E-Business Essay: Analysis of E-commerce Trading and Market Models

This essay provides a comprehensive analysis of the evolving landscape of e-commerce, focusing on the significant changes in trading patterns and market models. It begins by defining e-business and contrasting it with traditional business approaches, then delves into the transformation of consumer shopping trends, industry structure, and the dynamics of competition among firms. The essay critically evaluates the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and explores social shopping patterns among consumers. Furthermore, it examines industry structure, structural analysis, value chains, and firm value chains, highlighting the role of social media marketing, including EWOM, online communities, and online advertisement, in promoting brand loyalty and purchase intention. The analysis draws on various research papers to provide insights into the impact of technological environments and virtual customer experiences on customer participation in social commerce. This essay provides a thorough understanding of how e-business has reshaped the business landscape.

Consumer behavior in social commerce: A literature review
Kem Z.K. Zhanga,b,
⁎, Morad Benyoucefb
a School of Management, University of Science and Technology of China, 96 Jinzhai Road, Hefei, Anhui 230026, China
b Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, 55 Laurier East, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1N 6N5
a b s t r a c ta r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 7 August 2015
Received in revised form 26 January 2016
Accepted 1 April 2016
Available online 7 April 2016
The emergence of social commerce has brought substantial changes to both businesses and consumers. He
understanding consumer behavior in the context of social commerce has become critical for companies tha
aim to better influence consumers and harness the power of their social ties. Given that research on this iss
is new and largely fragmented, it will be theoretically important to evaluate what has been studied and deri
meaningful insights through a structured review of the literature. In this study, we conduct a systematic rev
of social commerce studies to explicate how consumers behave on social networking sites. We classify thes
studies, discuss noteworthy theories,and identify important research methods. More importantly, we draw
upon the stimulus–organism–response model and the five-stage consumer decision-making process to prop
an integrative framework for understanding consumer behavior in this context. We believe that this framew
can provide a useful basis for future social commerce research.
© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Literature review
Social commerce
Social networking sites
Consumer behavior
Decision-making process
Stimulus–organism–response model
1. Introduction
The concept of social commerce emerged in 2005 amid the growing
commercialuse of social networking sites and many other social
media websites [15]. It ushers a new form of electronic commerce (e-
commerce) [97].Unlike traditional e-commerce where consumers
usually interact with online shopping sites separately, social commerce
involves online communities that support user interactions and user-
generated content [55]. A recent survey points out that social commerce
in the U.S. has already generated 5 billion dollars in sales, with 9 billion
expected in 2014 and 15 billion in 2015 [71].
The significance of socialcommerce has made it the subject of
various studies. For instance, prior research posits that online reviews
in social media are an important source of information that assists
consumers' decision-making [1,32]. Liang et al. [65] showed that social
support from online friends is critical in driving consumers to adopt
social commerce.Edelman [22] advocated that social media enables
consumers to engage with brands in profoundly new ways; hence, com-
panies should shift marketing strategies from attracting consumers'
awareness (pre-purchase stage) to bonding with consumers after
their purchases (post-purchase stage).
To harness the power of social commerce, it is important to study the
process and uniqueness of how consumers behave in this setting [38].
Although we are witnessing an increase in the literature on this emerg-
ing issue, current research is rather fragmented, which makes it difficult
to derive meaningful and conclusive implications from it. To this end,
the purpose of this study is to conduct an extensive review of the liter-
ature on consumer behavior in social commerce. We first address im-
portant aspects such as research contexts,theories,and methods in
this area. We then draw upon the stimulus–organism–response model
[69] and the five-stage consumer decision-making process [23] to de-
velop an integrative framework for better understanding consumer be-
havior in the context of social commerce. We argue that this framework
can provide a useful foundation for future social commerce research.
The paper is organized as follows. First, we discuss the definition and
scope of social commerce in the present research. Second, we explain
our review method of studies on consumer behavior in social
commerce. Third, we review these studies and summarize findings in
several aspects. Fourth, we propose a theoretical framework to under-
stand consumer behavior in social commerce. Finally, we discuss our
implications, opportunities for future research, as well as the limitations
of our work.
