ARTICLE IN PRESS

Technovation 27 (2007) 774787

www.elsevier.com/locate/technovation

Shopping motivations on Internet: A study based on utilitarian and

hedonic value
Pui-Lai Toa, Chechen Liaob,, Tzu-Hua Linc
a
Department of Management Information Systems, National Chiayi University, Chia-Yi 60074, Taiwan
b
Department of Information Management, National Chung Cheng University, Ming-Hsiung, Chia-Yi 62117, Taiwan
c
Graduate Institute of Management, National Chiayi University, Chia-Yi 60074, Taiwan

Abstract

Electronic commerce has been growing rapidly. Although business-to-consumer electronic commerce has created new opportunities
for businesses, questions about consumer shopping motivations toward Internet shopping versus conventional shopping continue to
persist. The purpose of this study is to investigate the Internet shopping motivations from both utilitarian and hedonic perspectives. The
differential effects of these dual motivations on both search intention and purchase intention are examined. An integrated model of
shopping motivations on the Internet is proposed. A structural equation model is developed to test the casual effects between variables.
The study nds that utilitarian motivation is a determinant of consumer intention to search and intention to purchase. Hedonic
motivation has a direct impact on intention to search and indirect impact on intention to purchase. While these dual motivations have
signicant effects, utilitarian motivation is the strongest predictor of intention to search and intention to purchase. Utilitarian motivation
is inuenced by convenience, cost saving, information availability, and selection; hedonic motivation is inuenced by adventure, and
authority and status. The study serves as a basis for the future growth of Internet marketing.
r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Internet shopping; Utilitarian motivation; Hedonic motivation; Shopping motivation; Search intention; Purchase intention

1. Introduction shopping experience. From the utilitarian perceptive, the

According to the survey, 2004 Internet User Behavior
Analysis issued by the Market Intelligence Center (MIC)
of the Institute for Information Industry (III), 77.6% of
Internet users have shopped online during the past year,
and the average amount of Internet shopping has more
than quadrupled compared with the amount 3 years ago.
This trend shows that the Internet has certainly become a
vital channel for shopping. However, in contrast with the
booming development of the online shopping business,
most of the studies on the motivations of Internet shopping
have been focused on utilitarian motivations, which regard
Internet shopping as a mission-oriented and rational
Corresponding author. Tel.: +886 5 2720411x34610;
fax: +886 5 272 1501.
E-mail addresses: plto@mail.ncyu.edu.tw (P.-L. To),
ccliao@mis.ccu.edu.tw (C. Liao), s0910364@mail.ncyu.edu.tw
(T.-H. Lin).
shopping motivation is to procure the product or to
complete the mission only (Batra and Ahtola, 1991; Babin
et al., 1994). The emotional aspect of Internet shopping
motivation has seldom been taken into consideration.
With the prevalence of hedonistic shopping at physical
storefronts, some researchers started to explore the social
and emotional value acquired during the process of
physical shopping. Academics believe that simply studying
whether the product is procured or the mission is
completed is not enough to represent shopping motiva-
tions. The motivation of sensual and emotional satisfaction
during the shopping process cannot be overlooked (Batra
and Ahtola, 1991; Babin et al., 1994; Roy, 1994; Wakeeld
and Baker, 1998). In studies of physical shopping,
researchers use both utilitarian and hedonic viewpoints to
explore the physical shopping behavior of consumers
(Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982; Batra and Ahtola,
1991; Babin et al., 1994). While some studies have
investigated the inuence of cognitive style and purchase

