CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 66Consumer Behavior and Marketing InfluenceDigital Marketing and Social MediaTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour

I give discounts, I share information, I interact with viewers: a predictive analysis on factors enhancing college students' purchase intention in a live-streaming shopping environment

Zhong, Yingyu, Zhang, Yingying, Luo, Meng, Wei, Jiayue, Liao, Shiyang, Tan, Kim-Lim, Yap, Steffi Sze-Nee·2022·Young Consumers
DOI 10.1108/yc-08-2021-1367
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: Grounding the research in the stimulus-organism-resource (S-O-R) framework, this study aims to address the research gap of explaining and predicting the relationship between price discounts, interactivity and professionalism on college students’ purchasing intention in live-streaming shopping. It also attempts to understand if trust plays the role of mediator in the effect of these relationships. Design/methodology/approach: This study collected data using a questionnaire protocol adapted and refined from the original scales in existing studies. The partial least squares structural equation modeling was used to analyze data collected from 258 college students in China. Other than assessing the path model’s explanatory power, this study examined the model’s predictive power toward predicting new cases using PLS predict. Findings: Results indicated that all three predictors have a positive significant relationship with trust, while only price discounts demonstrate a significant relationship with purchase intention. Simultaneously, the mediation results provide support to the S-O-R framework demonstrating that external factors (professionalism, interactivity and price discounts) can arouse organism (trust), which in return, generate a behavioral outcome (purchase intention). Originality/value: This study is the first few studies that focus on college students’ behavioral responses in an online shopping environment. At the same time, this is the first study supplement the explanatory perspective with a predictive focus, which is of particular importance in making sound recommendations on managerial decision-making.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/yc-08-2021-1367

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Zhong, Y., Zhang, Y., Luo, M., Wei, J., Liao, S., Tan, K.-L., & Yap, S. S.-N.
Affiliations
  • Beijing Normal-Hong Kong Baptist University (CN)
  • Swinburne University of Technology Sarawak Campus (MY)
ORCID
Venue
Young Consumers
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2022-01-17
Volume
23
Issue
3
Pages
449-467
ISSN
1747-3616 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1108/yc-08-2021-1367
OpenAlex
W4206232757
Cited by
66
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 8
FWCI
11.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.emerald.com/insight/site-policies (tdm)
Locations
  • Young Consumers Insight and Ideas for Responsible Marketers (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline - JCU (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Marketing and Social Media
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
Keywords
live streaming shopping, purchase intention, discounts, interactivity, consumer trust, university students, online shopping behavior

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