2. What is social commerce?
Social commerce is often considered as a subset of e-commerce
[16,67]. Prior research has broadly characterized it with two essential
elements: social media and commercial activities [65,104]. However,
a closer look at its definitions in the literature reveals that the social
commerce conceptis associated with many inconsistencies.For
instance, Stephen and Toubia [92] defined social commerce as a form
of Internet-based social media which enables individuals to engage in
Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108
⁎ Corresponding author at: School of Management,University of Science and
Technology of China, 96 Jinzhai Road, Hefei, Anhui 230026,China. Tel.: +86 551
63600195.
E-mail addresses: [e-mail] (K.Z.K. Zhang),
[e-mail] (M. Benyoucef).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2016.04.001
0167-9236/© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Decision Support Systems
j o u r n a lh o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / d s s

the selling and marketing of products and services in online communi-
ties and marketplaces.Such definition limits sellers to individuals,
excluding companies. Dennison et al. [21] adopted a definition provided
by IBM and explained it as the marriage of e-commerce and electronic
word-of-mouth (eWOM). Marsden and Chaney [68] conceptualized
social commerce as the selling with social media websites,such as
Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Pinterest, and YouTube (the “Big Five”),
which support user-generated content and social interaction.
The conceptualconfusion in defining social commerce,to some
extent, brings about different understandings of what social commerce
websites are.Recent research identified two major types ofsocial
commerce: (1) social networking sites that incorporate commercial
features to allow transactions and advertisements; and (2) traditional
e-commerce websites that add social tools to facilitate social interaction
and sharing [43,67].The first social commerce type is the focus of a
majority of previous studies (e.g.,[7,8,26]).In contrast,Amblee and
Bui [2] considered Amazon,a traditional e-commerce website,as
practicing a form of social commerce because it contains a large amount
of online consumer reviews.Group shopping websites were also
recognized as a form of social commerce in which people form groups
to purchase products with price advantages [54]. Indvik [45] summa-
rized seven categories of social commerce websites, including social
network-driven sales platforms (e.g., Facebook), peer recommendation
websites (e.g., Amazon), group buying websites (e.g., Groupon), peer-
to-peer sales platforms (e.g.,eBay),user-curated shopping websites
(e.g.,Lyst),social shopping websites (e.g.,Motilo), and participatory
commerce websites (e.g., Kickstarter).
A recent study by Yadav et al. [104] defines social commerce as the
“exchange-related activities that occur in,or are influenced by,an
individual's social network in computer-mediated social environments,
where the activities correspond to the need recognition, pre-purchase,
purchase, and post-purchase stages of a focal exchange” (p. 312). This
definition explicates two building blocks of the concept: (1) exchange-
related activities, which include various stages of consumers' decision-
making; and (2) computer-mediated socialenvironments,where
meaningfulpersonal connections and sustained socialinteractions
exist among network members. This definition clearly rules out
websites such as Amazon and Groupon, which have no explicit social
networks among their users.
In this study, we adopt Yadav et al.'s definition of social commerce,
and we further restrict our discussion to social networking sites to better
highlight the “social” nature of social commerce. Moreover, to obtain a
holistic view of consumer behavior,we consider various stages in
the decision-making process,instead of narrowly emphasizing the
transaction stage.
3. Literature identification and collection
We employ a systematic approach to identify relevant articles for
our literature review.We use two methods to collect academic and
peer-reviewed journal articles in this process. First, we select a number
of academic databases,including Web of Science,Business Source
Premier, Science Direct, ABI/INFORM Global (ProQuest), Emerald, and
Wiley Online Library. We search these databases using keywords like
social commerce,Facebook commerce,social shopping,and social
media marketing. Second, we check important journals to ensure that
we do not miss relevant articles. This method is consistent with Cheung
and Thadani's [10] work on reviewing the literature of eWOM commu-
nication. We conduct a similar keyword search on information systems
(IS) and e-commerce journals, such as MIS Quarterly,Information
Systems Research, Journal of Management Information Systems, Decision
Support Systems, Information & Management, and International Journal
of Electronic Commerce; as well as marketing journals like Journal of
Marketing,Journal of Marketing Research,and Journal of Consumer
Research.