0166-4972/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2007.01.001
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787
involvement on Internet shopping motivations and
attitudes, few studies on Internet shopping have
been based on both utilitarian and hedonic motivations
(Wang et al., 2006ac). The purpose of this study is to
explore the inuence of different values affecting search
intentions and purchase intentions of consumers from
utilitarian and hedonic points of view, and to develop an
integrated model which could explain the purchase
intention of consumers. This study would then apply a
structural equation model to verify the causal relationship
among various variables in the model. The research
questions are listed as follows:
1. Would factors including cost-saving, convenience, selec-
tion, information availability, lack of sociality, custo-
mized product or service inuence the utilitarian
motivation of Internet shopping?
2. Would factors including adventure, social, idea, value,
authority and status inuence the hedonic motivation of
Internet shopping?
3. Would utilitarian and hedonic motivations inuence the
search intention of Internet shopping?
4. Would utilitarian motivation inuence the purchase
intention of Internet shopping?
5. Would search intention of Internet shopping inuence
purchase intention?
2. Literature review
2.1. Researches on shopping motivations
The study by Tauber (1972) rst explores the moti-
vation behind shopping behavior. The author regards
shopping as a series of behaviors of acquiring the
product or the value of the shopping process. A shopper
could be motivated simply to nd the products he or she
needs. However, attracting others attention, nding time
to be with peers, or just simply killing time are other
motivations propelling people to shop. Generally
speaking, the author believes that people shop not only
for the utilitarian value of the products, but also for the
satisfaction obtained during the shopping process. Hirsch-
man and Holbrook (1982) further extend the idea of
Tauber (1972) by including factors such as pleasure,
feeling, aesthetics, emotion, and enjoyment as additional
shopping motivations, and compare them with tra-
ditional utilitarian shopping motivations. They believe
this original viewpoint further expanded the scope conned
by traditional research on shopping. Their study
has not only provided clear denitions of hedonic
shopping motivations, but has also broken new grounds
for future studies on shopping intention of consumers. The
study of shopping motivation has been shifted from the
utilitarian viewpoint to the conceptual hedonic viewpoint
ever since, which means that it focuses on fun instead of
function only.
775
2.2. Utilitarian and hedonic shopping motivations
Utilitarian motivation is dened as mission critical,
rational, decision effective, and goal oriented (Hirschman
and Holbrook, 1982; Batra and Ahtola, 1991; Engel et al.,
1993). Utilitarian motivation shows that shopping starts
from a mission or task, and the acquired benet depends
on whether the mission is completed or not, or whether the
mission is completed efciently during the process (Batra
and Ahtola, 1991; Sherry et al.,1993; Babin et al., 1994).
Hirschman and Holbrook (1982) propose the concept of
hedonic motivation from a different perceptive. Hedonic
motivation refers to those consumption behaviors in search
for happiness, fantasy, awakening, sensuality, and enjoy-
ment. The benet of hedonic motivation is experiential and
emotional. The reason that hedonic consumers love to
shop is because they enjoy the shopping process. It is not
about obtaining the physical objective or completing the
mission. In other words, the study of hedonic motivation is
the study of shopping enjoyment. Shopping behavior is no
longer just a boring task or a mission to complete (Bloch
and Bruce, 1984; Sherry, 1990; Babin et al., 1994).
Academics further point out that the study of hedonic
motivation has become increasingly important because of
the identiable motivations attracting consumers to visit
the storefront or website. Furthermore, hedonic motivation
has become the extension of utilitarian motivation, both of
which have become an emerging factor in maintaining
competitive advantage (Parsons, 2002).
2.3. The impact of utilitarian and hedonic motivations on
consumer behavior
Babin et al. (1994) conducted an empirical study to
verify the existence of hedonic and utilitarian shopping
value, and comments that value, such as the amount of
money consumed and satisfaction procured, inuences
consumer behavior. The research also states that hedonic
shopping value can inuence unplanned shopping behavior
while utilitarian shopping value does not. Dhar and
Wertenbroch (2000) study the inuence of utilitarian and
hedonic motivations to the decision-making behavior of
consumers. Products purchased for pleasure have a
different level of impact than products purchased for
functional purposes. In the situation where a decision must
be made to give up certain products, products for pleasure
are usually the ones to be given up rst. Park et al. (1986)
indicated that the benet of advertising campaigns could be
calculated through the categorization of utilitarian and
hedonic products. The research shows that hedonic
products or brands have higher premiums than utilitarian
ones. The study of Chandon et al. (2000) also points out
that hedonic products coupled with hedonic promotional
campaigns would have higher premiums, and the same
principle could be applied to utilitarian products as well.
Based on previous studies, we found that utilitarian and
hedonic motivations have been widely applied in academic
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
776 P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787
research, while they are also quite valuable for the
reference of market pricing, promotional campaigns and
marketing decisions. Studies also show that utilitarian and
hedonic motivations have different levels of impact on
consumer behaviors.
2.4. Utilitarian and hedonic motivations for online shopping
behavior
In contrast to physical storefronts, Internet shopping
represents a new way of shopping. Alba et al. (1997) show
that diversied selection is the primary motivation that
Internet shopping could offer to the consumers. Ghosh
(1998) states that convenience, information, customization
and interaction are the primary motivations for Internet
shopping. Morganosky and Cude (2000) indicate that
convenience and time efciency are the primary factors of
online shopping. This posit has been restated in the study
of Verhoef and Langerak (2001). Keeney (1999) compiled a
list of Internet shopping values via interviews and
discussions. The 10 fundamental shopping values raised
by the author are basically utilitarian values except for
enhancing the shopping pleasure. Blake et al. (2005)
indicate several features for commercial websites that are
important to Internet shoppers. Almost all of the features
mentioned are utilitarian related. Previous researchers
believe that utilitarian values are the major factors for
people shopping online.
In terms of hedonic motivation, Falk (1997) points out
that whether for storefront shopping or Internet shopping,
sensual stimulation and the freedom to search are the
primary shopping motivations for consumers; therefore,
hedonic motivation is also very important. The research of
Mathwick et al. (2001) explores the experiential value of
Internet shopping, in which the intrinsic experiential value
include enjoyment and aesthetics. Such experiential value
should be regarded as hedonic value. Kim and Shim (2002)
suggest that consumers who go online to shop are not only
doing so for gathering information and purchasing
products. They are also satisfying the needs of experience
and emotion, which shows that online shoppers are like
shoppers in the real world for they pursue utilitarian as
well as hedonic value. Parsons (2002) proposed numerous
non-functional shopping motivations for online shoppers,
and these non-functional motivations should be referring
to hedonic values. Based on previous studies, it seems
that hedonic shopping values for Internet shopping do
exist.
2.5. Search intention, search behavior and purchase
intention
Jamiszewski (1998) categorized search behavior as goal-
oriented and exploration-oriented behaviors. Goal-oriented
consumers have a substantial shopping plan in their minds.
The purpose of the search is to gather information of the
products they want to buy. On the other hand, exploration-
oriented consumers do not have a substantial plan in their
minds. Their purpose of the search is to browse or window
shop only. Search behavior on the Internet is similar to that
in physical storefronts, which means that consumers could
be performing either search activity, with or without a
specic purpose. Search at physical storefronts is more time
and effort consuming than search online since preparations,
such as commute and dressing up, need to be made before
and afterwards. The Internet has overcome the limitation of
space and time. It provides a more convenient browsing
medium and signicantly increases the search intention of
consumers. The theory of planned behavior (Fishbein and
Ajzen, 1975) indicates that behavioral intention is a very
powerful predictor of actual behavior; therefore, this study
uses search intention to represent search behavior.
The study of Moe (2003) indicates that both goal-
oriented and exploration-oriented searching behavior
would inuence purchase intention. A goal-oriented con-
sumer would generate purchase intention once they nd the
shopping information they need while exploration-oriented
consumers would have impulsive purchasing or unplanned
shopping behavior with emotional stimulation. It can be
seen that searching would have inuence on purchase
intention.
3. Research model
The purpose of this study is to explore the inuence of
utilitarian and hedonic value on online shopping motiva-
tion and to study whether different shopping motivations
would inuence search intention and purchase intention.
This study proposes an integrated model to explain the
purchase intention of consumers (see Fig. 1).
From the perspective of utilitarian value, Babin et al.
(1994) dened utilitarian shopping motivation as acquiring
the benet of the product needed, or acquiring the product
more effortlessly during the shopping process. This study
categorizes utilitarian value into convenience, selection,
information availability and lack of sociality based on the
research of Wolnbarger and Gilly (2001). This study
further adds in two variables: cost saving and customiza-
tion of product or service. Previous research recognized
cost-saving as an important factor for consumers to adopt
Internet shopping (Keeney, 1999). Customized product or
service is regarded by the academia as one of the
competitive advantages for Internet shopping (Burke,
1997; Han and Han, 2001). Thus, cost-saving, convenience,
selection, information availability, lack of sociality, and
customized product or service are considered as the
utilitarian shopping value in this study.
From the perspective of hedonic value, this study
categorizes the hedonic value of Internet shopping as
adventure, social, idea, value, authority and status accord-
ing to Westbrook and Black (1985) and Arnold and
Reynolds (2003), and excludes the hedonic value of
satisfaction and role of traditional shopping. It is
because satisfaction refers to the sense of therapy achieved
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787 777

Utilitarian Value
H1
Cost Saving

H2
Convenience

H3
Selection

H4
Utilitarian
Information Motivation
Availability

H5 H14
Lack of Sociality
H12
H6
Customized
Products or Service

Search H15 Purchase

Intention Intention

Hedonic Value
H7
Adventure/Explore H13

H8
Social
H9
Hedonic
Idea Motivation
H10
Value
H11
Authority & Status

Fig. 1. Research model.

