.). Each site offers a wide variety of rings or laptops, similar to those that many women and men currently buy and use. The 3D stimuli were designed to help consumers imagine the rings or the laptops in appropriate and relevant ways, thus enhancing their virtual experiences (Algharabat and Abu-ElSamen, 2013; Algharabat and Dennis, 2010a). The website we created for this study was not previously known to users, nor did users have any knowledge (i.e., we did not include any brand name for the presented product) of the fictitious brands on it. Thus, we eliminated any impact of previous experiences or attitudes (Algharabat and Dennis, 2010a; Fiore et al., 2005). Please see Appendix for screen shot of the 3D rings and laptops.
3.2 Justifications for using the stimuli We select laptops and rings products because; 1
They represent product categories whose salient features can be adequately evaluated with 3D interfaces using both experience attributes (i.e., weight, size, visual clarity, etc.) and search attributes (i.e., price, warranty, special effect features, etc.).
2
Rings and laptops represent product categories which previous research (Algharabat and Abu-ElSamen, 2013; Algharabat and Zamil, 2013; Algharabat and Dennis, 2010a, 2010b; Li et al., 2001) tested. For example, Li et al. (2001) stated that using 3D laptops and rings often impact online attitude and behaviour. Algharabat and Abu-ElSamen (2013) state that 3D rings often impact online attitude, trust and
308
R.S. Algharabat enjoyment. Furthermore, according to Li et al. (2001), choosing a 3D ring not only gives participants the impression of owning them, but also it puts more personality into them.
3
Rings and laptops represent product categories which are popular and interesting to our sample. Therefore, consumers’ examination of 3D products, such as rings and laptops often enhance their virtual experience (Algharabat and Abu-ElSamen, 2013; Algharabat and Zamil, 2013; Algharabat and Dennis, 2010a, 2010b; Li et al., 2001, 2002, 2003). Therefore, the sites provide a suitable context for the present sample.
3.3 Sample and procedures A convenience non-student sample has been employed to conduct this research. We used a sample of 400 for the data collection. The sample consists of 200 subjects for each stimulus. The sample was gender-balanced, consisting of 50% women and 50% men and 98% of the sample were aged between 23 and 45. Approximately 98% reported having had prior online shopping experience (we excluded the remaining 2% from the analysis). We conducted a non-response bias test (Armstrong and Overton, 1977) to confirm the generalisation of our results, comparing the late responses with the early responses. The results show no significant difference between respondents (p > 0.05 regarding authenticity, PD, compatibility, flow, enjoyment, VPE, attitude toward the product and PI). As a result, a non-response bias was not considered to be a serious limitation in this study. We conducted the study in Jordan, Middle East and used an English language questionnaire that was translated into Arabic and then translated back into English to test for equivalency. The questionnaire was pre-tested with a small Jordanian non-student sample (employees from a governmental university in Jordan) before field implementation. In determining the proper time for each site, we followed Zajonc’s (2001) study in determining the limit exposure for each experiment up to five minutes. Prior to the collection of our data, participants were given a series of practice trials to familiarise themselves with websites. After this, we informed the participants that this study aims to measure their experience via different online retailers. In order to engage participants in the study, we asked users to browse one of two websites (one for laptops and one for rings) and then answer the attached questionnaire.
3.4 Pre-test To enable potential users to experience products virtually, we manipulated VPE using two levels, i.e., low, vs. high. We classify high VPE by having a high level of diagnosticity, authenticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment. While low level of VPE has low level of diagnosticity, authenticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment. Therefore, we designed two 3D sites, one always participants to zoom in or out on the rings and or laptops, rotate them and see different parts of them in different colours (high level of diagnosticity, authenticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment) and get information about the product such as the size of the product and its prices (high level of diagnosticity and compatibility). For the low level of VPE, we designed 3D sites which have a product which rotates alone, users neither can zoom in or out on the rings and or laptops, nor can they rotate them or see them in different colours (low level of
Conceptualising and modelling VPE for online retailers
309
diagnosticity, authenticity, flow and enjoyment). Furthermore, the designed websites did not allow users to get information about the presented product (low level of compatibility). We ran a pre-test to develop the study materials. Respondents (n = 50), a convenience non-student sample from a governmental university in Jordan, were asked to rate several VPE based on their diagnosticity, authenticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment of rings (seven-point scales) and laptops (seven-point scales), using different samples of each stimulus. Manipulation checks were used to decide whether the participants had noticed the differences between the various conditions of each construct (i.e., high vs. low). After each level, participants were shown the following statements: the 3D website is: ‘helpful for me to evaluate the product’, ‘helpful in familiarising me with the product’, ‘helpful for me to understand the performance of the product’, ‘helpful for me to understand the quality of the product’, ‘I feel like I am dealing with a salesman who is responding to my orders’, I feel like I am holding a real laptop and rotating’, ‘I feel time passes quickly while using the 3D site’, ‘I felt curious while using 3D site’, ‘I never thought of other things while using 3D site’, while using 3D site, I was entirely absorbed’, ‘evaluating the product on this website is compatible with how I evaluate products in physical stores’, ‘evaluating the product on this website fits well with the way I like to evaluate products in physical stores’, ‘familiarising myself with the product on this website is similar to my product evaluation style in physical stores’, ‘I find my experience with this website interesting’, ‘I find my experience with this website enjoyable’. The results confirmed that participants noticed the different levels of VPE. They perceived that the 3D ring website with high level of diagnosticity, authenticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment as being significantly providing VPE more than the 3D website with low level of diagnosticity, authenticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment (M high VPE = 6.35, M low VPE = 1.54; F 1, 49 = 116.4, p < .001). We followed the same procedures for laptops and our results confirm that participants noticed the different levels of VPE. They perceived that the 3D laptop website with high level of diagnosticity, authenticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment as being significantly providing VPE more than the 3D website with low level of diagnosticity, authenticity, compatibility, flow and enjoyment (M high VPE = 5.75, M low VPE = 1.55; F 1, 49 = 145.3, p < .001).