We follow the conventional literature review approach to cross-
check and validate the relevance of the initial set of articles [100]. To
select relevant articles, we examine the title, abstract,or the content
of the articles manually by referring to three criteria: (1) empirical
research,(2) focusing on consumer behavior,and (3) examining the
context of social networking sites. This literature selection process allows
us to reflect on significant peer-reviewed journal articles with empirical
evidence regarding consumer behavior on social networking sites.
Finally, a total of 77 articles are collected for our literature review. As
shown in Fig.1, the number of articles about consumer behavior on
social networking sites has increased each year since 2010. The increase
suggests that this is a new research area that is increasingly attracting
the interest of academics.Note that six articles have already been
published in early 2015, and we expect that more studies are likely to
appear in the upcoming years.
Table 1 shows a list of 19 journals with more than one article, sug-
gesting that they have an interest in publishing in such area. Computers
in Human Behavior (n = 6) and Journal of Interactive Marketing (n = 5)
are the two journals with the highest numbers of published articles. In
addition, we observe that some articles appeared in social commerce-
related special issues of a few journals.These special issues include
(1) Decision SupportSystems,Volume 65, September 2014,pages
59–68: “Crowdsourcing and Social Networks Analysis”; (2) Electronic
Commerce Research and Applications, Volume 12, Issue 4, July–August
2013, pages 224–235: “SocialCommerce”; (3) Information Systems
Research, Volume 24, Issue 1, March 2013: “Social Media and Business
Transformation”; and (4) International Journal of Electronic Commerce,
Volume 16, Issue 2, 2011: “Social Commerce”. This is perhaps an indica-
tion that these journals are pioneers in showing an interest in social
commerce research. Note that not all articles in the special issues were
part of our studied sample.As mentioned earlier,we only selected
those that focus on consumer behavior on social networking sites using
empirical methods.
4. Review of the studies
To guide our review of the studies,we consider four major ques-
tions: (1) what research contexts were studied? (2) What theories
were adopted? (3) What research methods were used? And (4) what
important factors were studied to understand consumer behavior in
social commerce? These questionsare consistent with previous
literature review studies [39,91] and can help us synthesize the research
findings of various articles. We discuss the first three questions in this
section. The fourth question is addressed in the next section with the
discussion of an integrative framework.
4.1. Research contexts
While all the social commerce studies in our sample emphasize
social networking sites,a further examination reveals two different
3
8 9
20
31
6
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Fig. 1. Publication timeline of the literature.
96 K.Z.K. Zhang, M. Benyoucef / Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108

streams of studies with regards to their research contexts: focusing on
social networking sites in general (n = 37) vs.brand pages on social
networking sites (n = 40). Fig.2 depicts the publication timeline of
the two research streams.We can see that both streams have an
increasing publication trend,with relatively more recent interest in
the second stream.
Studies in the first research stream examine consumer behavior by
considering the context of social networking sites in general. Moreover,
a majority of these studies examine consumer behavior by shedding
light on information (especially eWOM) seeking [4,5,12],purchase
attitude [63,99],and purchase intention [53,75,98].This shows that
pre-purchase and purchase behaviors are often the focus, which reflects
the view that social networking sites can function as tools that stimulate
consumers to purchase. Further, consumers' perceptions and feelings
toward the websites [65], other consumers [99], and content created
by other consumers [32] are deemed to be important aspects in
influencing consumer behavior.
The second research stream pays particular attention to brand pages
on social networking sites.Such brand pages are usually created by
companies with the purposes of disseminating information, promoting
brands/products, and interacting with consumers [109]. In this setting,
it becomes important to consider factors associated with companies,
their brands, and brand pages in understanding consumer behavior.
For instance, Pentina et al. [81] examined the influence of consumers'
perceived relationships with brands on Facebook and Twitter. de Vries
et al. [19] investigated the effects of posted messages on brand pages,
which include vividness, interactivity, informational content, entertaining
content, position of the messages, and valence of comments. Labrecque
[58] considered whether the perceived interactivity,openness,and
parasocial interaction of brands can entice consumers to provide inform
tion and develop loyalty toward the brands. Overall, this research stream
mainly focuses on consumer participation [81,109], purchase intention [
70], eWOM spreading intention [6,61], and brand loyalty [24,59,110].
