Explaining and Predicting the Impact of Branding Alliances and Web Site Quality on Initial Consumer Trust of E-Commerce Web Sites
Background DefiningBrandEquity,BrandAwareness,andBrandImage
A KEY GOAL OF ANY W EB - BASED BUSINESS shouldbetobuildbrandequitytoincrease onlinetransactions.Abrandis“aname,term,sign,symbol,ordesign,orcombination ofthemwhichisintendedtoidentifythegoodsandservicesofonesellerorgroup ofsellersandtodifferentiatethemfromthoseofcompetitors”[38,p.442].Brand equity isameasureofthefavorablemarketoutcomesthatwouldnothaveoccurred ifthesameproductorservicedidnothavethatbrandassociatedwiththeproductor service[35].Brandequityiscreatedwhenaconsumerhasanawarenessofabrand andanassociatedpositiveimagethattogethercreateuniquebrandassociations[35]. Hence,toachievemarketadvantages,itiscriticalforaWebsitetoincreasebrand knowledge.Brandknowledge[35]iscomposedofbrandawarenessandbrandimage. Brandawareness isaconsumer’sabilitytoidentifyabrandunderdifferentcondi- tions[35].Brandawarenessconsistsofbrandrecognition(aconsumer’sabilityto recognizethatheorshehasbeenpreviouslyexposedtothebrand)andbrandrecall (theabilityofaconsumertogeneratethebrandfrommemorygivenarelatedcue, suchasaproductcategory)[35].Brandimagedefinesthesetofnegativeorpositive associationsaconsumerhaswithabrand[35].Thesebrandassociations“aretheother informationalnodeslinkedtothebrandnodeinmemoryandcontainthemeaningof thebrandforconsumers”andcanvaryinstrength[35,p.3].
Becausecognitivesciencehasshownthatmemoryisdurable,positiveornegative associationsarehighlyenduring;thus,itiscrucialtopromotepositivebrandassocia- tions.Traditionalmarketingtechniquesimprovebrandimagebycreatingpositiveas- sociationswithabrandbydescribingpositiveattributes,carefullychoosingmemorable names,creatingpositivesecondaryassociations,andsoforth[35].
202 LOWRY ET AL.
TheAssociativeNetworkModelofMemory: StoringBrandInformation
Beforeproceedingtothetheoreticalmodel,wedescribetheassociativenetworkmodel ofmemory uponwhichourtheoreticalmodelisbuilt.Cognitivescienceresearchers generallyagreethattheassociativenetworkmodelisausefulmodeloflong-term memory(LTM)[1,34].Inthismodel,LTMis“representedasanetworkofnodes andconnectinglinks,wherenodesrepresentstoredinformationorconceptsandlinks representthestrengthofassociationbetweennodes”[34,p.317].Thismodelispar- ticularlypowerfulwithinthecontextofbranding.Thismodelexplainsthatanything thatrelatestobrandknowledge,suchasbrand-specificinformation,brandidentifica- tion,productcategory,andsoon,canbestoredasamemorynode[34].Theretrieval ofinformationinLTMcomesthroughspreadingactivation[1,34]:
AparticularnodeinLTMisactivatedbyaretrievalcue,andactivationspreads fromthatnodetootherlinkednodesinLTM.Whentheactivationofaparticular nodeexceedsathresholdlevel,itscontentsarerecalled.Thestrengthsofthe associationbetweentheactivatednodeandallotherlinkednodesdetermine whichnodesareactivated.[34,p.317]
Asanillustration,Figure1representstheLTMofahypotheticalconsumerwith respecttohisorherbrandknowledgeofRitz-Carlton.Thestrengthofthelinksbe- tweenthenodesisrepresentedbythethicknessofthelines.Thus,givenaretrieval cue—forinstance,aRitz-Carltonlogo—thefirstnodetobeactivatedwouldbethe “Ritz-Carlton”node.Next,throughspreadingactivation,themostlikelynodestobe activatedwouldbehotelandtopservice,thenclassy,refined,discreet,roomservice, sleepingin, pleasant,andrelaxation.
Aneffectiveretrievalcueisthekeytoretrievinginformationfromanode.Brands, logos,andsoonserveassuchcues[34].Thus,strongbrandfamiliarityprovidesan effectiveretrievalcueforaccessingbrandknowledge.Brandfamiliarity“captures consumers’brandknowledgestructures,thatis,brandassociationsthatexistwithina consumer’smemory”[12,p.293].Itisimportanttonotethat“establishedsuccessful brandshelptocreatedifferentiationthroughbrandassociationsthatgobeyondthe limitsofthefeaturesandattributesoftheproductitself”[42,p.35].
TheoreticalModel O UR MODEL EXPLAINS AND PREDICTS HOW positiveimpressionsofathird-partybrand,
storedinLTM,canbeassociatedwithandtransferredtoanunknownWebsite,thus increasinginitialtrustinthatWebsite.Ourtheoryistermedthebranding-association- trustmodel (BATM),andisexplainedinfourstages.First,usingtheassociativenet- workmodelofmemory,weshowhowthemereexposureeffectcancreateorstrengthen positivebrandimageforexistingbrandnodesinaconsumer’smemory.Second,we showhowincreasedbrandawareness,brandimage,andWebsitequalitycanbelever- agedtoincreaseinitialtrust.Third,wethenextendinformationintegrationtheoryto
CONSUMERTRUSTOFE-COMMERCEWEBSITES203
Figure1. ExampleRepresentationofaConsumer’sLong-TermMemoryofBrand Knowledge
showhowbrandalliancescancreatestrongerassociationsbetweenwell-knownbrands andunknownWebsites.Fourth,fornomologicalvalidity,weintegrateourtheoryby confirmingandextendingMcKnightetal.’s[49]modeloftrusttoadditionallyshow thatinitialtrustingbeliefswillbeaffectedbyconsumers’institution-basedtrustand dispositiontotrust.Thosebeliefs,inturn,affectinitialtrustingintentions.
BATMStage1:StrengtheningStoredBrandImageThrough Exposure
Wepositthatgreaterbrandawarenessthroughrepeatedexposurewillpositivelyin- creasetheimageofabrandbycreatingorstrengtheningexistingimagenodes’links tothebrandnodesstoredinmemorythroughthemereexposureeffect.Themere exposureeffectistheobservedphenomenonthatthe“mererepeatedexposureofthe stimulusisasufficientconditionfortheenhancementoftheindividual’sattitudeto thatstimulus”[72,p.384].Bornsteinconductedaseminalmeta-analysisofmore than200experimentsonthemereexposureeffectandsummedupthephenomenon bystatingthat“familiarityleadstoliking”[8,p.265].