through actual shopping. It is difcult for Internet
shopping to achieve this due to the lack of a physical
shopping environment and stimulation from physical
products. As for the value of role, Parsons (2002) believes
that the convenience value brought by Internet shopping
allows consumers to play the expected role within limited
time and space, therefore it is covered by the value of
convenience of Internet shopping.
In conclusion, this research model includes six utilitarian
and ve hedonic shopping values (see Fig. 1).
3.1. Utilitarian value and motivations
3.1.1. Cost saving
According to the study of Keeney (1999), the reason why
Internet shopping is cost saving is because it saves the
expenditure of product cost and browsing cost. Miller
(2000) points out that the virtual quality of online stores
allow vendors to save on the cost of rent, store installation,
decoration and personnel. Consumers therefore are able to
get the product at a lower price. When consumers discover
that they can get the same quality product at a lower cost,
purchase intention would then be generated. Therefore, we
hypothesize that:
H1. Cost saving has a signicant positive inuence on the
utilitarian motivation of Internet shopping.
3.1.2. Convenience
Burke (1997) indicated that Internet shopping provides
24/7 nonstop service, which is not limited by time, space or
weather. The value of convenience is the main reason
people love to go shopping online. Wolnbarger and
Gilly(2001) also think that Internet shopping provides a
more comfortable and convenient shopping environment,
i.e. the home of the shopper. Consumers could choose to
dress more comfortably, and choose when to shop
according to their own schedule. Therefore, this study
presents the following hypothesis:
H2. Convenience has a signicant positive inuence on the
utilitarian motivation of Internet shopping.
3.1.3. Selection
Alba et al. (1997) pointed out that online stores have
more products for selection since they do not have the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
778 P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787
inventory pressure physical stores do. Wolnbarger and
Gilly(2001) also pointed out that physical stores could not
afford to stock those less-popular products for certain
niche markets, while online stores have no such problem.
In other words, online stores are able to provide a more
diversied selection at a lower cost. Therefore, this study
presents the following hypothesis:
H3. Selection has a signicant positive inuence on the
utilitarian motivation of Internet shopping.
3.1.4. Information availability
The study of Wolnbarger and Gilly (2001) indicates
that information availability includes acquiring the infor-
mation of product specs, stores, promotions and so on. The
Internet provides the most efcient means for consumers to
get that information. The information collected could be
copied or saved for future comparison. Bakos (1997) thinks
that the Internet contains numerous public information
resources and a variety of searching tools. Customers are
only a few clicks away from receiving abundant informa-
tion about stores and products online. Therefore, this study
presents the following hypothesis:
H4. Information availability has a signicant positive
inuence on the utilitarian motivation of Internet shop-
ping.
3.1.5. Lack of sociality
Joerding and Meissner (1998) indicates that Internet
shoppers prefer not to be bothered during shopping. The
technology interface allows online shoppers to browse
products as they wish without being bothered by sales
people. The study by Wolnbarger and Gilly (2001) points
out that since there are no sales people, companions, or
strangers on the Internet, shoppers do not have to worry
about bargaining with sales people, boring their compa-
nions, or worrying about others around them. Shopping
motivation is generated by saving complicated and
unnecessary social activities. Therefore, this study presents
the following hypothesis:
H5. Lack of sociality has a signicant positive inuence on
the utilitarian motivation of Internet shopping.
3.1.6. Customized products or service
The study of Burke(1997) suggests that online stores
could provide a variety of customized products. Han and
Han(2001) points out that customized products or services
are a unique value that the Internet could provide to the
customer. Feather (2001) posits that customization in-
cludes not only product specs, but also packaging,
shipment, design and transaction method. The Internet is
the best medium to provide customization. Therefore this
study presents the following hypothesis:
H6. Customized products and service has a signicant
positive inuence on the utilitarian motivation of Internet
shopping.
3.2. Hedonic value and motivations
3.2.1. Adventure/explore
Adventure means that customers encounter something
novel and interesting, and experience the joy of exploration
during the process of shopping (Westbrook and Black,
1985). Sherry (1990) argues that shoppers need for sensual
excitement is more than that for the product itself during
the shopping process. Webster et al. (1993) mention that
people would experience a sense of curiosity during the
interaction with computer. This sense of curiosity would
generate the action of adventure. Therefore, this study
presents the following hypothesis:
H7. Adventure/explore has a signicant positive inuence
on the hedonic motivation of Internet shopping.
3.2.2. Social
Dawon et al. (1990) indicate that the social interaction
provided by shopping is usually the main reason for
consumers to go shopping. Arnold and Reynolds (2003)
points out that many people treasure the time spent
shopping with friends or family members, and also enjoy
social activities while shopping. Wolnbarger and Gilly
(2001) believe that the emergence of the virtual community
has shifted the social benets from friends and relatives to
friends known through the Internet. Internet shoppers
could share information and shopping experiences with
those who have the same interest online. Online experience
could also become the subject of conversations to give an
Internet shopper pleasure. Therefore, this study presents
the following hypothesis:
H8. Sociality has a signicant positive inuence on the
hedonic motivation of Internet shopping.
3.2.3. Idea
Idea refers to the fact that consumers go shopping to
learn about new trends (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003). On
the Internet, shoppers could nd, evaluate and understand
the information about brands, products and new trends
and receive pleasure in the process. The study of Parsons
(2002) also points out that one of the strongest motivations
for Internet shoppers is to discover and secure new trends.
Therefore, this study presents the following hypothesis:
H9. Idea has a signicant positive inuence on the hedonic
motivation of Internet shopping.
3.2.4. Value
Value refers to the pleasure generated when the shopper
negotiates with the sales people during a bargaining
process (Westbrook and Black, 1985). Babin et al. (1994)
indicate that the pleasure and emotional involvement
provided by the bargaining process is a kind of hedonic
value, while Chandon et al. (2000) believe that getting a
better discount would give consumers joy for they feel
themselves to be smart shoppers. Arnold and Reynolds
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787
(2003) indicate that shoppers feel happy when they
consider they won the challenge by getting a bargain.
Finding a discount or bargain may lead to satisfaction
from personal achievement. Internet shoppers may obtain
hedonic values through the shopping process, which
provide increased sensory involvement and excitement.
Therefore, this study presents the following hypothesis:
H10. Value has a signicant positive inuence on the
hedonic motivation of Internet shopping.
3.2.5. Authority and status
Westbrook and Black (1985) state that shoppers obtain
authority and status from receiving one-to-one service
provided by the sales person at physical stores. The study
of Parsons (2002) argues that consumers could decide what
products to see, when to place an order, and when to
receive delivery when shopping online. Internet shoppers
could have a higher level of control and authority. In
summary, the authority and status provided by physical
and Internet shopping are actually derived from different
sources. The former is from the sales people, while the
latter comes from the control over technology. Therefore,
this study presents the following hypothesis:
H11. Authority and status has a signicant positive
inuence on the hedonic motivation of Internet shopping.
3.3. Relationships among shopping motivations, search
intention and purchase intention
Jamiszewski (1998) categorizes search behavior as goal
oriented (with purchase plan) and exploration oriented
(without purchase plan). Goal-oriented consumers search
to collect desirable product information while exploration-
oriented consumers who have no specic targets in mind
search solely for browsing product information. The joy of
searching behavior not only comes from what they have
found, but also from the searching process itself. There-
fore, both utilitarian and hedonic motivations would
inuence search intention of Internet shopping. This study
presents the following hypothesis:
H12. Utilitarian motivation has a signicant positive
inuence on the search intention of Internet shopping.
H13. Hedonic motivation has a signicant positive inu-
ence on the search intention of Internet shopping.
If the consumer considers the website as having more
function and utilitarian value, the more purchase intention
he or she would have. On the other hand, the entertainment
quality of a website would not directly induce purchase
intention. It would induce exploration-oriented searching
behavior and in turn generate purchase intention. Babin et
al. (1994) indicates that hedonic shopping motivation
would have a greater impact on unplanned purchase
behavior than utilitarian motivation, therefore hedonic
motivation would indirectly inuence purchase intention
779
via search intention. Therefore, this study does not suggest
any direct relationship exists between hedonic motivation
and purchase intention. The following hypothesis is
presented:
H14. Utilitarian motivation has a signicant positive
inuence on the purchase intention of Internet shopping.
Shim et al. (2001) study the relationship between pre-
purchase search intention and purchase intention for
Internet shoppers. The result shows that the search
intention of Internet shoppers does have a positive
inuence on their purchase intention. Therefore, this study
presents the following hypothesis:
H15. The search intention has a signicant positive
inuence on purchase intention of Internet shopping.
4. Research methodology
The variable measurement in the research model is
derived from previous studies, and is modied according to
the special conditions of Internet shopping. The measure-
ment of utilitarian and hedonic motivations is from the
items developed by Voss et al. (2003). The items of cost
saving are derived from the questionnaire of Chandon et al.
(2000) while convenience and selection are from that of
Eastlick and Feinberg (1999). Information availability
follows the questionnaire by Korgaonkar and Wolin
(1999) while the items of customized product and service
are from that of Srinivasan et al. (2002). The items of lack
of sociality are developed in the study. The items of
adventure, social, idea and value are all adopted from the
questionnaire of Arnold and Reynolds (2003) while
authority and status comes from Korgaonkar and Wolin
(1999). The items of search intention and purchase
intention are self-developed. In addition, part of the items
derived from previous researches focus on physical