Thus,compared to the first stream,the second stream of studies has
placed more emphasis on purchase and especially post-purchase behav
iors. This reflects the view that social networking sites can be helpful for
branding strategies after the purchase [22]. In sum, the second researc
stream is likely to provide more specific insights for companies to under
stand the influence of their brand pages on consumer behavior.
4.2. Theories
To understand consumer behavior, prior social commerce studies
have adopted a number of theories.Table 2 depicts the theoretical
foundations for these studies. The table shows that motivation theory,
technology acceptance model, theories of reasoned action and planned
behavior, and culture-related theoreticalperspectives are mostly
adopted in the literature (at least five articles for each theoretical
perspective).
Upon further review,we note that the selected studies have put
several theoretical emphases in addressing consumer behavior in social
commerce. These emphases are detailed below.
First, there is an interest in investigating what consumers' motives,
benefits, and values are in this setting, and theories such as consumer
value theory, uses and gratifications theory, and motivation theory are
used to explain these issues. Consumer value theory states that
consumers may be able to identify functional value, emotional value,
self-oriented value, social value, and relational value while interacting
with brand pages on social networking sites [18]. Uses and gratifications
theory is adopted to explain that consumers tend to seek entertainment
information, and remuneration on brand pages [17]. Likewise, motiva-
tion theory suggests that a consumer's intention to shop and intention
to spread eWOM in the context of social commerce may be determined
by utilitarian (e.g., perceived effectiveness of using a social commerce
website) and hedonic (e.g., perceived enjoyment of using the website)
motivations [70].
Second, behavioral theories such as the theory of reasoned action
(TRA), the theory of planned behavior (TPB),and the technology
acceptance model (TAM) were also applied in a number of the studies.
Table 1
List of journals with more than one article.
Journal Studies Number
Computers in Human Behavior [60,61,63,64,82,109]6
Decision Support Systems [36,103] 2
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications[83,87,98] 3
Global Economic Review [53,78] 2
Information & Management [52,75,108] 3
Information Systems Research [26,85] 2
International Journal of Advertising [8,13] 2
International Journal of Electronic Commerce [65,81] 2
International Journal of Hospitality Management[49,62] 2
International Journal of Information Management[29,32,59] 3
International Journal of Market Research [5,31,33] 3
Journal of Business Research [7,50,107] 3
Journal of Consumer Behaviour [35,37,47] 3
Journal of Global Marketing [12,93] 2
Journal of Interactive Marketing [19,41,58,90,99] 5
Journal of Marketing Communications [27,95] 2
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services [3,18] 2
Technological Forecasting and Social Change [30,102] 2
Tourism Management [44,73] 2
Fig. 2. Publication timeline of the literature: in general vs. brand page.
Table 2
Theoretical foundations in the literature.
Theory Studies Number
Brand relationship theory [81,82] 2
Communication privacy management
theory
[87] 1
Consumer decision process theory [47,48] 2
Consumer socialization theory [99] 1
Consumer value theory [3,18,20,52] 4
Contagion theory [84] 1
Culture-related theoretical perspectives [12,27,63,75,82,95,102,105]8
Elaboration likelihood model [7] 1
Information processing theory [98] 1
Motivation theory [37,42,70,73,83,93,95] 7
Parasocial interaction theory [58] 1
Self-congruence theory [109] 1
Social capital theory [53,105,106] 3
Social cognitive theory [61] 1
Social exchange theory [110] 1
Social influence theory [57,103] 2
Social response theory [64] 1
Social support theory [30,31,65] 3
Stimulus–organism–response model [78,98,108] 3
Technology acceptance model [9,35,57,62,88] 5
Theories of reasoned action and planned
behavior
[57,88,102,105,106] 5
Trust transference theory [75] 1
Uses and gratifications theory [17,20] 2
97K.Z.K. Zhang, M. Benyoucef / Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108

TAM highlights the important roles of perceived usefulness and
perceived ease of use, whereas TRA and TPB provide a belief-attitude-
intention framework to understand individuals' behavior. Such theories
have been widely tested in the IS literature for understanding the
adoption of information technology (IT),as well as online shopping
behavior (e.g.,[25,80]).Thus, there were attempts to empirically
examine whether these theories can also be applicable in the emerging
social commerce context. For instance, Chen et al. [9] found that per-
ceived usefulness and perceived ease of use of brand pages on Facebook
can entice consumers to spread eWOM. Shin [88] adapted TAM and TPB
to investigate the behavioral antecedents of using social commerce
websites.