Thetwo-factormodelofmereexposureeffects,initiallydevelopedinBerlyne[6]and extendedinStang[65],providesstronginsightsastowhyandhowthemereexposure effectoccurs[8].Thismodelconsidersthecombinedeffectsofstimulushabituation andboredom[8](thelatter,whichrelatestolong-termeffectsofrepeatedexposure, isnotaddressedinthisstudy).Stimulushabitationaccountsforthemereexposure effectprimarilythroughtheideathatpeoplejudgetheunfamiliartobethreatening andthusdevelopnegativeimpressionstowardunfamiliarthings.
Impressionsthroughmereexposurearerepresentedeitherbynewnodesrepresent- ingtheimpressionsinmemoryassociatedwiththebrandknowledgenode(s)orby
204 LOWRY ET AL.
strengtheningtheassociationbetweenexistingimpressionnodesandbrandknowledge nodes.Becausenodeswithlinksofhigherstrengtharemorelikelytoberetrieved [34],effortstoenhanceimpressionsthroughrepetitionincreasethelikelihoodoffuture positiveimpressionretrieval.
Wenowapplythismodeltobrandawarenessandbrandimageandextendthemodel toe-commerceWebsites.Brandawarenessincreaseswithexposuretoabrandand typicallyoccursthroughrepeatedadvertisingexposureovertime.Brandswiththe mostadvertisingtendtodevelopthemostawarenessandfamiliarityamongconsumers [7].Thepositiveeffectsofrepetitionhavelongbeenstudiedinadvertisingandare foundtohelpimprovepositiveimpressionandrecall,whichinturnresultinahigher intentiontopurchase[61,62].Repetitionoflogoshasalsobeenusedtohelpprime positiveimpression[58].Moreover,asbrandsbecomemorefamiliarthroughincreased awareness,theyaremorelikelytobefavoredastried-and-trusted,familiarsignals [29].Morebrandawarenessgenerallyresultsinlessthreattoconsumersbecauseof increasedfamiliarity,andthusresultsinmorepositiveimpressions,asmanifested throughimprovedbrandimage.Forexample,inFigure1,thebrandimageofRitz- Carlton would largely be manifested through spreading activation of the positive impressiontraitsofclassy,refined,discreet,andpossiblythroughfurtheractivation ofrelaxationandpleasant.
Conversely,littleexposuretoabrandresultsinlittleawareness(manifestedbyfew tononodesbeingrecalled,givenaretrievalcue),whichshouldresultinincreased threattoconsumers,becauseoftheunfamiliarandriskiernatureofthebrand,andthus morenegativeimpressions,whichwillbemanifestedthroughanegativebrandimage. Giventheabove,weproposethatbrandawarenesspositivelyaffectsbrandimage:
Hypothesis1:Exposuretoabrandofwhichaconsumerhashighbrandaware- nesswillcauseamorepositivebrandimagethanexposuretoabrandofwhich aconsumerhaslowbrandawareness.
BATMStage2:IncreasingTrustwithBrandAwarenessand Image,andWebSiteQuality
Trust hasbeenaddressedinseverale-commercestudies(see[24,26,48,55]fora morecompletereview).Ourstudyfocusesprimarilyoninitialtrustbecauseofits criticaleffectonfirst-timevisitorstoaWebsite[43,51].Initialtrusthasbeendefined astheabilityofthetrustertobelieveandrelyuponthetrusteewithoutanyfirsthand knowledgeofthetrustee[51].
Initialtrustiscomposedoftwosubconstructs—trustingbeliefsandtrustinginten- tions.TrustingbeliefsisdefinedinaWebcontextasaconsumer’sbelievingthataWeb sitewillactwithbenevolence,integrity,andcompetencetowardtheconsumer[49]. Trustingintentions “meansthatthetrusterissecurelywillingtodepend,orintends todepend,onthetrustee”[49,p.337].Trustingbeliefsleadtotrustingintentions, whichleadtotrust-relatedbehaviors(e.g.,purchasing).Therefore,ourstudyfocuses primarilyonhow(1)theWebsiteand(2)thebrandaffectinitialtrustingbeliefs,which thenaffecttrustingintentions.
CONSUMERTRUSTOFE-COMMERCEWEBSITES205
WebSiteQuality(TrustSource1) WenowexplainhowpositiveimpressionsofaWebsite’squalityenhanceinitialtrust-
ingbeliefs.PerceivedWebsitequalityreflectsconsumers’overallperceptionsofhow welltheythinkaWebsiteworksandlooks,particularlyincomparisontoothersites [49].Websitequalityhasbeenexaminedbyadiversenumberofstudieswithinthe informationsystems(IS)[36,60]andmarketingdisciplines[73].Moststudieshave conceptualizedWebsitequalityasaformativeconstructcomposedofseveralsubcon- structs,althoughthereisnoclearconsensusastowhichsubconstructstouse[70].At least30differentsubconstructsofWebsitequalityhavebeenidentifiedinliterature [20].However,typicalcomponentsofconceptualizationsofWebsitequalityinclude navigability[45],graphicalstyle[53],andfunctionality[74].WefollowMcKnight etal.[49],withWebsitequalitybeingdefinedbytheuser’sgeneralperceptionof navigability,aesthetics,andfunctionalityoftheWebsite.
ThepositivelinkbetweenWebsitequalityandtrustissupportedbyEverardand Galletta[16],whoexplainhowimpressionformationbasedonWebsitequalityaf- fectstrustinaveryshortperiodoftime.Theypredict,andshowempiricalsupport, thattheinitialimpressionsofperceivedWebsitequalitypositivelyaffecttrust.Thus, perceivedWebsitequalityservesasaretrievalcueandenablesconsumerstoplace trustintheWebsitebecauseitevokesfeelingsoftrusttowardthevendor.Similarly, HaandPerks[27]conductedastudythatfoundthatincreasedexperiencewithanef- fectivelydesignedWebsiteincreasedthetendencyofconsumerstotrusttheWebsite. Initialtrustcanalsobeincreasedbycuesorimpressionsthatserveasthestrongest firstgeneralimpressionoftheWebsite[43].