shopping rather than Internet shopping. Those items have
been modied for this study to better t the research topic.
4.1. Instrument design
First of all, the subjects were required to answer the
items of the questionnaire based on their impressions of
their most frequently shopped website. The questionnaire
was divided into ve parts. The rst part was to explore the
relationship between the subject and their target website,
and the background information about the website. The
second part included ten items to measure the utilitarian
and hedonic motivations of Internet shoppers. The third
part constituted 38 items in eleven constructs for the
evaluation of utilitarian and hedonic values. The fourth
part included six items measuring the search intention and
purchase intention of Internet shoppers. The last part
collected the demographic data of the subject. Among this,
the second part of the questionnaire adopted a seven-scale
semantic differential measurement, while the third and
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
780 P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787
fourth part adopted a seven-scale Likert scale, with 1
representing total disagreement and 7 representing total
agreement.
4.2. Pretest and pilot study
The questionnaire of the study was reviewed by two
Internet shopping researchers before conducting a pretest
and pilot test. The purpose of the pretest was to conrm
whether the questionnaire had semantic, i.e. meaning,
problems. Subjects of the pretests included four graduate
students and two Ph.D. candidates of a national university
in southern Taiwan, and two Internet shopping profes-
sionals. These eight subjects had prior Internet shopping
experience. The pretest was conducted in an open-end
format, in which the subjects could raise questions about
the items anytime. During the process, the subjects
suggested that the phrasing of certain items could be
revised, which included utilitarian motivation, hedonic
motivation, customized product and service, adventure and
value. The wording of the items was slightly revised after
adopting several suggestions from the pretest subjects.
Following was the pilot test, of which the subjects were
IS professionals and graduate students with Internet
shopping experience. Subjects could write down any
comments in the suggestion boxes next to the items. A
total of 50 questionnaires were received for reliability and
factor analysis. The study showed that the Cronbachs
alpha of all constructs were above 0.7, which indicates the
items were quite consistent with the constructs to be
measured. The result of the factor analysis shows that the
second item of the cost saving could not be discriminated
from the other items of the same construct; therefore the
item was removed from further analysis. Thirty-seven items
remained in the third part of the questionnaire. Since no
respondents questioned other items and the data generated
was in accordance with the expectation, the questionnaire
could be ofcially distributed.
4.3. Sample selection
Respondents of this study are adults in Taiwan who have
Internet shopping experience. The option of conducting an
Internet survey was excluded as the respondents of such a
survey would often be young students and heavy Internet
users, which might cause a bias in the sample. This study
adopted three different sources of sample populations to
minimize the bias of the sample. Sources of samples for this
study are: people in industry, street distribution and
convenient sampling. For the rst group, people in
industry, the study selected 20 companies and distributed
10 questionnaires each to be lled out by the employees or
their relatives who had Internet shopping experience. A
total of 200 questionnaires were distributed, 132 were
received, and among them 104 were valid. The valid
response rate was 52%. The reason to select 20 companies
is to ensure the diversity of sample source and the reason to
select ten questionnaires in each company is to try to
minimize the impact of any single company or individual.
In terms of street distribution, the study distributed 45
questionnaires in each Taipei and Chiayi cities at railway
stations. A total of 90 questionnaires were distributed and
60 were received, of which 53 were valid. The valid
response rate was 58.9%. In terms of convenient sampling,
the study distributed questionnaires to the students of
EMBA, graduate and undergraduate programs of a
university located in south Taiwan. Fifty questionnaires
were distributed, 50 were received of which 49 were valid.
The valid response rate was 98%. In summary, the total
number of questionnaires distributed was 340, of which 206
were valid after eliminating incomplete and faulted
questionnaires. The valid response rate was 60.6%.
4.4. Demographics
The number of male and female respondents in this
study was quite close, of which female (51%) is slightly
more than that of male. People aged between 26 and 30
comprise about 40.8% of the respondents. As for the
educational background, most of the respondents were
college graduates (68.4%). The product category that was
most often seen for Internet shopping is book/magazine
(21.8%), followed by apparel/accessory and computer
peripheral products. The demographic data demonstrated
that this study had a similar sample distribution as the
Internet shopping population described in Institute for
Information Industry and Market Intelligence Center
(MIC) (2004) and should have a certain degree of
representation. In addition, Internet usage history of most
respondents was more than 7 years (38.8%), followed by
57 years. The history of online shopping of most
respondents was 13 years (47.1%), followed by less
than 1 year. More than 50% of the respondents used
Internet more than 16 h a week.
This study requested the respondents apply their most
frequent shopped website as the reference in answering the
questionnaire. The shopping history of the most frequently
shopped website was mostly less than 3 years (total of
88.4%). The study shows that the most popular website
was Yahoo (93, 45.1%), followed by PC Home (16, 7.8%),
Bookstore.com (14, 6.8%), and Ezy (11, 5.3%). The four
websites mentioned above account for 65% of all
responses.
5. Data analysis
Structural equation model (SEM) was used to validate
the causal relationship among variables in the research
model. A two-stage analysis method: measurement model
and structural model was used for data analysis. LIS-
REL8.52 was used to perform these analyses.
In terms of measurement model, one has to examine for
offending estimates rst. The offending estimates are
estimated coefcients that exceed acceptable limits. The
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787
common examples of offending estimates are negative error
variance, standardized coefcients exceeding or close to
1.0, or very large standard errors associated with any
estimated coefcient (Hair et al., 1998). The result showed
that there were high colinearity (correlation coefcient
higher than 0.8) between items 3 and 4 of the lack of
sociality construct. Item 3 of the lack of sociality While cost-saving, convenience, selection, and infor-
construct was deleted from further analysis. Since all other
items in the questionnaire have no offending estimates, the
next step is to assess the overall model with goodness-of-t
measures. In terms of the goodness-of-t measures, the
indexes were divided into three categories: (1) absolute t
measures, i.e. GFI and AGFI, (2) incremental t measures,
i.e. NFI, IFI. (3) parsimonious t measures, i.e. w2/df, CFI
(Hair et al., 1998, pp. 654661). The recommended level
and calculation of measures are listed in Table 1. The
results show that all goodness-of-t measures are within
acceptable levels.
After the overall model was accepted, reliability and
validity analysis was conducted (see Table 2). Each of the
items and constructs can be evaluated by examining every
item reliability (0.5 or above, the higher the better),
construct reliability of potential variables (0.7 or above)
and variance extracted (0.5 or above) to verify the
reliability and validity of the model (Hair et al., 1998).
The result shows that reliability for a few items was slightly
less than 0.5. Among 52 undeleted items, nine items
were found for which the reliability was less than 0.5
(between 0.33 and 0.48). Reliability for all other items was
within the recommended level. The construct reliability of
potential variables were between 0.75 and 0.96, exceeding
the recommended level. All variance extracted measures
substantially exceeded the recommended level of 0.5
(see Table 2). The results demonstrate that both items
and constructs have acceptable reliability and validity.
Additionally, discriminant validity was shown when the
average variance extracted (AVE) of each construct was
larger than the squared correlation coefcients with other
constructs (Fornell and Larcker, 1981, p. 46). As can be
seen in Table 3, the AVE of each construct is larger than
the squared correlation coefcients between constructs.
Therefore, it could be concluded that discriminant validity
was achieved.
Table 1
Overall model t
Fit indicators Recommendation Questionnaire (Part
criteria II): utilitarian and
hedonic motivations
w2/df o3 2.73
GFI 40.9 0.92
AGFI 40.8 0.87
NFI 40.9 0.95
NNFI 40.9 0.96
CFI 40.9 0.97
IFI 40.9 0.97
RFI 40.9 0.94
781
Structural equation analysis was conducted after
satisfying the requirements of the measurement model.
Fig. 2 shows the standardized path coefcients and the
overall t indexes. Since the goodness-of-t measures
are within the range of recommended levels, the model
should be acceptable. Most hypotheses are also validated.
mation availability has positive inuence on utilitarian
motivation, lack of sociality, and customized product
and service has no causal relationships with utilitarian
motivation (po0.05). On the other hand, while
adventure, and authority and status have positive inuence
on hedonic motivation, social, idea, and value have no
causal relationships with hedonic motivation (po0.05).
Utilitarian and hedonic motivations have signicant
impact on search intention. Utilitarian motivation and
search intention have signicant impact on purchase
intention. Therefore, hypothesis H1H4, H7, and
H11H15 are supported while hypothesis H5, H6, and
H8H10 are rejected.
The study shows that factors inuencing utilitarian
motivation are led by convenience, followed by cost
saving, information availability and selection (judging by
the level of standardized path coefcient). The factors
inuencing hedonic motivation are adventure, autho-
rity and status accordingly. Both utilitarian motiv-
ation and hedonic motivation would inuence search
intention, of which utilitarian motivation was more
inuential. Utilitarian motivation would directly or indir-
ectly inuence purchase intention via search intention
while hedonic motivation could only indirectly inuence
purchase intention via search intention. In summary,
utilitarian motivation is more important than hedonic
motivation in terms of inuencing search or purchase
intention.
This study tries to determine whether a direct relation-
ship exists between hedonic motivation and purchase
intention. No signicant relationship has been found.
This study also tries to discover whether any hidden
relationships exist between different kinds of values
and shopping motivations. The result did not nd
any utilitarian values that would inuence hedonic
motivation and vice versa.
Questionnaire (Part Questionnaire (Part Questionnaire (Part
III): utilitarian values III): hedonic values IV): search and
purchase intention
1.34 1.74 2.91
0.91 0.91 0.97
0.88 0.87 0.90
0.94 0.94 0.98
0.98 0.96 0.98
0.98 0.97 0.99
0.98 0.97 0.99
0.93 0.93 0.97
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
782 P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787