Third, the inherent social nature of social commerce entices
researchers to derive theoretical insights from social-related theories.
As shown in Table 2, these theories include social capital theory, social
cognitive theory, social exchange theory, social influence theory, social
response theory, and social support theory. The social capital theory
indicates that consumers may investand utilize social capital to
facilitate their social shopping behavior [53]. The social cognitive theory
explains that consumers' eWOM behavior on social networking sites
may be a function of their cognitive judgment and socialoutcome
expectation [61]. According to the social exchange theory, consumers
are found to evaluate the benefits and costs to decide whether or not
to participate in brand pages [110]. The social influence theory high-
lights the influence of social others.It is found that the frequency of
interaction with online friends and their reviews of a product can be
good measures to reflect the social influence in a consumer's product
purchase decision [103]. Meanwhile, the social response theory views
a social networking site as an independentsocial actor in which
consumers can establish socialrelationships and apply socialrules
[64]. The social support theory characterizes social support from online
friends with several dimensions (e.g., emotional support and informa-
tion support). Further, social support is found to be an important deter-
minant of consumers' social commerce intention [65].
Finally,our literature review shows that culture-related issues in
social commerce have attracted considerable attention.Research
shows that the levels of usage, participation, trust, and eWOM behavior
on social networking sites are likely to differ across cultures [12,27,102].
Culture is also found to have moderating effects on consumers' purchase
decision [75,82]. Overall, we identify several culture-related theoretical
perspectives in these studies.For instance,Hofstede's five cultural
dimensions [40], namely, individualism/collectivism,uncertainty
avoidance,masculinity/femininity, power distance,and long-/short-
term orientation, were adopted to explain cultural differences [27]. Ng
[75] contended that the individualism/collectivism and uncertainty
avoidance are the most relevant dimensions to compare behavioral dif-
ferences between East Asians (high individualism and low uncertainty
avoidance) and Latin Americans (high collectivism and high uncertainty
avoidance) on Facebook. According to Triandis [94], the individualism/
collectivism dimension can be further divided into horizontal individu-
alism, vertical individualism, horizontal collectivism, and vertical collec-
tivism. This more sophisticated classification was helpful in addressing
the differences in participation behavior [95] and eWOM communica-
tion [12] in social commerce.Xu-Priour et al. [102] considered the
dimension of polychronic/monochronic time orientation besides the
individualism/collectivism dimension.They found that consumers
from a polychronic culture (e.g.,France) are more likely to enjoy
multitasking and social interactions than those from a monochronic
culture (e.g.,China), thus, are more prone to use socialcommerce
websites. Lastly, Li [63] adopted the culture learning model to
explain socialnetworking sites as culturalproducts,which enable
newcomers (e.g.,internationalstudents and immigrants) in a host
society to shape new cultural orientations.They showed that new-
comers' attitude and purchase intention toward products with cultural
symbols are associated with their usage intensity of social networking
sites.
4.3. Research methods
Previous studies have employed a number of research methods to
provide empirical evidence with regards to consumer behavior in social
commerce. According to Hoehle et al. [39], empirical research methods
are classified as qualitative (e.g., netnographic approach and focus group
interview) if they emphasize descriptive data collection and the under-
standing of contextual and environmentalresearch phenomena.In
contrast, the quantitative methods (e.g., survey and experiment) focus
on observable and numerical data collection and the analysis of
relationships among factors in the phenomena.As shown in Fig.3,
both qualitative and quantitative methods have been adopted in the
studies we collected. Further, over 70% (n = 54) of the studies adopted
the quantitative survey method. This indicates that the survey method
dominates empirical research in social commerce studies.
Since social commerce is still a new research area, only few studies
apply qualitative methods such as narrative analysis,netnographic
approach, and focus group interview to attain exploratory understand-
ings of the phenomenon.For instance,using the narrative analysis
method, Heinonen [37] asked consumer respondents to keep a diary
to report their thoughts and information about social networking site
usage. She was able to identify 15 types of activities regarding
consumers' participation, consumption, and production behaviors. The
Fig. 3. Research methods in the literature.
