CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 102Technology Adoption and User BehaviourPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionDigital Marketing and Social Media

The value of seller trustworthiness in C2C online markets

Open access
Strader, Troy J., Ramaswami, Sridhar N.·2002·Communications of the ACM
DOI 10.1145/585597.585600
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Trust has value in online markets, and individual and company actions can improve or impair how trustworthy they are perceived in these markets.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/585597.585600

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 5 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data
    § Rank Description

    Consumers reported completing deals in first quarter 2000 ranging in price from a low of 33 cents for a self-addressed stamped envelope, to a high of $13,200.

    “From the survey, consumers reported completing deals in first quarter 2000 ranging in price from a low of 33 cents for a self-addressed stamped envelope, to a high of $13,200.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    The trust premium decreases as the transaction value increases.

    “Although the trust premium decreases as the transaction value increases it is still a significant amount of money that consumers are willing to pay to a trusted seller.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    The trust premium buyers were willing to pay a trusted seller varied from about 7% to 10% of transaction value (9.7% for a $10 item to 7.0% for a $250 item).

    “The trust premium (extra amount willing to pay divided by the transaction value) was found to vary from 9.7% for the $10 item to 7.0% for the $250 item.”
    • Also stated in: § Implications for Online Sellers · boosted
      “There was clear evidence that buyers reward sellers they can trust with price premiums (from 7%-10%).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Interpretationown data
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    Consumers are willing to pay a significant amount of money to a trusted seller.

    “Although the trust premium decreases as the transaction value increases it is still a significant amount of money that consumers are willing to pay to a trusted seller.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Interpretationown data
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    The sample comprised both price-sensitive and trust-sensitive individuals.

    “Overall, it appears the sample is comprised of both price-sensitive and trust-sensitive individuals.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 15
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 13

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    Among respondents, price was considered more important than trust by 36 individuals (43.3%), trust more important than price by 33 (39.8%), and the two equally important by 14 (16.9%).

    “Between the two, price was considered more important than trust by 36 individuals (43.3%), trust was considered more important than price by 33 individuals (39.8%) and the two were considered equally important by the remaining 14 individuals (16.9%) of the sample.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    In the sample, price and trustworthiness were the two most important factors in the final choice of an online seller, with price (mean 39.0) and trustworthiness (mean 38.9) rated highest among four factors.

    “Price and trustworthiness were the two most important factors.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § Rank Description

    The average deal value was $19.70.

    “The average deal value was $19.70.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    The number of previous dealings with the seller and the seller's speed of response to consumer's email messages were important factors affecting trustworthiness.

    “The next group included the number of previous dealings with the seller and the seller's speed of response to consumer's email messages.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    Whether the seller has a Web site and how close the seller is to where the consumer lives were not at all important in influencing consumers' evaluation of trustworthiness of a seller.

    “Finally, the factors not at all important are whether the seller has a Web site and how close the seller is to where the consumer lives.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    Seller type (individual versus company) and how long the seller has been in business were of minimal importance in influencing consumers' evaluation of trustworthiness of a seller.

    “Of minimal importance is the seller type, whether they are a business or an individual, and how many years they have been in business.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    Reputation of the seller and quality of previous dealings with the seller were highly important for affecting consumers' perception of seller trustworthiness.

    “The factors found to be highly important for affecting consumer's perception of seller trustworthiness are reputation of the seller and quality of previous dealings with the seller.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    It is not necessary for a seller to be a business to be perceived as trustworthy; an individual can be viewed as trustworthy just as easily.

    “This indicates potential for continued growth in C2C e-commerce because it is not necessary for a seller to be a business to be perceived as trustworthy.An individual can be viewed as trustworthy just as easily.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Conclusion

    C2C e-commerce will continue to grow because online markets provide individual buyers and sellers with an efficient mechanism for information search that enables them to bypass intermediaries.

    “First, C2C e-commerce will continue to grow because online markets provide individual buyers and sellers with an efficient mechanism for information search in the market that enables them to bypass intermediaries.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    Sellers have an incentive to be trustworthy, and trusted sellers may receive higher profit margins that may be the difference between success and failure in highly competitive online markets.