Table 2
Measurement model t

Item Items Standardized Construct Variance

reliability item reliability extracted
loadings

Cost saving 0.85 0.66

31 y save my money 0.82 0.91
33 y spend less when I go online shopping 0.59 0.77***
34 y offers me the competitive price 0.55 0.75***

Convenience 0.84 0.57

35 y whenever I want 0.50 0.71***
36 y without going out 0.61 0.78***
37 y ts with my schedule 0.58 0.76***
38 y convenient to me 0.58 0.76***
Selection 0.91 0.76
39 y access to many merchandises 0.75 0.87***
310 y access to many brands 0.78 0.88***
311 y access to wide selection 0.76 0.87***
Information availability 0.96 0.89
312 y quick access to large volumes of information 0.75 0.87***
313Information obtained from the web is useful 0.55 0.74***
314Internet makes acquiring information easily 0.74 0.86***
Lack of sociality 0.75 0.51
315 ... avoid social interaction with others 0.42 0.65***
316 y avoid salespeople 0.61 0.78***
318 y buy things online without embarrassment 0.37 0.61***
Customized products or service 0.80 0.50
319 y purchase recommendations match my needs 0.33 0.58
320 y order product that are tailor-made for me 0.54 0.73***
321 y customized to my needs 0.69 0.83***
322 y makes me feel that I am a unique customer 0.48 0.69***
Adventure/explore 0.81 0.59
323 y feel like I am in my own universe 0.43 0.65***
324 I nd online shopping stimulating 0.66 0.81***
325 To me, online shopping is an adventure 0.68 0.83***
Social 0.89 0.66
326 y exchange information with friends 0.75 0.86***
327 y share experiences with others 0.57 0.76***
328 y develop friendships with other Internet shoppers 0.70 0.84***
329 y extend personal relationship 0.62 0.79***
Idea 0.85 0.65
330 y keep up with the trends 0.69 0.83***
331ykeep up with the new fashions 0.78 0.88***
332 y see what new products are available 0.50 0.70***
Value 0.78 0.54
333 ... I go online shopping when there are sales 0.62 0.79***
334 I enjoy looking for discountsy 0.42 0.65***
335 I enjoy hunting for bargains y 0.59 0.77***
Authority and Status 0.85 0.65
336 When shopping online I feel in control 0.66 0.82***
337 y I have control over my online shopping process 0.77 0.87***
338 The Web allows me to control my online shopping trip 0.51 0.72***
Utilitarian motivation 0.87 0.58
21 Effective/ineffective 0.56 0.75***
22 Helpful/unhelpful 0.87 0.93***
23 Functional/not functional 0.69 0.83***
24 Necessary/unnecessary 0.36 0.60***
25 Practical/impractical 0.42 0.65***
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787 783