Accordingly,ifaconsumer’sinitialexperiencewithaWebsiteisnegative(e.g.,from anonresponsive,inaccurate,orflawedpresentation),thenhisorherinitialimpression (whichwillbeusedasaretrievalcue)islikelytoactivateanodeandassociatedlinks thatinvolvenegativeimpressions;thiswouldcausetheconsumertoinfernegative beliefsaboutthevendor’sattributes.Conversely,aconsumer’sinitialimpressionof aprofessional,timely,andhigh-qualityWebsiteasaretrievalcueislikelytoactivate anLTMnodeandassociatedlinksthatinvolvepositiveimpressions,whichwould enabletheconsumertoinferpositivebeliefsabouttheattributesofthevendorthat enableinitialtrustandimprovetheperceptionofthebrand’simage.
WhilenomemorynodesexistforanewWebsite,thepositivefeaturesofthenew WebsitecouldactasretrievalcuestonodesforqualityWebsitesorothercontextsof highprofessionalismthattheuserhasestablishedinLTM.BylinkingthenewWeb sitetothesetypesoftrustedattributes,trustingbeliefswouldbeindirectlyassociated withthenewWebsitenodethroughthetrust-relatedattributesassociatedwiththe Website.Moreover,astheWebsitestimulatesattributesneededforatrustedvendor, perceivedWebsitequalityshouldalsoincreasetheperceivedbrandimageofthe unknownWebsite.
Brand(TrustSource2) Similarly,brandknowledgecanalsoexplainhowtoenhanceinitialtrustingbeliefs.
Anexploratorystudyoftheantecedentsofonlinetrustshowedapositiverelation-
206 LOWRY ET AL.
shipbetweenawarenessofacompanyandtrustinitsWebsite[71].LikeWebsite quality,brandservesasaretrievalcuetoaffecttheattributesofthevendor’simage, whichenablestrustingbeliefs.Therearemanybrandattributesthatcaninfluencethe feelingsoftrustthatconsumershavetowardabrand,whichareconveyedthrough thesenseofbrandimage.Brandswithpositivebrandimageconveypositiveimpres- sionsthatserveasassociationstostrengthentheconsumer’sbeliefthatthetrusteehas positiveattributesthatarebeneficialtothetruster.Conversely,brandswithnegative imagesandunknownbrandsdonothaveassociationswithintheconsumer’smemory topositivelyaffectthebeliefsofthetruster.Asaresult,brandsthathaveapositive imageareassociatedwithpositiveattributesthatenablethetrustertoinferincreased trustingbeliefsinthevendor.Thisindirectassociationthroughbrandimageprovides abasisforconsumerstoestablishinitialtrustingbeliefsinaWebvendorwithoutthe previousinteractionsthatwouldnormallyprovidethebasisfortrust.Thetiebetween brandandtrustbecomesmoreimportantwithinthecontextofe-commerceWebsites because“brandscanprovidegreatercomfortonlinethanofflineincustomerchoice [13,71]”[4,p.136].
BATMStage3:IncorporatingInformationIntegrationTheory GivenStages1and2,wecannowexplainhowbrandalliancescanbeusedasretrieval
cues to activate associated positive attribute nodes and create positive links with unknownWebsites.Abrandallianceisthe“short-orlong-termassociationoftwo ormoreindividualbrands,products,and/orotherdistinctiveproprietaryassets”[64, p.31].Brandallianceisalsoanumbrellatermforco-brandingandsimilartechniques suchascross-promotion,jointmarketing,andjointbranding[64].Brandalliancescan applytothecontextofe-commerceWebsitesbecausesuchalliancescanbesymbolic throughuseofbrandnamesorlogos[64].Brandalliancesallowunfamiliarbrandsto sharetheimageofhigher-imagebrands.
SimoninandRuth[64]proposeatheorythatshowshowpreexistingimpressionsor associationswithbothbrandsinabrandalliancecombinewithperceptionsofproduct fitandbrandfittocreateanoverallimpressionofthealliance,whichinturndirectly predictstheoverallimpressionofeachbrand.SimoninandRuth’stheoryisbasedon researchshowingthatsecondary,non-product-basedassociationsarepowerfulinflu- encesonthebrandimagenodesinmemory[35].Theselinksneednotbedirectly relatedtoabrand—theysimplyneedtobeassociatedwithabrandsothattheassocia- tionandbrandarerecordedaslinkedassociationsinmemory.ThemodelSimoninand Ruth[64]usetoexplainthesetiesiscalledinformationintegrationtheory[2],which furtherexplainshowpeoplewilllikelyprocessexistingnodesandassociationsand createnewlinksbetweennodes(inourcase,becauseofbrandalliances).
Thistheoryexplainsthat“attitudesorbeliefsareformedandmodifiedaspeople receive, interpret, evaluate, and then integrate stimulus information with existing beliefsorattitudes”[64,p.32].Thekeytothismodel,then,isaccessibilitythrough strongernodesandassociations.Ifabeliefaboutabrandismoreaccessible(astronger link),individualswillbemorelikelytoaccessthebelief’snodewhenretrievalcues
CONSUMERTRUSTOFE-COMMERCEWEBSITES207
associatedwiththebrandareused[17,18,64].Whensuchanassociativenodeismore accessible,itwillbiastheinformationprocessingregardingthebrandinthedirection oftheassociatedpositiveornegativeimpression[19,30,64].Intermsoftheassocia- tivenetworkmodel,strongimpressionstowardbrandshavestrongerandmorelinks tobrandinformationnodesthanweakimpressions.Theseimpressionsarethusmore likelytoberetrievedwhenanexternalretrievalcueisgiven,resultinginincreased positiveornegativeimpressions.Applyingthistheorytobrandalliances,
Judgmentsaboutthebrandalliancearelikelytobeaffectedbypriorattitudes towardeachbrand,andsubsequentjudgmentsabouteachbrandarelikelyto beaffectedbythecontextoftheotherbrand.Thebrandalliancestimulusinfor- mation,presentedthroughadvertisingorbyexperiencingitdirectly,accesses relatedaffectandbeliefsaboutthosebrandsandtheproductsthatarestoredin memory.[64,p.32]
Inourcontext,thebrandalliancestimulusinformation(retrievalcue)isthebrand nameorlogo.
