Journal Press India^®

Author Details ( * ) denotes Corresponding author

Purpose: The present study is based on the antecedents of on-line buying implications for the business-to-consumer e-commerce. Design/Methodology/Approach: The methodological approach of this research study is analytical and the data is obtained from various primary and secondary data sources in thematic form. Findings: The analysis of data collected revealed that there exists a very positive intent among the respondents (students) for making on-line purchases. Utilitarian and social outcomes are the most significant factors contributing towards the acceptance of on-line model for purchase. This is followed by the social influences that turn non-buyers into buyers. Hedonic outcomes have been found to be the least significant factor in the acceptance of B2C e-commerce. Research Limitations: The main limitation for this study is that it is based on limited sample size of primary data because it has been done on a student population. Replicating the research approach with more primary data would result in deriving better conclusion. Managerial Implications: The implications for management from this study are that there are significant takeaways for them based on students’ on-line buying behavior. E-Commerce has opened a new universe for consumers and organizations. Companies are trying to exploit the potential of the Internet not only for acquiring the customers but also for retaining them with a long-lasting relationship. Companies need to formulate strategies to cater for the new generation hybrid customer, who would like to keep diverse buying options with him, both on and off line. Originality/Value: This study showcased the original work of the authors in the field of on-line buying behavior, the paper seeks to investigate the purchase intent of buying on-line amongst students, who are perceived as being the front-runners in the use of technology and the Internet.

Keywords

E-Commerce, B2C, On-Line, Buying Behavior, E-Consumer.

1. Agarwal, R. and Prasad J. (1997), “The Role of Innovative Characteristics and Perceived Voluntariness in the Acceptance of Information Technologies”, Decision Sciences, (28; 3), Summer, 57-582.
2. Agarwal, R., and Prasad J. (1998), “A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the domain of Information Technology”, Information Systems Research (9:2) June, 204-215.
3. Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980), “Understanding Attitude and Predicting Social Behaviour”, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
4. Ajzen, I. (1985), “From Intention to Action: A Theory of Planned Behaviour”, In J. Kuhl and J. Beckmann (Eds), Action Control: From Cognition to Behaviour, Springer Verlag, New York, 11-39.
5. Ajzen, I. (1991), “The Theory of Planned Behaviour”, Organization Behaviour and Human Decision Processes (50:2), 179- 211.
6. Brancheau, J.C. and Wetherbe J.C. (1990), “The Adoption of Spreadsheet Software: Testing Innovation Diffusion Theory in the Context of end user Computing”, Information Systems Research (1:2), 115-143.
7. Davis, F.D. (1989), “Perceived Usefulness”, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology, MIS Quarterly (13:3), 319-340.
8. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi R.P and Warshaw, P.R. (1989), “User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A comparison of Two Theoretical Models”, Management Science (35:8) August, 982-1003.
9. Foxall, G.R. (1992), “The Behaviour Perspective Model of Purchase and Consumption: From Consumer Theory to Marketing Practice”, Journal of Academy of Marketing Science (20:2), 189-198.
10. Kalakota, R. and Whinston A.B. (1997), “Electronic Commerce – A Managers Guide”, Pearson Education Asia Pvt. Ltd., second reprint.
11. Kraut R., Scherlis, W., Mukhopadhayey T., Manning J. and Kiesler, S. (1996), “The Home Net Field Trial of Residential Internet Services”, Communications of the ACM (39:12), Dec. 55-63.
12. Lacher, K.T. and Mizerski, R. (1994), “An exploratory Study of the Responses and Relationships involved in the evaluation of and in the Intention to Purchase New Rock Music”, Journal of Consumer Research (21:4), 366-380.
13. Matheison, K. (1991), “Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior”, Information Systems Research, 173-191.
14. Rice, R.E., Grant, A.E., Schmitz J. and Torobin, J. (1990), “Individual and Network Influences on the Adoption and Perceived Outcomes of Electronic Managing”, Social Networks (12:1), 27-55.
15. Robertson and Arndt (1949), “Purchase Sequence Responses and Role of Product related Conversations”, 293, quoted in Schiffman L.G. Kanuk L. (1997), “Consumer Behaviour”, Prentice Hall India, Sixth Ed., 615.
16. Roger, E.M. (1995), “Diffusion of Innovation (4th Ed.)”, Free Press, New York.
17. Schiffman, L.G. , Kanuk, Leslie L. (1997), “Consumer Behaviour”, Prentice Hall India, 6th Ed. 235.
18. Schifter, D.B. and Ajzen, I.M. (1985), “Intention, Perceived Control and Weight Loss: An Application of Theory of Planned Behavior”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (49:4), 843-851.
19. Taylor, S. and Todd, P.A. (1995), “Understanding Information Technology Usage : A test of Competing Models”, Information Systems Research (6:2), June, 144-176.
20. Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A. and Howell J. M. (1991), “Personal Computing: Towards a Conceptual Model of Utilization”, MIS Quarterly (15:1), March, 124-143.
21. Venkatesh, A. (1996), “Computers and other interactive Technologies for the Home”, Communications of the ACM (39:12) Dec, 47-54.
22. Venkatesh, A. and Brown S.A. (2001), “A Longitudinal Investigation of Personal Computing in Homes: Adoption Determinants and Emerging Challenges”, MIS Quarterly (25:1), March, 71-90.
23. Warshaw, P.R. (1980), “A New Model for Predicting Behavioural Intention: An alternative to Fishbein”, Journal of Marketing Research (17:2), 153-172.
24. William, O. Bearden and Netemeyer, R. (1999), “Handbook of Marketing Scales”, Multi-item Measures for Marketing and Consumer Behaviour Research, 2nd Ed., Sage, Scale developed by Holbrook and Hirchman, Batra & Athola, Spanberg, Voss & Crowley.
25. Wind, Y., Mahajan, V. and Gunther, R.E. (2002), “Convergence Marketing: Strategies for Reaching New Hybrid Consumer”, Prentice-Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.