Cited by 26Consumer Behavior and Marketing InfluenceTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourConsumer Retail Behavior Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Factors affecting shopping cart abandonment: pre-decisional conflict as a mediator.

Open access
Erdil, Melek·2018·Pressacademia

Abstract

Purpose -This paper aims to investigate the relationship between research purpose, entertainment purpose, perceived cost, perceived risk, transaction inconvenience and shopping cart abandonment, and test whether it is mediated by pre-decisional conflict or not.Methodology -Data of 275 respondents were collected through an online self-administered questionnaire.The respondents consisted of consumers who abandoned a shopping cart at least once in their lives.Simple linear regression analysis and multiple linear regression analysis were applied following mediation paths to test the hypothesis.Findings-The results indicate that there is a significant relationship between research purpose, entertainment purpose, perceived cost, perceived risk, transaction inconvenience and shopping cart abandonment.This relationship is partially mediated with pre-decisional conflict.Conclusion-The findings offer scholars a recognition of consumer motivations for shopping cart abandonment.For retailers, they provide an understanding to prevent shopping cart abandonment which means the loss of potential gain.In consumer behavior research field, this paper fills the gap by testing pre-decisional conflict which is served as a counterpart of post-purchase cognitive dissonance.

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 · 10.17261/pressacademia.2018.845

Cites

28 of 28 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

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?

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

Show all 31 references

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. [1]1. Baron R. M. & Kenny D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1173-1182.
  2. [6]6. Coppola, J. & Sousa, K. (2008). Characteristics affecting the abandonment of e-commerce shopping carts -a pilot study. Northeast Decision Sciences Institute Proceedings, 384-389.
  3. [12]12. Krithika, M. & Rajini, G. (2017). Evidence of effect of perceived risk on online shopping cart abandonment. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research, 15(21), 103-110.
  4. [14]14. Li, S. & Chatterjee, P. (2005). Reducing shopping cart abandonment at retail websites. INFORMS Marketing Science Conference, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, June 2006.
  5. [15]15. Luo, X. (2002). Uses and gratifications theory and e-consumer behaviors: a structural equation modeling study. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 2(2), 34-41.
  6. [17]17. 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), 39-56.
  7. [18]18. Maxwell, S. & Maxwell, N. (2001). Channel reference prices: the potentially damaging effects of napster. Proceedings of the 2001 Fordham University Behavioral Pricing Conference, 32.
  8. [23]23. Paden, N. & Stell, R. (2010). Virtual cart abandonment: addressing hedonic and utilitarian shopping motives. Proceedings of ASBBS, 17(1), 883-887.
  9. [26]26. Rajamma, R., Paswan, A. & Hossain, M. (2009). Why do shoppers abandon shopping carts? Perceived waiting time, risk, and transaction inconvenience. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 18, 188-197.
  10. [27]27. Rewick, J. (2000). Clinching the holiday e-sale: some 65% of online shopper's bolt at the checkout point; e-tailers try to keep them. Wall Street Journal, B1. October 9.
  11. [29]29. Seiders, K., Berry, L.L. & Gresham, L..G. (2000). Attention, retailers! How convenient is your convenience strategy?. Sloan Management Review, 41(3), 79-89.
  12. [32]32. Srinivasan, S.S., Anderson, R. & Ponnavolu, K. (2002). Customer loyalty in e-commerce: an exploration of its antecedents and consequence, Journal of Retailing, 78, 41-50.
  13. [41]41. Zhou, L., Dai, L. & Zhang, D. (2007). Online shopping acceptance model-a critical survey of consumers factors in online shopping. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 8(1), 41-62.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 26

Metadata

Authors
Erdil, M.
Affiliations
İstanbul Nişantaşı Üniversitesi (TR)
Corresponding author
Erdil, Melek
Venue
Pressacademia
Publisher
Pressacademia
Published
2018-06-30
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
140-152
ISSN
2146-7943 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2883620821
Cited by
26
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Pressacademia (publishedVersion)
  • DergiPark (Istanbul University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Retail Behavior Studies
Keywords
shopping cart abandonment, perceived cost, risk perception, purpose of research, consumer motivation, online shopping

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