Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,313

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Collaborative consumption: determinants of satisfaction and the likelihood of using a sharing economy option again

Möhlmann, Mareike·2015·Journal of Consumer Behaviour
DOI 10.1002/cb.1512
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Collaborative consumption, often associated with the sharing economy, takes place in organized systems or networks, in which participants conduct sharing activities in the form of renting, lending, trading, bartering, and swapping of goods, services, transportation solutions, space, or money. In this paper, a framework on the determinants of choosing a sharing option is developed and tested with two quantitative studies by applying partial least squares path modeling analysis. In study 1, users of the B2C car sharing service car2go (N = 236), and in study 2, users of the C2C online community accommodation marketplace Airbnb (N = 187) are surveyed. The results reveal the satisfaction and the likelihood of choosing a sharing option again to be predominantly explained by determinants serving users' self‐benefit. Utility, trust, cost savings, and familiarity were found to be essential in both studies, while service quality and community belonging were identified solely in study 1. Four proposed determinants had no influence on any of the endogenous variables. This applies to environmental impact, internet capability, smartphone capability, and trend affinity. Finally, research and managerial implications are discussed. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cb.1512

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 46

  1. 10.1002/cb.1389 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1086/666376 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1086/612649 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.001 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1177/1094670513486169 · DOI
  6. Botsman R, 2010, What's mine is yours—the rise of collaborative consumption
  7. 10.1080/10495140802224951 · DOI
  8. 10.1080/10495142.2012.733637 · DOI
  9. 10.2753/MIS0742-1222280309 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1086/593699 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1002/j.2325-8012.2009.tb00942.x · DOI
  12. 10.2307/1252296 · DOI
  13. 10.1080/01441647.2013.775612 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.2307/1251898 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1287/mksc.1120.0706 · DOI
  16. Griffith MA, 2012, Sharing space: Extending Belk's (2010) sharing, Journal of Research for Consumers, 22, 1
  17. 10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.001 · DOI · Paper page
  18. HamariJ SjöklintM UkkonenA.2013.The sharing economy: why people participate in collaborative consumption. Available online:papers.ssrn.com(last access December 03 2014). · DOI
  19. Hardin G, 1968, The tragedy of the commons, Science, 163, 1243, 10.1126/science.162.3859.1243 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1509/jmkg.71.4.1 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014 · doi:10.1108/s1474-7979(2009)0000020014 · Paper page
  22. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199902)20:2<195::AID-SMJ13>3.0.CO;2-7 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1002/cb.1469 · DOI
  24. Keymolen E, 2013, Bridging distances in technology and regulation
  25. 10.1086/425104 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Melnik IA, 2002, Does a seller's ecommerce reputation matter? Evidence from E‐Bay auctions, The Journal of Industrial Economics, 337, 10.1111/1467-6451.00180 · DOI
  27. 10.1108/09604521011027598 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.03.030 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.1002/cb.1433 · DOI
  30. 10.1002/cb.313 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Nelson MR, 2009, From trash to treasure: freecycle.org as a case of generalized reciprocity, Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 905
  32. 10.1002/cb.225 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Olson M, 1965, The logic of collective action. Public goods and the theory of groups
  34. 10.1017/CBO9780511807763 · DOI · Paper page
  35. 10.1002/cb.334 · DOI · Paper page
  36. 10.1108/10662240110402777 · DOI
  37. 10.1177/002224298504900403 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Park JK, 2006, The moderating role of consumer trust and experience: value driven usage of mobile technology, International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 1, 24
  39. 10.1002/cb.388 · DOI
  40. 10.1002/cb.1392 · DOI
  41. Rapoport A, 1970, Prisoner's dilemma
  42. Rifkin J, 2000, The age of access. The new culture of hyper capitalism, where all of life is a paid‐for experience
  43. 10.1002/cb.1501 · DOI · Paper page
  44. 10.1007/s11747-006-0001-5 · DOI · Paper page
  45. The Economist.2013.The sharing economy. March Edition.
  46. 10.1177/1094670509335772 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 1,313

Metadata

Authors
Möhlmann, M.
Venue
Journal of Consumer Behaviour
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-02-26
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
193-207
ISSN
  • 1472-0817 (ISSN-L)
  • 1479-1838
DOI
10.1002/cb.1512
OpenAlex
W1550674074
Cited by
1,313
References
10
FWCI
226.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.