Abstract

Globalization processes rapidly advance information and communications technologies that influence social, economic, and cultural changes and transform consumers’ needs and buying behavior in online shopping. Business sector organizations operating in a dynamic environment have to adjust to the environment’s uncertainty, consider the changing needs of consumers and find effective and efficient ways to create a unique value for them. However, researchers and business practitioners have different interpretations and assessments of the factors influencing end-user purchasing behavior in the internet space. Therefore, the main problem area is how to assess which approach more comprehensively reflects and conveys the online market reality related to consumer buying behavior. This study examines these issues by combining various researchers’ and business practitioners’ positions to assess factors influencing consumers’ decision-making in online shopping. This study aims to evaluate the critical factors related to e-shop characteristics and the product features that significantly impact consumer buying behavior in online shopping. Scientific literature review showed that the most crucial e-shop characteristics are e-shop design, e-shop informativeness, e-shop convenience, e-shop security, and e-shop popularity. From product features’ perspectives, scientists and business practitioners mainly focus on product design and packaging, price, brand, customer reviews, and delivery time. Research methods such as scientific literature analysis, survey (structured questionnaire), correlation, and regression analysis were used to achieve the research goal. The survey results demonstrated that Lithuanian customers prefer traditional shopping compared to online purchases. As a result, the investigation results indicate that online purchases in Lithuania are still a growing market. Depending on survey results, the most crucial e-shop characteristics affecting Lithuanian customer buying behavior in online shopping were identified as e-shop design and e-shop security. Furthermore, the most influencing product features related to customer buying behavior in online shopping were product design and packaging, product price. Correlation and regression analysis proved that significant factors are e-shop design, e-shop security, product design and packaging, product price, and customer reviews for Lithuanian buyers in online shopping.

Keywords: customer buying behavior, e-shop characteristics, product features, online shopping, Lithuania.

JEL Classification: M1, M3, M31.

Cite as: Davidaviciene, V., Raudeliuniene, J., Jonyte-Zemlickiene, A., & Tvaronaviciene, M. (2021). Factors affecting customer buying behavior in online shopping. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 4, 11-19. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2021.4-01