Toclarifyourmodel,ifonebrandalliancepartnerhasaweaknetworkofassocia- tionsandpooraccessibility(theunknownWebsiteinourcontext),thenthepositive spillovereffectofthestrongalliancepartner(theknownbrandinourcontext)onthe weakerbrandalliancepartnerwillbestrong[17,18,64].Asaresult,anyrecalledas- sociationsrelatingtothestrongermemberofthealliancewillthenbeassociatedwith theweakerpartneraswell[10,64].However,“attitudestowardafamiliarbrandwill bemoreresistanttochange”[64,p.34]becausethestrongbrandwillhaveanexten- sivenetworkofnodeswithstrongassociationsandisthuslesslikelytobenegatively affectedbytheunknownpartner.
SimoninandRuth’s[64]empiricalfindingssupporttheirtheoryandshowstrong evidenceforthenotionofalesser-knownbrandgettinga“freerider”effectoutofan unequalbrandalliance.SimoninandRuthalsoshowthatbecausehighlyfamiliarbrands arehighlyresistanttochanges[64],lesser-knownbrandsgenerallydonotnegatively affecttheimageofwell-known,entrenchedbrands[69].Infact,mostwell-known brandsgenerallybenefitfrombrandingalliancesbystrengtheningpreexistingposi- tivebrandknowledge[67,69].Thesameresearchsuggeststhatco-brandingcouldbe effectiveforintroducingnewproductswithunknownbrandnames[69].Weextend thisassumption,whichprovidesanextremeformofabrandalliance,topartnering withanunknownbrand.Althoughthescenarioofapurefreeriderhasnotbeentested, thesametrusttransfershouldoccurifourtheoryholds.Combiningthetheoryinthis section(onbrandalliances)withthetheoryintheprevioussection(whichdescribes howbrandawareness,brandimage,andWebsitequalityaffectinitialtrustingbeliefs) yieldsthefollowinghypotheses:
Hypothesis2:AWebsiteofanunknownbranddisplayinganassociatedthird- party brand of which a consumer has high brand awareness will elicit more initialtrustingbeliefsthanasimilarWebsitewithabrandforwhichlessbrand awarenessexists.
208 LOWRY ET AL.
Hypothesis3:AWebsiteofanunknownbranddisplayinganassociatedthird- partybrandofwhichaconsumerhasapositivebrandimagewillelicitmore initialtrustingbeliefsthanasimilarWebsitewithabrandforwhichalessposi- tivebrandimageexists.
Hypothesis4:AWebsiteofanunknownbrandthatisperceivedtohavehighWeb sitequalitywillelicitmoreinitialtrustingbeliefsthanasimilarWebsitethatis perceivedtohavelowWebsitequality.
Furthermore,ifthismodelholds,theimpactofpositiveaffectiveassociationsshould gobothways:aslongastheadditionalaffectiveinformationdoesnotconflictwith existingassociations,anunknownWebsitethatisjudgedtobeofhighqualityshould createapositiveassociationforathird-partybrandthatservesastheretrievalcuefor theunknownWebsite.
Hypothesis5:AWebsiteofanunknownbrandthatisperceivedtohavehigh Websitequalitywillgenerateagreaterincreaseinpositivebrandimageforan associatedthird-partybrandthanasimilarWebsitethatisperceivedtohave lowWebsitequality.
BATMStage4:ExtendingtoMcKnightetal.’sModelofTrust To complete our trust predictions and to maximize the nomological validity of
our study, we include the predictors of trusting beliefs that have been previously examined—dispositiontotrustandinstitution-basedtrust.Weincludethesepredictors becausetheyaccountforalternativeexplanationsofhowinitialtrustingbeliefsmay beaffectedinourstudy[43].
DispositiontoTrust McKnightetal.definedispositiontotrustas“theextenttowhichapersondisplays
atendencytobewillingtodependonothersacrossabroadspectrumofsituations andpersons”[49,p.339].Theydefinetwosubconstructstothisconstruct:faithin humanity “means one assumes others are usually upright, well meaning, and de- pendable” [49, pp.339–340]; trusting stance “means that, regardless of what one believesaboutpeoples’attributes,oneassumesbetteroutcomesresultfromdealing withpeopleasthoughtheyarewellmeaningandreliable”[49,p.440].Importantto ourmodelisMcKnightetal.’spredictionthatone’sdispositiontotrustaffectsone’s trustingbeliefsandpositivelyaffectsinstitution-basedtrust[49].Inarelatedstudy, McKnightetal.foundthatone’sdispositiontotrustpositivelyaffectedone’strustin aWebsite[52].Gefen[21]alsofoundthataperson’sdispositiontotrustwasthekey determinantoftrustininteractingwithaWeb-basedvendor.Thisrelationshipwas alsosupportedinGefenandStraub[24],LeeandTurban[41],Limetal.[43],and PavlouandGefen[57].McKnightetal.believetheexplanationfortheseoutcomes isthat“dispositiontotrustisespeciallysalientine-commercerelationshipsbecause
CONSUMERTRUSTOFE-COMMERCEWEBSITES209
theserelationshipsarecharacterizedbysocialdistance,whichlimitstheamountof informationaconsumerhasaboutthevendor”[52,p.254].Wereplicateandextend thesepredictionsandfindings:
Hypothesis6:One’sdispositiontotrustpositivelyaffectsone’sinitialtrusting beliefs.
Hypothesis7:One’sdispositiontotrustpositivelyaffectsone’sinstitution-based trust.
Institution-BasedTrust McKnightetal.defineinstitution-basedtrustas“thebeliefthattheneededstructural
conditionsarepresent(e.g.,intheInternet)toenhancetheprobabilityofachieving a successful outcome in an endeavor like e-commerce” [49, p.339].They define twodimensionsofinstitution-basedtrust:structuralassurance,which“meansone believesthatstructureslikeguarantees,regulations,promises,legalrecourse,orother proceduresareinplacetopromotesuccess”[49,p.339],andsituationalnormality, which“meansonebelievesthattheenvironmentisinproperorderandsuccessis likelybecausethesituationisnormalorfavorable”[49,p.339].Theyalsopredictthat institution-basedtrustisapositivepredictoroftrustingbeliefstowardaWeb-based vendor.Inarelatedstudy,McKnightetal.[52]foundthatone’sstructuralassurance positivelyaffectedone’strustinaWebsite.Theexplanationforthisrelationshipis that“consumerswhofeelsafeabouttheInternetingeneralaremorelikelytotrust aspecificwebbusiness”[52,p.255],aclaimsupportedinGefenetal.[26],Kimet al.[37],McKnightandChervany[48],Pavlou[54],andPavlouandGefen[57].We replicateandextendthesepredictionsandfindingstotestthenomologicalvalidity ofourmodel:
Hypothesis8:One’sinstitution-basedtrustpositivelyaffectsone’sinitialtrust- ingbeliefs.