98 K.Z.K. Zhang, M. Benyoucef / Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108

netnographic approach,which has the unobtrusive and naturalistic
attributes, is adapted from the ethnographic method to study commu-
nities and cultures in online settings [56]. Our review shows that this
approach was adopted to collect data by actively participating and
interacting with others on social networking sites [29,107].Their
findings provided insights about the existence and dimensions of
brand communities on these sites,as well as the motivations of
consumers' participation. The focus group interview method refers to
two similar approaches: (1) a group of individuals are interviewed
jointly to discuss topics provided by the researchers, and (2) individuals
are interviewed independently.By using these approaches,prior
research has examined consumers'shopping behavior [35],eWOM
behavior [79], and the benefits of consuming brands on social network-
ing sites [18].
In the social commerce context, the panel data method refers to the
collection of archival data on social networking sites. The data can be
qualitative (e.g., content of messages) and quantitative (e.g., number
of messages). Data may be collected, for instance, using web crawlers
developed by leveraging the application programming interfaces
(APIs) of social networking sites [26,103]. The analysis of qualitative
data may initially rely upon the content analysis approach (manual or
computerized coding) to transfer it into quantitative data [26,90].
According to Fig.3, panel data is the second most adopted research
method in social commerce studies.This method is usually used to
understand the relationship between the characteristics ofbrand
pages and consumers' participation behavior (e.g., forward, reply, like,
and comment) [8,17,19,36,86].Xu et al. [103] used this method to
examine consumers'probability of adopting a product,while Goh
et al. [26] integrated archivaldata on a Facebook brand page with
consumers'transaction data in order to examine their purchase
behavior.
Survey and experiment are two typical representatives of quantita-
tive research methods.As mentioned earlier, survey is also the most
widely adopted method in the social commerce literature. It allows for
the use of questionnaires to reach a large number of people on social
networking sites and collect many theoretically related variables.In
contrast, we find that only a few studies apply the experiment method.
This method requires the manipulation and control over variables to
design treatments.In the social commerce context,this method is
used to build experimental brand pages on social networking sites and
then examine consumers'behavior towards them [61,63,64].Note
that it may take time to develop social relationships among subjects in
this context [98] which may,to some extent,constitute a barrier to
the experimental design on these sites. Lastly, our review also identified
two studies with mixed methods. Hollebeek et al. [41] first employed
the focus group interview method to develop the measurement
instrument of consumer brand engagement on social networking sites.
Then, they tested and refined the measures through two surveys and
conducted a final survey to investigate its antecedent and conse-
quences. Labrecque [58] adopted the survey method to examine how
parasocial interaction, which delineates consumers' illusionary social
interactions with media, affects the willingness to share information
and brand loyalty. Then, they conducted two experiments to manipu-
late parasocial interaction and explore the boundary conditions
(e.g., knowledge of computer response automation) for their model.
5. An integrative framework for consumer behavior in social
commerce
Through the literature review,we are further able to identify a
number of important factors for studying consumer behavior in social
commerce. To provide a coherent picture of the roles they play in this
context, we propose an integrative framework based on the stimulus–
organism–response modeland the five-stage consumer decision-
making process. Fig. 4 depicts an overview of the framework. Details
of its theoretical background and important components and factors
are discussed below.
5.1. Theoretical background
The stimulus–organism–response (SOR) model was originally devel-
oped upon the classical stimulus–response theory. This theory explains
individuals' behaviors as learned responses to external stimuli [101].
Later, the theory was questioned and accused of oversimplifying the
causes of behaviors and not considering ones' mental states. As a signif
icant theoretical extension, Mehrabian and Russell [69] improved the
SOR model by incorporating the concept of organism between stimulus
and response. This concept was adopted to better reflect individuals'
cognitive and affective states before their response behaviors. Accordin
to the SOR model, environmental cues act as external stimuli, which can
affect individuals'internal cognitions and emotions.These internal
factors will then drive them to perform behaviors forming the
responses. In the extant literature,the SOR model has shown to be a
viable theoretical framework to address consumers' behavior in online
environments (e.g., [76,77]). As can be seen in Table 2, we found that
some recent studies adopted the SOR model to understand consumers'
social commerce intention [108] and purchase intention on social
networking sites [78,98].