Table 2 (continued )

Item Items Standardized Construct Variance

reliability item reliability extracted
loadings

Hedonic motivation 0.89 0.62

26 Fun/not fun 0.54 0.74***
27 Exciting/dull 0.44 0.66***
28 Delightful/not delightful 0.63 0.79***
29 Thrilling/not thrilling 0.70 0.84***
210 Enjoyable/unenjoyable 0.81 0.90***
Search intention 0.88 0.71
41 y a wonderful way to search products or service online 0.59 0.77***
42 y search products or service online 0.78 0.89***
43 y continue searching products or service online in the future 0.75 0.87***

Purchase intention 0.91 0.78

44 y a wonderful way to shop online 0.80 0.90***
45 y purchase products or service online 0.73 0.86***
46 y continue shopping online in the future 0.81 0.90***
po0.01.
po0.001.

Table 3
Discriminant validity

CS CV SL IA LS CPS AV SC IDA VL AS U H S P

CS 0.66
CV 0.21 0.57
SL 0.14 0.08 0.76
IA 0.16 0.22 0.23 0.89
LS 0.03 0.10 0.07 0.12 0.51
CPS 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.50
AV 0.06 0.01 0.09 0.09 0.02 0.10 0.59
SC 0.04 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.17 0.31 0.66
IDA 0.03 0.06 0.08 0.07 0.03 0.09 0.08 0.21 0.65
VL 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.06 0.18 0.13 0.14 0.54
AS 0.09 0.13 0.14 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.08 0.09 0.14 0.65
U 0.16 0.11 0.10 0.13 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.09 0.58
H 0.10 0.05 0.13 0.05 0.01 0.07 0.25 0.09 0.04 0.10 0.12 0.28 0.62
S 0.19 0.27 0.10 0.18 0.04 0.02 0.09 0.04 0.12 0.17 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.71
P 0.24 0.26 0.19 0.23 0.04 0.04 0.14 0.08 0.14 0.15 0.18 0.26 0.21 0.61 0.78

Notes: Diagonals represent the average variance extracted, while the other matrix entries represent the squared correlations.
CS cost saving; CV convenience; SL selection; IA information availability; LS lack of sociality; CPS customized products or service;
AV adventure/explore; SC social; IDA idea; VL value; AS authority and status; U utilitarian motivation; H hedonic motivation;
S search intention; P purchase intention.

Finally, while the combined effect of these four
utilitarian values achieved 70% of variance on utili-
tarian motivation (R2 0.70), the effect of hedonic
values on hedonic motivation achieved 35% of variance
(R2 0.35). On the other hand, while the combined
effect of utilitarian and hedonic motivations achie-
ved 51% of variance on search intention, the effect
of utilitarian motivation and search intention on
purchase intention explained 73% of variance. The
measures of the R2 shows that the model has suf-
cient explanatory power and therefore could predict the
Internet shopping motivation and purchase intention
adequately.
6. Conclusions and implications
6.1. Discussion and conclusions
Utilitarian and hedonic motivations proposed by Hirsch-
man and Holbrook (1982) have been extensively applied to
shopping motivation studies for physical storefronts.
However, few studies explore whether utilitarian and
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
784 P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787

Utilitarian Value
0.29** 2/df = 1.56; NFI=0.91
Cost Saving NNFI=0.96; CFI=0.96
IFI=0.96; RFI=0.96
0.39**
Convenience

0.21*
Selection R2=70%
0.22* Utilitarian
Information Motivation
Availability

NS 0.49*
Lack of Sociality
0.64*
NS
Customized
Products or Service
R2=51% R2=73%
Search 0.44** Purchase
Intention Intention

Hedonic Value
0.52**
Adventure/Explore 0.19*

NS
Social

NS Hedonic
Idea
Motivation
NS
Value R2=35%

0.25**
Authority & Status
**=p<0.01, *=p<0.05

Fig. 2. Relationships supported by empirical study.