Hypothesis9:One’sinitialtrustingbeliefspositivelyaffectsone’sinitialtrusting intentions.
Figure 2 graphically summarizes the hypotheses that operationalize our BATM theorywiththenomologicalextensiontoMcKnightetal.’smodel.
Method Design
T HE RESEARCH DESIGN FOR THIS STUDY WAS A multiblockexperimentwithlogo/name usageandcompanyimageasthetreatmentsappliedto298participants.Participants wererandomlyassignedtooneof10treatments.Thisresearchusedonlyindividual participantswhowereworkingandrespondingalone;pretestandposttestdatawere collectedwitheachtreatment.
210 LOWRY ET AL.
Figure2 .TheoreticalModel
Participants Atotalof298studentsatalargesoutheasternuniversityparticipatedintheexperi-
ment.AllwerestudentsinsectionsofanintroductoryIScourserequiredforbusi- nessundergraduatesandwereofferedextracredittoparticipateinthestudy.Thus, arangeofbusinessmajorswasrepresentedinoursample.Thesamefacilitatorand samecoursewereusedforalldatacollection,whichwasdoneatfourdifferenttimes betweenDecember2005andJanuary2007.Human-participantapprovalwasobtained forthisstudy,andallstandardprocedureswerefollowed.Theparticipantpoolwas wellbalancedintermsofgenderanddiversitywithrespecttothedemographicsof theuniversity.Eventhoughparticipantswereinanintroductorycourse,thestudents tendedtobeolderandmoreexperiencedthantypicalintroductorycoursestudents: theaverageagewas22.8(standarddeviation[SD]6.8),andtheaverageyearsincol- legewere3.8(SD1.2).
Treatments TheexperimentconsistedofaWeb-basedsimulationofahotelreservationWebsite
similartoExpedia(www.expedia.com).Accordingtoanestablishedrandomization algorithm,aserverrandomlyassignedparticipantstoatreatment.Thismaximized randomizationbutcausedunequalsizesoftreatments.Participantswereassignedto
CONSUMERTRUSTOFE-COMMERCEWEBSITES211
Table1.SummaryofTreatmentsandNumberTested(N=298)
High-image Low-image Unknown
third-party Treatment
brand Control
1. Logo-only branding
39 — 2. Name-only branding
18 — 3.Logoandname branding
acontrol(nonameorlogo),nameonly,logoonly,ornameandlogobrandingtreat- mentwithahigh,low,orunknownthird-partybrandontheexperimentalWebsite.We chosetodeliverbrandingknowledgeinthesecombinationssothatwecouldalsotest whetheranyoftheseformsofretrievalcuesweresuperiortotheothers.Thisproce- dureresultedina3×3,fullycrossedexperimentwithacontroltreatment.Beforeany treatmentwasexperienced,allparticipantsreadinstructionsabouttheexperimentand itsprocedures,providedbasicdemographicinformation,andparticipatedinapretest developedbyMcKnightetal.thatmeasuresone’sdispositiontotrust[49].Table1 summarizesthetreatments.
BrandAwarenessandBrandImage ParticipantsviewedtheHotelBooking.comWebsite(thefictionalWebsitecreatedfor
theexperiment)withathird-partybrandasindicatedbyanameand/orlogoonthetop andbottomofthepage.Participantsweregiventherealistictaskofconfirmingaroom reservationonthissimulatedhotelWebsite.Bothhigh-image(Ritz-Carlton)andlow- image(Motel6)brandconditionswereconsideredhigh-brand-awarenessconditions, whereasthefictitioushotelwasconsideredalow-brand-awarenesscondition.
High,Low,orUnknownThird-PartyImage Eachparticipantwasshownathird-partylogoand/ornameforahigh-image,low-
image,orunknownlodgingcompany.Weusedthenamesandlogosoftwoactual lodgingcompaniestoserveashigh-andlow-imageexamples,andcreatedaname andlogoforafictitioushoteltoserveasanunknownbrand.
Control ControlparticipantsviewedthesimulatedWebsitewithnothird-partysponsorshown
onthepage.Thiswastheno-brand-awareness/no-brand-imagecondition.Participants wereaskedtocompletethesametaskasparticipantsintheothertreatments.
212 LOWRY ET AL.
Aftercompletingthetask,participantsansweredquestionsthatgatheredtheirpercep- tionsabouttheirperceivedlevelsoftrustandtheirperceivedimageofthethird-party brander.Thisprocedureenabledustogathertheperceivedimagethateachthirdparty hadoneachparticipantandtheperceivedleveloftrustthattheparticipanthadinthe simulatedWebsite.
Measures WeusedaninstrumentdevelopedbyJavalgietal.[33]tomeasureperceivedimage
andanotherinstrumentdevelopedbyLastovickaandGardner[40]tomeasurebrand awareness.Aseparateinstrumentwasusedtomeasureperceivedonlinetrust[49]. Minorwordingchangesweremadetotheimageandtheonlinetrustinstrumentsso thattheywereparticularlyapplicabletothehotelbookingWebsitetask. 1
Procedures TheexperimentinvolvedasimulatedWebsitethatparticipantsaccessedfromacom-
puter.Experimentalproceduresgiveninaninstructionalpacketwereadministered uniformlyforallparticipants.Theinformationpacketcontainedaninformedconsent formandinstructionsfortheexperimentaltask.Allrelevantinformationwascontained inthepacket.Onceparticipantsfinishedreadingthepacket,theyproceededtothe simulationWebsite.
Allparticipantscompletedabasicdemographicsurveyandthepretestportionsof theMcKnightetal.[49]onlinetrustinstrument,whichassessedparticipants’dispo- sitiontotrust.OnceparticipantsaccessedtheexperimentWebsite,thesimulation serverrandomlyassignedparticipantstoonetreatmentandforwardedthemtothe appropriateWebsite.