    “This indicates that sellers have an incentive to be trustworthy, and trusted sellers may receive higher profit margins that may be the difference between success and failure in highly competitive online markets.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    Previous B2C e-commerce research has highlighted the importance of trust between businesses and consumers.

    “Previous business-to-consumer (B2C) e-commerce research has highlighted the importance of trust between businesses and consumers [2][3][4].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [2] 2. Bellman, S., Lohse, G., and Johnson, E. Predictors of online buying behav- ior. Commun. ACM 42, 12 (Dec. 1999). source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [3] 3. Hoffman, D., Novak, T., and Peralta, M. Building consumer trust online. Commun. ACM 42, 4 (Apr. 1999). source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [4] 4. Jarvenpaa, S., Tractinsky, N., and Vitale, M. Consumer trust in an Inter- net store. Information Technology and Management 1, 1&2 (2000), 45-71. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Conclusion

    There are economic incentives for buyers and sellers to participate in C2C e-commerce because they can share the money typically paid to intermediaries.

    “Second, there are economic incentives for these buyers and sellers to participate because they can share the money typically paid to the intermediaries.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § Rank Description

    Of the surveys sent, 83 were completed and returned for a response rate of 15%.

    “Of the surveys sent, 83 were completed and returned for a response rate of 15%.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Introduction

    The trustworthiness of the seller becomes an important factor influencing whether the seller is chosen or not by potential buyers.

    “In other words, the trustworthiness of the seller becomes an important factor influencing whether the seller is chosen or not by potential buyers.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Introduction

    Given an individual's lack of knowledge about others selling online and the significant amount of money involved, the lack of trust in the seller is likely to be a more important barrier in the C2C market.

    “Given an individual's lack of knowledge about others selling online, as well as the fact a significant amount of money may be involved in a transaction, the lack of trust in the seller is likely to be a more important barrier in the C2C market for obvious reasons.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § Rank Description

    On average the respondents were experienced and knowledgeable about the sports trading card industry and the Internet, having actively collected sports cards for 12.2 years, used the Internet for 4.5 years, and participated in sports card e-markets for 3.6 years.

    “On average the respondents were experienced and knowledgeable about the sports trading card industry and the Internet given they had actively collected sports cards for 12.2 years, had actively used the Internet for 4.5 years, and had actively participated in sports card e-markets for 3.6 years.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § Rank Description

    E-markets have the potential for a major impact in the sports trading card industry because there are a large number of buyers and sellers, and there is a widespread and accepted standard for describing the products.

    “E-markets have the potential for a major impact in the sports trading card industry because there are a large number of buyers and sellers, and there is a widespread and accepted standard for describing the products.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Factors affecting online seller choice.

    Individual sellers do not have to have a Web site and do not have to live near the people to whom they are selling.

    “This also indicates potential for continued growth in C2C e-commerce because individual sellers do not have to have a Web site and do not have to live near the people to whom they are selling.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Conclusion

    Competing on price alone in online markets eventually leads to one lowest-cost seller surviving, while competing by being a trusted seller may result in receiving higher prices than other sellers and thus more profit and long-term success.

    “Competing on price alone in online markets eventually leads to one lowest-cost seller surviving, while competing by being a trusted seller in the market may result in receiving higher prices than other sellers and thus more profit and long-term success.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Conclusion

    Participants were asked what they would do in hypothetical situations rather than reporting actual purchase behavior.

    “Moreover, participants were asked what they would do in hypothetical situations rather than reporting actual purchase behavior.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Implications for Online Sellers

    The beneficial impact of trustworthiness may be limited to buyers who consider trustworthiness important; price-sensitive buyers are not willing to pay this price premium.

    “However, our study pointed out the beneficial impact may be limited to those that consider trustworthiness to be important.Buyers who were price sensitive are not willing to accord this price premium.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § Rank Description

    The sample was comprised primarily of males between 18-60.

    “As expected, the sample was comprised primarily of males between 18-60.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Rank Description

    The survey was sent electronically to 560 randomly selected active participants in the USENET sports trading card e-market.

    “A survey was sent electronically to 560 randomly selected active participants in the USENET sports trading card e-market.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § Implications for Online Sellers

    In the long term, as more transactions are conducted using the online medium, the premium for trustworthiness can be expected to increase.