hedonic motivations exist in the Internet shopping
environment. The result of this study empirically validates
that consumers of Internet shopping have both utilitarian
and hedonic shopping motivations, not unlike shoppers of
physical storefronts. Consumers get not only product
value, but also some pleasure and enjoyment during the
process of Internet shopping.
In terms of the inuence of shopping motivation to
search intention, the result is in accordance with that of
Jamiszewski (1998). The studies of Jamiszewski categorize
search behavior as goal oriented and exploration oriented.
This study discovers that utilitarian and hedonic motiva-
tions drive search intention, which means that some people
shop on the Internet for the utilitarian value made
available by Internet shopping, such as convenience, cost
saving, information availability and selection while others
do so for the hedonistic values such as adventure, and
authority and status.
As the results show, utilitarian value inuences utilitar-
ian motivation of Internet shopping. The utilitarian values,
ranked by their relative importance, are: convenience, cost
saving, information availability and selection. Factors such
as lack of sociality and customized product or service
would not inuence the utilitarian motivation of Internet
shopping. Regarding lack of sociality, it seems that
consumers do not oppose the idea of interacting with sales
people during the shopping process. Internet shoppers do
not regard lack of sociality as a required and critical
shopping value. Customized product and service is viewed
as a unique advantage on the Internet shopping channel by
academia. However, this study nds that Internet shoppers
do not feel customization useful, which means that it would
not inuence utilitarian motivation. There are two
possibilities of the results. First, customization is some-
times delivered to customers without the customers being
alerted and told because product and services change
promptly to reect consumers tastes. Customers who
receive customization may not even realize the benet.
Second, there may be the possibility that the level of
customization for Internet shopping in Taiwan is not
sophisticated enough to meet consumer requirements. If
this is the case, online stores need to make a greater
improvement on this front. Future research is needed to
investigate the phenomenon.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787
This study also proves that hedonic value inuences
hedonic motivation of Internet shopping. The hedonic
values, ranked by their relative importance, are: adventure/
explore, authority and status. Sociality, idea and value do
not inuence the hedonic motivation of Internet shopping.
Regarding sociality, shoppers think that Internet shopping
would not enlarge their people network or enhance their
sociability. It is presumed that the popularity and inuence
of communities and forums on shopping websites are not
strong enough for consumers to sense the value. In terms of
idea, consumers feel that Internet shopping could not
satisfy their desire to learn the latest fashion trends. It is
presumed that most of the products sold on the Internet
are common, and could not contribute to the learning of
fashion trends. In terms of the value factor, shoppers do
not think that Internet shopping could provide them with
the pleasant sensation of bargaining. Since Internet
shopping does not have a bargaining mechanism, con-
sumers could not receive any benet from the bargain, or
pleasant sensation during the bargaining process. This
study shows that there are not many hedonic values that
could inuence Internet shopping. One of the major
reasons is that Internet shopping is unable to provide a
diversied sensational simulation as physical shopping
does. However, with the advancements of Internet
technology, shopping websites should be able to provide
a more humane and comprehensive Internet shopping
environment and bring more enjoyment to Internet
shoppers.
As comparing utilitarian motivation with hedonic
motivation, the study reveals that utilitarian motivation
has more inuence on search intention and purchase
intention than hedonic motivation. The results are
consistent with several previous studies which demonstrate
that Internet shopping is mostly driven by utilitarian
motivations (Alba et al., 1997; Ghosh, 1998; Keeney, 1999;
Morganosky and Cude, 2000; Verhoef and Langerak,
2001; Blake et al., 2005). All of the researches discover that
the major reasons for people shopping online are utilitarian
related. In addition, Barnes (2000) indicates that the
shopping motivation of Internet shoppers is different from
that of physical storefront shoppers. Shoppers emphasizing
hedonic motivation tend to buy things on physical
storefront rather than through the Internet channel.
Consumers browsing and shopping on the Internet tend
to be practical and are motivated by utilitarian purposes.
The results of the study help online vendors to recognize
the utilitarian values of Internet shopping and utilize the
unique characteristics found on the Internet to gain
competitive advantage.
On the other hand, Hedonic motivation is important in a
physical distribution channel. Hedonic motivation has less
inuence on search intention and purchase intention in the
online shopping environment. Thus, Vendors could
emphasize strengthening consumer experience via
visual, audio and physical stimulation in the physical
shopping environment. By facilitating a rst-rate shopping
785
environment, this strategy could provide better opportu-
nities for social interaction between shoppers or between
shoppers and service providers. However, Internet shop-
ping, limited by technology and virtual environment, is not
able to provide diversied sensational stimulation and
physical social interaction. Compared to the physical
shopping environment, only mild enjoyment is generated
through the Internet shopping process. The mildly hedonic
motivation triggers less search intention, and in turn
generates less purchase intention during the course of
Internet shopping.
However, as the results show, interesting Internet
shopping experiences would trigger the searching and
browsing of web pages and indirectly cause an impulsive
purchase intention. In other words, shopping enjoyment
generates search intention, which in turn generates
purchase intention. This phenomenon describes impulsive
shopping, which refers to unplanned and hasty shopping
behavior. This implicates that hedonic shopping motiva-
tion would cause impulsive shopping. Managers should
include more hedonic values while operating and designing
shopping websites, such as interactive designs to stimulate
the shopping intention of consumers. The results of this
study could be used as a reference for the future design of
fun and interesting shopping websites. This study provides
the foundation for the further investigation of Internet
shopping behavior from a hedonic viewpoint. It also
increases our understanding about the essence of impulsive
Internet shopping.
Other interesting questions are whether the offer of
utilitarian value would generate hedonic motivation or
whether hedonic value would generate utilitarian motiva-
tion for the consumers. In other words, would utilitarian
factors bring pleasure and joy to the consumer, and would
hedonic factors make the consumer feel the purchased
product and shopping process were effective and efcient?
No previous studies explore this issue. However, the results
of this study do not nd any utilitarian values that would
inuence hedonic motivation and vice versa.
6.2. Limitations
This study focuses on utilitarian and hedonic value and
motivations of Internet shopping. These values and
motivations are derived from previous studies and reorga-
nized by the authors. Despite all the efforts and due
diligence, there could still be some negligence since
previous studies are based mostly on consumer behavior
of physical shopping, and the studies on utilitarian and
hedonic values of Internet shopping remain in a prelimin-
ary stage. However, since the research model passes the
examination of the measurement model, the interpretation
capability of the model should be acceptable. In addition,
random sampling is not used for this study. In order to
reduce the error of non-random sampling, three different
sources of sample were adopted to diversify the source.
Methods of street distribution and industry distribution
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
786 P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787
were used to make the sample more closely related to the
Internet shopping population. The study also nds that
certain characteristics of the sample are quite similar to
that of the study conducted by the Institute for Informa-
tion Industry and Market Intelligence Center (MIC) (2004)
on Internet shopping population which suggests that no
explicit sampling bias is found.
6.3. Future research
Numerous factors constitute Internet shopping motiva-
tion. This study explores the motivation of Internet
shopping from both utilitarian and hedonic perspectives.
Other factors such as industry or product difference,
personality and consumer lifestyles could all inuence the
shopping motivation of customers. For example, Arnold
and Reynolds (2003) indicate that females emphasize
hedonic value more than males and have stronger hedonic
shopping motivations. In view of that, consumers with
different backgrounds (i.e. gender, education, age and
Internet shopping history) should have different perspec-
tives on utilitarian and hedonic values. Future researchers
could investigate the differences of shopping motivations
based on different product or consumer market segments.
Furthermore, few studies contrast shopping motivations
between different shopping styles. It is imperative to make
a further comparative research between shopping at
physical storefronts and Internet shopping. Finally,
although several studies focus on the hedonic value of
physical distribution channels, few studies have been
conducted regarding the inuence of hedonic value on
the virtual distribution channel. This study marks the
commencement of this perspective. Academics should
consider whether more hedonic values could be included
for Internet shopping in the future.
References
Alba, J., Lynch, J., Weitz, B., Janiszewski, C., Lutz, R., Sawyer, A.,
Wood, S., 1997. Interactive home shopping: consumer, retailer, and
manufacture incentives to participate in electronic marketplaces.
Journal of Marketing 61 (3), 3853.
Arnold, M.J., Reynolds, K.E., 2003. Hedonic shopping motivations.
Journal of Retailing 79 (1), 7795.
Babin, B.J., William, R.D., Mitch, G., 1994. Work and/or fun: measuring
hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research
20 (4), 644656.
Bakos, J.Y., 1997. Reducing buyer search costs: implications for electronic
marketplaces. Management Science 43 (12), 16761692.
Barnes, J.G., 2000. Secrets of Customer Relationship Management: Its
All About How You Make Them Feel. McGraw-Hill Inc., New York.
Batra, R., Ahtola, O.T., 1991. Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian
sources of customer attitudes. Marketing Letters 12 (2), 159170.
Blake, B.F., Neuendorf, K.A., Valdiserri, C.M., 2005. Tailoring new
websites to appeal to those most likely to shop online. Technovation
25, 12051214.
Bloch, P.H., Bruce, G.D., 1984. Product involvement as leisure behavior.
In: Kinnear, T.C. (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 11,
pp. 197202.
Burke, R.R., 1997. Do you see what I see? The future of virtual shopping.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 25 (4), 352361.
Chandon, P., Wansibk, B., Laurent, G., 2000. A benet congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing 64
(4), 6581.
Dawon, S., Bloch, P.H., Ridway, N.W., 1990. Shopping motives,
emotional states, and retail outcomes. Journal of Retailing 66 (4),
408427.
Dhar, R., Wertenbroch, K., 2000. Customer choice between hedonic and
utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research 37 (1), 6071.
Eastlick, M.A., Feinberg, R.A., 1999. Shopping motives for mail catalog
shopping. Journal of Business Research 45 (3), 281290.
Engel, J.F., Blackwell, R.D., Miniard, P.W., 1993. Consumer Behavior.
Dryden, Chiao.
Falk, P., 1997. The scopic regimes of shopping. In: Falk, P., Campbell, C.
(Eds.), The Shopping Experience. Saga Publications, London,
pp. 177185.
Feather, F., 2001. Future Consumer.com, Capstone Publishing Ltd.,
pp. 279281
Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I., 1975. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior:
An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley, Reading,
MA.
Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models
with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of
Marketing Research 18 (Feb), 3950.
Ghosh, S., 1998. Marketing business sense of the internet. Harvard
Business Review. MarchApril, 127135.
Han, J., Han, D., 2001. A framework for analyzing customer value of
internet business. Journal of Information Technology Theory and
Application 3 (5), 2538.
Hirschman, E.C., Holbrook, M.B., 1982. Hedonic consumption: emerging
concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing 46 (2),
92101.
Institute for Information Industry, Market Intelligence Center (MIC),
2004. The 2004 Internet User Behavior Analysis, /http://mic.
iii.org.twS
Jamiszewski, C., 1998. The inuence of display characteristics on visual
exploratory search behavior. Journal of Consumer Research 25 (3),
290301.
Joerding, T., Meissner, K., 1998. Intelligent multimedia presentations in
the web: fun without annoyance. Computer Network and ISDN
System 30, 649650.
Keeney, R.L., 1999. The value of internet commerce to the customer.
Management Science 45 (4), 533542.
Kim, Y.M., Shim, K.Y., 2002. The inuence of intent shopping mall
characteristics and user traits on purchase intent. Iris Marketing
Review 15 (2), 2534.
Korgaonkar, P.K., Wolin, L.D., 1999. A multivariate analysis of web
usage. Journal of Advertising Research 39 (2), 5368.
Mathwick, C., Malhotra, N., Rigdon, E., 2001. Experiential value:
conceptualization, measurement and application in the catalog and
internet shopping environment. Journal of Retailing 77 (1), 3956.
Miller, N.G., 2000. Retail leasing in a web enabled world. Journal of Real
Estate Portfolio Management 6 (2), 167184.
Moe, W.W., 2003. Buying, searching or browsing: differentiating between
online shoppers using in-store navigational clickstream. Journal of
Consumer Psychology 13 (1), 2939.
Morganosky, M.A., Cude, B.J., 2000. Consumer response to online
grocery shopping. International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management 28 (1), 1726.
Park, C.W., Jaworski, B.J., Machinnis, D.J., 1986. Strategic brand
concept-image management. Journal of Marketing 50 (4), 135145.
Parsons, A.G., 2002. Non-functional motives for online shoppers: why we
click. The Journal of Consumer Marketing 19 (5), 380392.
Roy, A., 1994. Correlates of mall visit frequency. Journal of Retailing 70
(2), 139161.
Sherry, J.F., 1990. A sociocultural analysis of midwestern ea market.
Journal of Consumer Research 17 (2), 1330.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
P.-L. To et al. / Technovation 27 (2007) 774787 787