Wehelpedpreventhypothesisguessingbyassigningarealistictaskthatdidnot directlyaffectanyofourhypothesesorrevealthenatureofourstudy.OntheHotel- Booking.comsimulationWebsite,participantswereaskedtoconfirmthereservation ofanalreadyselectedhotelroomasoutlinedintheirinformationpacket.Participants wererequiredtousefakeidentitiesforthepurposeoftheexperimentasrequiredbythe universityinstitutionalreviewboardtocompletethereservation.Oncetheparticipants reviewedthecompletenessandaccuracyoftheinformationandofthereservation, theexperimentalsimulationwascomplete.Theparticipantswereforwardedtothe posttreatmentinstrumentonaseparateWebpage.
Analysis ManipulationValidityandTreatmentTests T O ASSESS THE MANIPULATION VALIDITY OF THE EXPERIMENT [9,68],manipulationcheck
questionswereaddedtotheposttesttodeterminetowhatdegreeparticipantsper-
CONSUMERTRUSTOFE-COMMERCEWEBSITES213
ceivedtheirtreatmentmanipulations.Themanipulationcheckascertainedwhether theparticipanthadnoticedthethird-partycompanylogoand/ornamedisplayedon thesimulationWebpages.Ofthe298participants,18didnotnoticethemanipulation (notcountingthe41controlparticipants).Althoughthe18unmanipulatedparticipants mighthaveaddedunexplainedvariancetotheresults,datafortheseindividualswere retainedforanalysis.Straubetal.suggestthatalthoughunmanipulatedparticipants addadditionalvariancetoresults,datafortheseparticipantsmayprofitablybere- tainedinthedatasettoprovide“amorerobusttestingofthehypotheses”[68,p. 408].Havingestablishedthatthemajorityoftheparticipantsinourexperimentwere consciousofthemanipulation,wechosetheconservativeapproachofretainingthe unmanipulatedindividualstoenhancetherobustnessofourtests,thoughthisreten- tionweakensourresults.
We also tested whether brand and image treatments had the expected effect. In performingthesetests,weretainedthedataoftheparticipantswhobelievedthey werenotmanipulated;thus,theresultsarequiteconservative.Tochecktheefficacy ofbrandtreatments,wegroupedtheparticipantsbythewell-knownbrandscondi- tions(µ=4.30,SD=0.86),andthecontrolcondition(nobrand)andthefakebrand wereclassifiedasunknownbrands(µ=4.04,SD=0.88).Usinganalysisofvariance (ANOVA),thistestedpositivelyatF=6.30(1,298),p=0.013.Tochecktheeffect ofimagetreatments,wegroupedthecontrolconditionandfakebrandasunknown brandsthatshouldhavehadlowimages(µ=4.12,SD=0.83),andweseparatedthe low-imagecondition(µ=4.08,SD=0.8)andhigh-imagecondition(µ=4.5,SD= 0.79),withtheexpectationthatthehigh-imageconditionshouldhavethehighestim- age.PosthocTukey’scomparisonspartiallyconfirmedtheefficacyofthistreatment atF=6.37(1,298),p=0.002,showingthatthehigh-imageconditionhadthehigh- estimage;however,itwasalsoshownthattheunknownbrandsstatisticallyhadthe sameimageasthelow-imagecondition.(Thisinterestingresultisfurtherexplained intheDiscussionsection.)
Asafinalexploratorytest,weexaminedwhetheritmadeadifferencetobrandingif brandinformationwasconveyedvialogoonly,nameonly,oracombinationoflogo andname.Wefeltthisdifferencewasmoresalienttotherealbrandsconditionsthan totheunknownbrand.Thebrandingmeanswereasfollows:high-imagebrandlogo (µ=4.6,SD=0.76),high-imagebrandname(µ=4.1,SD=0.95),high-imagebrand both(µ=4.2,SD=0.68),low-imagebrandlogo(µ=4.2,SD=1.1),low-imagebrand name(µ=4.2,SD=0.8),andlow-imagebrandboth(µ=4.3,SD=0.8).Thistested insignificantlyatF=1.1(1,168),p=0.360.Theimagemeanswereasfollows:high- imagebrandlogo(µ=4.5,SD=0.83),high-imagebrandname(µ=4.3,SD=0.65), high-imagebrandboth(µ=4.5,SD=0.82),low-imagebrandlogo(µ=4.1,SD= 1.0),low-imagebrandname(µ=4.2,SD=0.68),andlow-imagebrandboth(µ= 4.0,SD=0.68).ThistestedsignificantlyatF=2.37(1,168),p=0.04.However,post hocTukey’scomparisonsrevealednosignificantdifferences.Overall,weconclude thatuseofalogo,name,orcombinationofalogoandnamearesimilarlyeffective retrievalcuesforestablishingbrandingoranimage.
214 LOWRY ET AL.
FormativeVersusReflectiveIndicators AkeystepbeforeassessingfactorialvaliditythathasrecentlycometolightinIS
research is to determine which constructs are formative and which are reflective. Given that all of our measures were carefully validated in previous research, our analysiswaslargelyconfirmatory[14,32,59].Likewise,itisalsocriticaltoconsider whetheranyoftheconstructsrepresentsecond-orderconstructscomposedoffirst- orderconstructs(ordimensions),whichcanbeeitherreflectiveorformative[46,59]. Basedonthisrecentliterature,thefollowingconstructsareformative—generalWeb experience,branding,andimage.Conversely,personalinnovativenessisreflective. WefollowedtheclearconceptualizationsandvalidationsbyMcKnightetal.[49]on allofthetrustconstructs.(Foradetaileddescriptionofthetrustconstructs,referto McKnightetal.[49].)
AssessingValidityandReliability Toestablishthefactorialvalidityofourreflectiveindicators,wefollowedtheproce-
duresoutlinedinGefenandStraub[25]andusedpartialleastsquares(PLS)forour structuralequationmodeling(SEM)analysis.Followingtheseproceduresyieldedvery highconvergentvalidity.Fordiscriminantvalidity,wefirstlookedatthecorrelationof thelatentvariablescores,whichshowedverystrongdiscriminantvalidity(exceptfor item1offollowadvice,whichwasthendropped).Wenextcomparedthesquareroot oftheaveragevarianceextracted(AVE)foreachconstructtothecorrelationsamong constructs(e.g.,[66]).This,too,confirmedhighdiscriminantvalidityaftertheone- itemadjustmentinthepreviousstep.Thishighdiscriminantvalidityisnotablegiven thelargenumberofhighlyrelatedbutconceptuallydistinctfirst-ordertrustfactors. Finally,thecompositereliabilityscores(similartoCronbach’sαinthattheyareboth measuresofinternalconsistency)showedhighreliability. 2
Validating formative measures is particularly challenging because indicators in formativemeasurescanmoveinoppositedirectionsfromeachotherandcantheoreti- callycovarywithotherconstructs;thus,reliabilitymeasuresforformativemeasures aremeaningless,andtraditionalapplicationsofconvergentanddiscriminantvalidity donotapply[59].