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Agariya, A. K., Johari, A., Sharma, H. K., Chandraul, U. N., & Singh, D. (2012). The role of packaging in brand communication. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 3(2), 1-13. [Google Scholar]
2. Andryeyeva, N., Nikishyna, O., Burkynskyi, B., Khumarova, N., Laiko, O., & Tiutiunnyk, H. (2021). Methodology of analysis of the influence of the economic policy of the state on the environment. Insights into Regional Development, 3(2), 198-212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3. Bartikowski, B., & Singh, N. (2014). Should all firms adapt websites to international audiences?. Journal of Business Research, 67(3), 246-252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
4. Cao, Y., Ajjan, H., & Hong, P. (2018). Post-purchase shipping and customer service experiences in online shopping and their impact on customer satisfaction: an empirical study with comparison. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
5. Cherenkov, V., Sheresheva, M., Starov, S., Gladkikh, I., Tanichev, A., Berezka, S., … & Yussuf, A. (2020). Sustainability trends and consumer perceived risks towards private labels. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(1), 347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
6. Chiabai, A., Platt, S., & Strielkowski, W. (2014). Eliciting users’ preferences for cultural heritage and tourism-related e-services: a tale of three European cities. Tourism Economics, 20(2), 263-277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
7. Darsono, J. T., Susana, E., Prihantono, E. Y., & Eley, S. K. (2019). Strategic Policies for Small and Medium Businesses in marketing through E-commerce. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 7(2), 1230. [Google Scholar]
8. Davidaviciene, V., Raudeliuniene, J., & VirSilaite, R. (2019). User experience evaluation and creativity stimulation with augmented reality mobile applications. Creativity studies, 12(1), 34-48.[Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
9. Davidaviciene, V., Raudeliuniene, J., & VirSilaite, R. (2021). Evaluation of user experience in augmented reality mobile applications. Journal of business economics and management, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
10. Davidaviciene, V., Raudeliuniene, J., Tvaronaviciene, M., & KauSinis, J. (2019). The importance of security aspects in consumer preferences in electronic environment. Journal of Security & Sustainability Issues, 8(3). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
11. Dong, R., & Gleim, M. R. (2018). High or low: The impact of brand logo location on consumers product perceptions. Food Quality and Preference, 69, 28-35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
12. Grewal, D., Roggeveen, A. L., & Nordfält, J. (2017). The future of retailing. Journal of retailing, 93(1), 1-6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
13. Hasan, B. (2016). Perceived irritation in online shopping: The impact of website design characteristics. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 224-230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
14. Hussain, S., Ali, S., Ibrahim, M., Noreen, A., & Ahmad, S. F. (2015). Impact of product packaging on consumer perception and purchase intention. Journal of Marketing and Consumer Research, 10, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
15. Imai, T., Kang, M. J., & Camerer, C. F. (2019). When the eyes say buy: visual fixations during hypothetical consumer choice improve prediction of actual purchases. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 5(1), 112-122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
16. Javaria, K., Masood, O., & Garcia, F. (2020). Strategies to manage the risks faced by consumers in developing e-commerce. Insights into Regional Development, 2(4), 774-783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Kahn, B. E. (2017). Using visual design to improve customer perceptions of online assortments. Journal of retailing, 93(1), 29-42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
18. Koo, D. M., & Ju, S. H. (2010). The interactional effects of atmospherics and perceptual curiosity on emotions and online shopping intention. Computers in human behavior, 26(3), 377-388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
19. Krishna, A. (2012). An integrative review of sensory marketing: Engaging the senses to affect perception, judgment and behavior. Journal of consumer psychology, 22(3), 332-351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
20. Lim, W. M. (2013). The effects of web atmospherics on entertainment gratification and web irritation: some empirical evidence from online shopping. Modern Applied Science, 7(12), 15.[Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
21. Lim, W. M., & Ting, D. H. (2012). E-shopping: an Analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model. Modern Applied Science, 6(4), 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
22. Lin, H. H., & Yang, S. F. (2014). An eye movement study of attribute framing in online shopping. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 2(2), 72-80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
23. Nassar, N., & Tvaronaviciene, M. (2021). A systematic theoretical review on sustainable management for green competitiveness. Insights into Regional Development, 3(2), 267-281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
24. Overmars, S., & Poels, K. (2015a). How product representation shapes virtual experiences and re-patronage intentions: the role of mental imagery processing and experiential value. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 25(3), 236-259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
25. Overmars, S., & Poels, K. (2015b). Online product experiences: The effect of simulating stroking gestures on product understanding and the critical role of user control. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 272-284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
26. Park, E. J., Kim, E. Y., Funches, V. M., & Foxx, W. (2012). Apparel product attributes, web browsing, and e-impulse buying on shopping websites. Journal of Business Research, 65(11), 1583-1589. [Google Scholar] [CrosssRef]
27. Pieters, R., Wedel, M., & Batra, R. (2010). The stopping power of advertising: Measures and effects of visual complexity. Journal of Marketing, 74(5), 48-60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
28. Rahman, M. A., Islam, M. A., Esha, B. H., Sultana, N., & Chakravorty, S. (2018). Consumer buying behavior towards online shopping: An empirical study on Dhaka city, Bangladesh. Cogent Business & Management, 5(1), 1514940. [Google Scholar] CrossRef[]
29. Rausser, G., Strielkowski, W., & Streimikiene, D. (2018). Smart meters and household electricity consumption: A case study in Ireland. Energy & Environment, 29(1), 131-146. [Google Scholar][CrossRef]
30. Rezaei, S., Shahijan, M. K., Amin, M., & Ismail, W. K. W. (2016). Determinants of app stores continuance behavior: a PLS path modelling approach. Journal of Internet Commerce, 15(4), 408-440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
31. Richard, M. O., Chebat, J. C., Yang, Z., & Putrevu, S. (2010). A proposed model of online consumer behavior: Assessing the role of gender. Journal of Business Research, 63(9-10), 926-934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
32. Rundh, B. (2013). Linking packaging to marketing: how packaging is influencing the marketing strategy. British Food Journal, 115(11), 1547-1563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
33. Simionescu, M., & Strielkowski, W. (2017). Brand loyalty and fashion marketing: a case study of Romanian youth. Marketing and Management of Innovations, (1), 25-31. [Google Scholar][CrossRef]
34. Spence, C., & Gallace, A. (2011). Multisensory design: Reaching out to touch the consumer. Psychology & Marketing, 28(3), 267-308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
35. Stefko, R., Bacík, R., Fedorko, R., Olearova, M., & Rigelský, M. (2019). Analysis of consumer preferences related to the use of digital devices in the e-commerce dimension. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 7(1), 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
36. Strielkowski, W., Veinbender, T., Tvaronaviciene, M., & Lace, N. (2020). Economic efficiency and energy security of smart cities. Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 33(1), 788-803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
37. Tesarova, M., Krmela, A., & Simberova, I. (2020). Digital support to external sustainability communication in self-adhesive labelling industry. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 7(3), 2109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
38. Vonkeman, C., Verhagen, T., & Van Dolen, W. (2017). Role of local presence in online impulse buying. Information & Management, 54(8), 1038-1048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
39. Wu, A. (2015). Food packaging design and its application in the brand marketing. Carpathian Journal of Food Science & Technology, 7(3), 5–15. [Google Scholar]
40. Yu, L., Westland, S., Li, Z., Pan, Q., Shin, M. J., & Won, S. (2018). The role of individual colour preferences in consumer purchase decisions. Color Research & Application, 43(2), 258-267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]