A Comparative Study of Customers Satisfaction towards E-Commerce between Males and Females of Gen Y
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
บทคัดย่อ
The main objective is to investigate the gender differs based on ease of use, customer attitude, brand image, personal innovation, and customer satisfaction towards e-commerce’s buyer behavior including to find the most influence factor on customer satisfaction towards e- commerce’s buyer behavior of males and females. The 410 respondents were the sample size, which collected the data from customers who have experienced to purchase mobile phone or electronic products from e-commerce online. The quantitative research and online survey were applied for this study. Simple Linear Regression, Multiple Linear Regression, and Independent t- test were designed to test all hypotheses. The results of hypothesis one and two, ease of use was a statistical significant influence on customer attitude based on males and female. The results of hypotheses three and four showed that ease of use and personal innovation were statistical significant influence on customer satisfaction towards e-commerce’s buyer behavior except customer attitude, and brand image were insignificant. Based on the results of hypotheses three and four, the researchers found that personal innovation was the most influence factor on customer satisfaction. The results of hypotheses five, six, seven, eight, and nine to find a different between males and females, the researchers found that both males and female from generation Y, they were not statistical significant different in attitude, brand image, personal innovation, and satisfaction in e-commerce purchasing except ease of use between males and females, which was significant.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Agarwal, R. & Prasad, J. (1999). Are Individual Differences Germane to the Acceptance of New Information Technologies?. Decision Sciences, 30(2), 361–391.
Aldahdouh, T. Z., Korhonen, V., & Nokelainen, P. (2019). What contributes to individual innovativeness? A multilevel perspective. International Journal of Innovation Studies, 3(2), 23-39.
Amornvivat, S., Homchampa, T., Poudpongpaiboon, S., Ratanapinyowong, T., Mintarkhin, N. &Arakvichanun, N. (2014). Insight capturing Thai gen y consumer. Retrieved October 10, 2020, from https://www.scbeic.com
Coppola, D. (2021). E-commerce worldwide - Statistics & Facts, Statista. Retrieved 9 September2021, from https://www.statista.com/statistics.
Council on Foreign Relations. (2021). Women and E-Commerce: The $300 Billion Opportunity. Retrieved 10 August 2021, from https://www.cfr.org/blog/women-and-e-commerce-300.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
Donald, L. A. & Ricardo, A. L. (2015). Exploring the Personal Innovativeness Construct: TheRoles of Ease of Use, Satisfaction and Attitudes. Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems, 25(4), 662-685.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley.
Fliegel, F. C., Kivlin, J. E., & Sekhon, G. S. (1968). Cross-national comparison of farmers erceptions of innovations as related to adoption behavior. Rural Sociology, 33(4),437-449.
Goldsmith, R. E., & Foxall, G. R. (2003). The Measurement of Innovativeness. In L. V.Shavinina (Ed.), The International Handbook on Innovation. Elsevier Science Ltd.
Goldsmith, R. E., d’Hauteville, F., & Flynn, L. R. (1998). Theory and measurement of consumerinnovativeness: A transnational evaluation. European Journal of Marketing, 32(3/4), 340-353.
Kim, J., Shin, B., and Lee, H. (2013). The mediating role of psychological contract breach in IS outsourcing inter-firm governance perspective. European Journal of Information Systems, suppl. Special Issue: Governing IT in inter-organizational, 22(5), 529-547.
Kuruvilla S.J., Joshi N., Shah N. (2009). Do men and women really shop differently?An exploration of gender differences in mall shopping in India. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33(6),715-723.
Lee, S., & Lim, T. S. (2017). Retailer's Innovative Differentiation Method Based on Customer Experience: Focusing Mediating Effect of Omni-channel Shopper Type. Quality Innovation Prosperity, 21(2), 37-51.
Mathiesson. (1991), and Donald, L. A. & Ricardo, A. L. (2015). Exploring the Personal Innovativeness Construct: TheRoles of Ease of Use, Satisfaction and Attitudes. Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems, 25(4), 662-685.
Rajagopal R. C. (2015). Understanding Consumer Behavior and Consumption Experience, IGI Global.
Rana, P. N. & Dwivedi, K. Y. (2016). Using Clickers in a Large Business Class: Examining Use Behavior and Satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Education, 38(1), 47–64
Rania, B. M. (2020). Mobile banking service quality: a new avenue for customer valueco-creation. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 38(5), 1107-1132.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. (5th ed.). Free Press.
Sanz de Acedo Lizárraga M.L., Sanz de Acedo Baquedano M.T., & Cardelle-Elawar M.
(2007). Factors that affect decision making: gender and age differences. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 7(3),381-391.
Sastima (2015). Young consumers’ insight on brand equity. Effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 4 (3), 276 -292.
Szymkowiak, A. & Garczarek-Bak, U. (2018). Gender Differences in E-commerce. HANDELWEWNETRZNY, 4(375), 250-261
Taylor, S. and Todd, P.A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage:a test of competing models. Infornation Systems Research, 6(2), 144-176.
Venkatesh, V. & Davis, F.D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use:development and test. Decision Sciences, 27, 451-81.