We used a modified multitrait–multimethod approach to validate our formative constructs,asoriginallyproposedinDiamantopoulosandWinklhofer[14]andbuilt onanddemonstratedinLochetal.[44]andPetteretal.[59].Wefollowedtheemerg- ingpracticeforcheckingconvergentvalidityanddiscriminantvalidity,allowingusto
concludethatreasonablediscriminantvalidityexistswithourformativeconstructs. 3 Finally,becauseofthenatureofformativemeasures,reliabilitycheckscannotbe reasonablymade[14].
Giventhestrongreliabilityinthereflectivemeasures,andtheconvergentvalidity anddiscriminantvalidityinthereflectiveandformativemeasures,weconcludethat ourmeasurementmodelisvalidforanalysisviaPLSSEM.
CONSUMERTRUSTOFE-COMMERCEWEBSITES215
ResultsofTheoreticalModelTesting Table2summarizesthehypotheses,thepathcoefficients,andthet-valuesforeachof
thetheoreticalpathsinthemodel.Thespecificresultsarealsodepictedgraphically inFigure3.Figure4summarizestherefinedmodel.Thesecond-orderconstructsare representedwiththickerconstructborders.
Discussion SummaryofResults
B ASED ON OUR STUDY CONDITIONS , WE FOUND severalimportantrelationshipsthatsup- port our underlying theoretical model. Brand awareness positively affected brand image (H1) and initial trust beliefs (H2), brand image positively affected initial trustingbeliefs(H3),Websitequalitypositivelyaffectedinitialtrustingbeliefs(H4) andbrandimage(H5),dispositiontotrustpositivelyaffectedinstitution-basedtrust (H7),institution-basedtrustpositivelyaffectedinitialtrustingbeliefs(H8),andinitial trustingbeliefspositivelyaffectedinitialtrustingintentions(H9).Theoneprediction thatwasnotsupportedwastheproposedpositiverelationshipbetweendispositionto trustandinitialtrustingbeliefs(H6).
Contributions This study provides several contributions for researchers and practitioners. Most
importantly,weshowthatanunknownWebsitecancreateabrandingalliancewith aknownbrand(preferablyonewithahighbrandingimage)andalmostimmediately gainanincreaseintrustingbeliefsandintentionsfromWebsitevisitors.Accordingly, thisisthefirststudytoconfirmtheabilityofafull“freerider”(completelyunknown Web site) to positively participate in a branding alliance first studied by Simonin andRuth[64].ShowingthattrustcanberapidlyfosteredforanunknownWebsite throughabrandingallianceisalsoveryrelevantforpractice.Aspreviouslyshown, trustiscriticalinfacilitatingonlinetransactionsandisastrong,positivepredictorofa consumer’sintentiontopurchase,whichinturnisagoodpredictorofpurchases.Our theoryandfindingsareparticularlyusefulforstart-upcompaniesandfirmsentering newmarketsbecauseitmeanstheycancompetemoreeffectivelyintheshort-term throughbrandalliances.
Wealsoshowthataconsumer’sdispositiontotrustisnotasimportantinourcontext asotherfactors.Muchmoreimportantdeterminantsofinitialtrustingbeliefs—inorder ofhighesteffect—areWebsitequality,brandimage,institution-basedtrust,andbrand awareness.Importantly,eachoftheseconstructs,otherthaninstitution-basedtrust,is directlycontrollablebyaWebsite’sdesigner.Thedifferencesinthestrengthsofthe pathsbetweenbrandimageandbrandawarenesspointtotheimportanceofnotjust aligningwithaknownbrandbutaligningwithabrandwithahighimagebecause brandimageismoreinfluentialthanbrandawareness.
Table2.SummaryofPathCoefficientsandSignificanceLevels
LOWR
Path t -value Hypothesis
Expected
Correspondingpaths (actual)sign coefficient (df=298)
Y ET
H1 Brandawareness→brandimage
0.384 6.57*** AL. H2
0.142 2.74** H3
Brandawareness→initialtrustingbeliefs
0.274 4.90*** H4
Brandimage→initialtrustingbeliefs
0.395 7.11*** H5
Websitequality→initialtrustingbeliefs
0.333 6.24*** H6
Websitequality→brandimage
–0.029 0.52 ns H7
Dispositiontotrust→initialtrustingbeliefs
0.507 10.86*** H8
Dispositiontotrust→institution-basedtrust
0.243 5.23*** H9
Institution-basedtrust→initialtrustingbeliefs
0.807 34.69*** N/A
Initialtrustingbeliefs→initialtrustingintentions
0.354 11.38*** N/A
Dispositiontotrust—benevolenceisafirst-orderfactorofdispositiontotrust
0.380 16.35*** N/A
Dispositiontotrust—integrityisafirst-orderfactorofdispositiontotrust
0.325 11.47*** N/A
Dispositiontotrust—competenceisafirst-orderfactorofdispositiontotrust
0.343 10.46*** N/A
Dispositiontotrust—trustingstanceisafirst-orderfactorofdispositiontotrust
0.161 21.23*** N/A
Situationalnormality—generalisafirst-orderfactorofinstitution-basedtrust
0.228 24.44*** N/A
Situationalnormality—benevolenceisafirst-orderfactorofinstitution-basedtrust
0.266 27.59*** N/A
Situationalnormality—integrityisafirst-orderfactorofinstitution-basedtrust
0.251 22.12*** N/A
Situationalnormality—competenceisafirst-orderfactorofinstitution-basedtrust
0.312 22.06*** N/A
Structuralassuranceisafirst-orderfactorofinstitution-basedtrust
0.388 21.70*** N/A
Trustingintentions—dependisafirst-orderfactorofinitialtrustingintentions
0.483 24.07*** N/A
Trustingintentions—followadviceisafirst-orderfactorofinitialtrustingintentions
0.146 12.73*** N/A
Trustingintentions—giveinformationisafirst-orderfactorofinitialtrustingintentions
0.191 12.71*** N/A
Trustingintentions—makepurchaseisafirst-orderfactorofinitialtrustingintentions
0.269 26.16*** N/A
Trustingbeliefs—benevolenceisafirst-orderfactorofinitialtrustingbeliefs
0.418 48.49*** N/A
Trustingbeliefs—integrityisafirst-orderfactorofinitialtrustingbeliefs
0.413 35.43*** N/A
Trustingbeliefs—competenceisafirst-orderfactorofinitialtrustingbeliefs
0.348 6.34*** N/A
Personalinnovativeness→Websitequality
N/A
–0.176 2.46** *p<0.05;**p<0.01;***p<0.001.