    “In the long term, however, as more transactions are conducted using the online medium, the premium for trustworthiness can be expected to increase.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    Trust is a critical factor in stimulating purchases over the Internet, especially at this early stage of commercial development.

    “Quelch and Klein [7] note that”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [7] 7. Quelch, J. and Klein, L. The Internet and international marketing. Sloan Management Review (Spring 1996), 60-75.

      Not checked in the free run.

25 of 25

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Consumers would like to maximize the savings in price that is feasible through use of the online medium.

    “Obviously, consumers would like to maximize the savings in price that is feasible through use of the online medium.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The degree to which buyers consider price and trust as important in their choice of a seller is not known in online consumer research.

    “What is not known yet in online consumer research is the degree to which buyers consider price and trust as important in their choice of a seller.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The relationship conditions of limited buyer control, high economic risks, and uncertain environment are present to a much greater degree in C2C e-commerce than in traditional markets.

    “These relationship conditions are present to a much greater degree in C2C e-commerce as compared to traditional markets.”
3 of 3

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?

  • Trust has been repeatedly identified as the most important driver of the long-term success of customer-to-customer (C2C) platforms.

    “Hence, trust has been repeatedly identified as the most important driver of the long-term success of customer-to-customer (C2C) platforms (Cook & State, 2015;Strader & Ramaswami, 2002).”

    From Antecedents of trust in the sharing economy: A systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as Strader & Ramaswami, 2002

    The paper says lack of seller trust is an important barrier in C2C markets, and its Implications for Online Sellers section reports that trusted sellers can receive price premiums. It does not identify trust as the most important driver of platforms’ long-term success; it also notes that price may matter more to some buyers. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The way a seller responds to feedback influences a buyer's trust.

    “The way a seller responds to feedback influences a buyer's trust, as identified by three studies (Malinen & Ojala, 2013;Strader & Ramaswami, 2002;Utz et al., 2009).”

    From Antecedents of trust in the sharing economy: A systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as Strader & Ramaswami, 2002

    In “Factors affecting online seller choice” (page unavailable), the paper says a seller’s speed of response to buyers’ emails affects perceived trustworthiness. “Implications for Online Sellers” (page unavailable) discusses ratings and comments as measures of reputation, but neither passage examines how sellers respond to feedback. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The speed of a seller's response to feedback positively influences a buyer's trust (the faster, the better).

    “Two aspects of feedback are important, namely, the speed of response (the faster, the better) (Malinen & Ojala, 2013;Strader & Ramaswami, 2002) and the content of the feedback.”

    From Antecedents of trust in the sharing economy: A systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as Strader & Ramaswami, 2002

    In “Factors affecting online seller choice” (page unavailable), the paper identifies speed of response to consumers’ email messages as a factor in perceived trustworthiness and says more responsive sellers engender greater trust. It does not address how quickly a seller responds to feedback, which is the specific interaction named in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Seller reputation influences a buyer's trust towards the seller.

    “Twelve studies found that the reputation of a seller influences a buyer's trust towards a seller.”

    From Antecedents of trust in the sharing economy: A systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as Strader & Ramaswami, 2002

  • Familiarity has a positive influence on trust.

    “Familiarity was identified as having a positive influence on trust by four studies.”

    From Antecedents of trust in the sharing economy: A systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as Strader & Ramaswami, 2002

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Tuttle , D. On-line collecting . Tuff Stuff : The Nation's Favorite Trading Card Magazine (Apr . 1996 ), 52--56. Tuttle, D. On-line collecting. Tuff Stuff: The Nation's Favorite Trading Card Magazine (Apr. 1996), 52--56.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Strader, T. J., & Ramaswami, S. N.
Affiliations
Iowa State University (US)
ORCID
Ramaswami, Sridhar N.
Venue
Communications of the ACM
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Published
2002-12
Volume
45
Issue
12
Pages
45-49
ISSN
  • 0001-0782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7317
DOI
10.1145/585597.585600
OpenAlex
W2047208831
Cited by
102
References
9
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 5
FWCI
6.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Background (vor)
Locations
  • Communications of the ACM (publishedVersion)
  • UCLA - Biblioteca de Ciencias y Tecnologia Felix Morales Bueno (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Marketing and Social Media
Keywords
trust, digital markets, perceived trust, perceived trustworthiness

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-11.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-11.

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