3.5 Construct operationalisation The participants were informed that this study pertained to consumer evaluations of laptops and rings retailers’ websites. The questionnaire contained seven-point Likert-type scales, anchored by 1 = ‘strongly disagree’ and 7 = ‘strongly agree’. The items and the supporting literature for the measurement scales are shown in Table 1. To measure the authenticity construct (AUT), we adopted a three-item scale based on Algharabat and Dennis’ (2010a) scale. To measure PD and compatibility (COM), we adopted a three-item scale for each based on Jiang and Benbasat (2005). We used a modified version of Lee and Tsai’s (2010) three-item scale to measure flow (FLW). We used Koufaris’ (2002) scale to measure enjoyment (ENJ). For attitude toward the product (AT), we used the scale of van der Heijden et al. (2003), Grazioli and Jarvenpaa (2000) and Coyle and Thorson (2001). Finally, for PI, we employed Fiore et al.’s (2005a) scale.
310
R.S. Algharabat
Table 1
Research construct operationalisation Author (s)
3D perceived diagnosticity (PD1–PD3) PD1
The 3D presentation is helpful for me to evaluate the product.
PD2
The 3D presentation is helpful in familiarising me with the product.
PD3
The 3D presentation is helpful for me to understand the performance of the product.
3D authenticity (AUT1–AUT3) AUT1
The 3D presentation is helpful for me to understand the quality of the product.
AUT2
The 3D lets me feel like I am dealing with a salesman who is responding to my orders.
AUT3
The 3D lets me feel like I am holding a real laptop and rotating
3D flow (FLW1–FLW4) FLW1
I feel time passes quickly while using the 3D site.
FLW2
I felt curious while using 3D site.
FLW3
I never thought of other things while using 3D site.
FLW4
While using 3D site, I was entirely absorbed.
3D compatibility (COM1–COM4) COM1
Evaluating the product on this website is compatible with how I evaluate products in physical stores.
COM2
Evaluating the product on this website fits well with the way I like to evaluate products in physical stores.
COM3
Familiarising myself with the product on this website is similar to my product evaluation style in physical stores.
Shopping enjoyment (ENJ1–ENJ4) ENJ1
I find my experience with this website interesting.
ENJ2
I find my experience with this website enjoyable.
Purchase Intention (PI1–PI3) PI1
After seeing the website, it is likely that I would buy a product from this online store
PI2
I would be willing to purchase a product through this online store
PI3
I would be willing to tell a friend about this online store
Attitude toward the product (AT1–AT3) AT1
I would have positive feelings towards buying a product from this site
AT2
The thought of buying a product from this website is appealing to me
AT3
It would be a good idea to buy a product from this website
Jiang and Benbasat (2005) and Kempf and Smith (1998) Algharabat and Dennis (2010a)
Lee and Tsai (2010)
Jiang and Benbasat (2005)
Koufaris (2002)
Fiore et al. (2005)
van der Heijden et al. (2003), Grazioli and Jarvenpaa (2000) Coyle and Thorson (2001)
Conceptualising and modelling VPE for online retailers
4
311
Analysis and results
We examined all the scale items to reflect the hypothesised direction. We used a combination of SPSS 17 and AMOS 17. Further, we examined the univariate skewness and kurtosis of the variables and found them to be within acceptable levels.
4.1 Measurement models The analysis started with an examination of the structure and dimensionality of the study constructs using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and reliability analysis. After examining the pattern matrix of the EFA, all items had loadings greater than 0.4 and communalities greater than 0.5. We found no crossed loadings in other factors. Figure 3
Second-order factor analysis of VPE dimensions
3D diagnosticity
3D authenticity
.83***
.60*** 3D flow
3D compatibility
.58***
3D virtual experience
.84***
.14* Enjoyment
Notes: χ2 = 164.499, df = 85, χ2/df = 1.935, CFI = .967, GFI = .950, TLI = .959, IFI = .967, RMSEA = .048 *p < 0.05, **p