Sherry, J.F., McGrath, M.A., Levy, S.L., 1993. The dark side of the gift.
Journal of Business Research 28 (4), D8. Chechen Liao is Professor of Management Information Systems
Shim, S., Eastlick, M.A., Lotz, S.L., Warrington, P., 2001. An online in the Department of Information Management at National
prepurchase intentions model: the role of intention to search. Journal Chung Cheng University in Taiwan. He received his Ph.D. in
of Retailing 77 (4), 397416. MIS from the University of Memphis. He currently serves on the
Srinivasan, S.S., Anderson, R.A., Ponnavolu, K., 2002. Customer loyalty Editorial Board of Journal of global information technology
in e-commerce : an exploration of its antecedents and consequences. management. His current research interests focus on electronic
Journal of Retailing 78 (1), 4150. commerce, knowledge management, e-supply chain management,
Tauber, E.M., 1972. Why do people shop? Journal of Marketing 36 (4), and the impacts of information technology on organizations and
4649. individuals. His articles have appeared or have been accepted for
Verhoef, P.C., Langerak, F., 2001. Possible determinants of consumers publication in International Journal of HumanComputer Studies,
adoption of electronic grocery shopping in the Netherlands. Journal of International Journal of Information Management, Computers in
Retaining and Consumer Services 8, 275285. Human Behavior, Journal of Database Management, Expert
Voss, K.E., Spangenberg, E.R., Grohmann, B., 2003. Measuring the Systems with Applications, International Journal of Information
hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of and Management Sciences, International Journal of management,
Marketing Research 40 (3), 310320. Journal of Information Management, MIS Review, Journal of
Wakeeld, K.L., Baker, J., 1998. Excitement at the mall: determinants and Management & Systems, and other refereed journals and
effects on shopping response. Journal of Retailing 74 (3), 515540. conference proceedings.
Wang, H., Pallister, J.G., Foxall, G.R., 2006a. Innovativeness and
involvement as determinants of Website loyalty: I. A test of
the style/involvement model in the context of Internet buying.
Technovation 26 (12), 13571365.
Wang, H., Pallister, J.G., Foxall, G.R., 2006b. Innovativeness and
involvement as determinants of Website loyalty: II. Determinants of
consumer loyalty in B2C e-Commerce. Technovation 26 (12), Tzu-Hua Lin received her MBA degree from National Chiayi
13661373. University in Taiwan. Her research interests include issues in
Wang, H., Pallister, J.G., Foxall, G.R., 2006c. Innovativeness and customer relationship management and electronic commerce.
involvement as determinants of Website loyalty: III. Theoretical and
managerial contributions. Technovation 26 (12), 13741383.
Webster, J., Trevino, L.K., Ryan, L., 1993. The dimensionality and
correlates of ow in humancomputer interactions. Computers in
Human Behavior 9, 411426.
Westbrook, R.A., Black, W.C., 1985. A motivation-based shopper
typology. Journal of Retailing 61 (1), 78103.
Wolnbarger, M., Gilly, M., 2001. Shopping online for freedom, control
and fun. California Management Review 43 (2), 3455.

Pui-Lai To is Professor and Chair of the Department of

Management Information Systems at National Chiayi University
in Taiwan. She received her Ph.D. in MIS from the University of
Memphis. Her current research interests focus on electronic
commerce, customer relationship management, and the impacts
of information technology on organizations and individuals. Her
articles have appeared or have been accepted for publication in
International Journal of Information Management, Journal of
Database Management, International Journal of Information and
Management Sciences, International Journal of Management,
Journal of Information management, Management Review,
Journal of Management and Systems, and other refereed journals
and conference proceedings.