Webexperience→Websitequality
N/A
CONSUMERTRUSTOFE-COMMERCEWEBSITES217
Figure3 .ModelTestingResults Notes: TB=initialtrustingbeliefs;DT=dispositiontotrust;SN=situationalnormality; SA=structuralassurance;TI=trustingintentions.Varianceexplainedisindicatedforeach
constructasR 2 .Thepathcoefficients,orbetas,areindicatedonthepathsbetweentwo constructs,alongwiththeirdirectionandsignificance.Thesecond-orderconstructsare representedwiththickerconstructborders(dispositiontotrust,institution-basedtrust,initial trustingbeliefs,andinitialtrustingintentions).Thesignificanceofthepathestimateswas
calculatedusingabootstraptechniquewith200resamples.Aswouldbeexpected,theR 2 sof thesecond-orderfactorsdidnotincludethefirst-orderfactorsthatmadeupthesecond-order factorsbecausethesewouldaccountfor100percentofthevarianceinPLS.**p<0.01; ***p<0.001.
Itisworthnotingthatinourmodel,perceivedWebsitequalityhadthelargestim- pactoninitialtrustingbeliefsbecausethismaybethefactormosteasilycontrolled byaWebsitedesigner.Thisisaparticularlyimportantcontribution,consideringthat previousrelatedresearchonthesetieshasbeenlargelyexploratory,mixed,andincon- sistentinitstheoreticalexplanations.ThecomparativeadvantageofWebsitequality inincreasinginitialtrustingbeliefsisstrong:comparingthedifferencebetweenthe Websitequalitypathtoinitialtrustingbeliefsandthebrandawarenesspathtoinitial trustingbeliefsprovidesahigheffectsizeof0.30.ThedifferencebetweentheWeb sitequalitypathtoinitialtrustingbeliefsandthebrandimagepathtoinitialtrusting beliefsprovidesamediumeffectsizeof0.17.Evenso,thestrengthofWebsitequality inourmodelislikelyunderstatedbecausebeyondthebrandtreatments,nodifferences weredesignedintheWebsites.Furthermore,itisnoteworthythatWebsitequality hadanimpactonperceivedbrandimagethatwasnearlyequaltobrandawareness impact.Thisfindingstronglysupportsourapplicationoftheassociativenetworkmodel ofmemorytobrandingallianceswithunknownWebsites.Furthermore,thisfinding
218 LOWRY ET AL.
Figure4. FinalTheoreticalModel
potentiallyexplainswhyconditionsoflow/nobrandknowledgehadstatisticallyequal perceivedbrandimageasdidthelow-imagebrandcondition.Absentanyotherbrand knowledgecues,participantslookedtotheWebsitequalityforretrievalcueswith whichtomakeassociationswithbrandimage.Hence,theonlywaytheno/lowbrand knowledgeconditionswouldhavehadlowerbrandimagewouldhavebeenthrough associationwithlow-qualityWebsites.Thisfindingcanhaveabigpracticalimpact onmarketingcampaignsthatbuildbrandawareness—indicatingthatWebsitequality needstobeconsideredasakeytoolinbuildingsuchawareness.
Toincreasethenomologicalvalidityofourmodel,weextendeditwithafullin- tegrationofMcKnightetal.’s[49]modeloftrustsothatwecouldaccountforthe complexandmultidimensionalnatureoftrustthatisoftenoverlookedine-commerce research.First,weaffirmedseveralimportantrelationshipsinourcontext:between dispositiontotrustandinstitution-basedtrust(H7),betweeninstitution-basedtrust andinitialtrustingbeliefs(H8),andbetweeninitialtrustingbeliefsandinitialtrusting intentions(H9).
Second,wealsoconfirmedandfurthervalidatedthemultidimensionalmodelof trustine-commercedevelopedbyMcKnightetal.’s[49]theorywhereoneoftheir findingsdidnotfullysupporttheirtheory—indicatingthattheirpredictionwascorrect. Webothpredictedthatinstitution-basedtrustwouldpositivelyaffectinitialtrusting beliefs.However,McKnightetal.foundnopositiveempiricallinkbetweenthetwo, whilewedid.Onekeydifferencebetweenourstudiesisthattheirtaskinvolveda legalWebsite,whereasoursfocusedonahotelreservationsite.Itcouldbethatpeople arelesslikelytotrustalegalWebsitethanahotelreservationsitebecausethelaw iscomplicated(andthusonemaybeatgreaterrisktotrustalegalWebsite),andour
CONSUMERTRUSTOFE-COMMERCEWEBSITES219
studywasbasedonsimulatedpersonalinformation.Exploratoryresearchhasshown thatthedeterminantsofandinfluencesontrustdifferaccordingtothetypeofWeb siteandconsumer[4]:ifinformationriskishigh,privacyandorderfulfillmentmust tiestronglytotrust;forinformation-intensivesites,navigationandpresentationare the greatest determinants; for high-involvement categoryWeb sites (i.e., financial servicesandcars),brandstrengthisthegreatestdeterminant.Hence,animportant theoreticalextensionthatneedsfurtherinvestigationisthedegreetowhichperceived riskisanegativemoderatoroftherelationshipbetweeninstitution-basedtrustand trustingbeliefs.Finally,weshowedthatalogo,name,orcombinationofalogoand nameweresimilarlyeffectiveincreatingaretrievalcueforLTMbrandknowledge. Ourmodelisabletoexplainthatifabrandiswell-known,itcanberetrievedbyits nameorlogo.