The five-stage consumerdecision-making processexplains five
prominent activities in one's decision-making process: need recogni-
tion, search,evaluation,purchase,and post-purchase [23].The need
recognition stage indicates thatconsumers establish consumption
needs or become aware of certain products. The search stage refers to
consumers'information searching behaviorfor making informed
choices. The evaluation stage suggests that consumers evaluate alterna
tive products or shopping platforms to choose the best option.The
purchase stage refers to consumers'purchase behavior or related
activities to fulfill the transaction. Finally, the post-purchase stage refers
to consumers' post-purchase activities, such as recommending products
to others. IS researchers have applied this theoretical perspective to
examine the effect of online store design on consumer purchase [66],
roles of recommendation agents in e-commerce [72], and consumers'
adoption of electronic channels over traditional channels [11]. Further,
Yadav et al. [104] defined the concept of social commerce on the basis
of this perspective.They contended thatsocial commerce should
encompass all consumer activities (or stages) of the decision-making
process rather than merely transactions. Kang et al. [47,48] empirically
applied this perspective to explain that factors in the search and evalu-
ation stages (e.g., opinion seeking and attitude) can affect consumers'
intention to shop on social networking sites.
Fig. 4. Framework for consumer behavior in social commerce.
99K.Z.K. Zhang, M. Benyoucef / Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108

Clearly, the SOR model and the five-stage consumer decision-
making process carry the potential to explain consumer behavior on
social networking sites. In this study, we further elucidate consumers'
response activities in social commerce with the five stages (as shown
in Fig. 4). This theoretical framework guides us in the literature review
to bring about and understand important stimulus and organism factors
that drive each type of consumer responses (i.e.,need recognition,
search, evaluation, purchase, and post-purchase). In addition, we recog-
nize that factors within the “response” may also have interrelationships.
Consistent with prior research [22,104], we note that consumers may
not always follow each stage in sequence,and the stages may take
place in iterative or non-linear manners on social networking sites.
5.2. Factors associated with the consumer decision-making process
Table 3 depicts the response factors identified in our literature
review. According to their definitions, we refer to attention attraction
in the need recognition stage; information seeking and browsing in
the search stage; attitude in the evaluation stage; purchase behavior
and information disclosure in the purchase stage; information sharing
and brand loyalty in the post-purchase stage. Note that social commerce
intention is denoted in the purchase stage, though by definition it may
relate to consumers'search,purchase,and post-purchase activities.
This is because the concept was initially developed to highlight
consumers' intention of conducting commercial activities in the social
commerce context [65].Meanwhile, we refer to website usage and
participation in the post-purchase stage because they tend to be beyond
the scope of purchasing products.Instead,they are more related to
brand followers'interactions with a brand/company through social
networking sites.These followers are usually passionate about the
brand, thus more likely to have purchased its products before and to
have certain levelof brand loyalty.In addition, the two constructs
tend to have some conceptual connections with other post-purchase
factors like information sharing and brand loyalty (e.g., use of a social
networking site to spread eWOM about brands). A number of previous
studies also posit that website usage and participation are positively
associated with consumers' brand loyalty and eWOM spreading
behavior (e.g., [20,84,105,106,110]).
Further, we use Fig. 5 to illustrate the number of studies that
examine the factors of each decision-making stage. Note that a study
can examine two or more factors associated with different stages.
Fig. 5 clearly shows that factors associated with the post-purchase
stage are the most investigated in the social commerce literature. This
finding is consistent with Edelman's [22] assertion as well as what we
derived from Fig.2. That is, researchers have shown growing and
dominant interest in understanding how social networking sites can
help companies to influence and bond with consumers after their
purchases.
5.3. Antecedents for decision-making stages
Following our framework,we elicit the antecedents of consumer
behavior in social commerce1. These antecedents are further catego-
rized to show the various components in each decision-making stage.
Table 4 depicts the factors that affect consumers'need recognition
(i.e., attention attraction) in social commerce. Research on this issue is
rather limited,and we only identified one relevant study. We found
that content characteristics like consumer-focused content and photo-
graphs are useful stimuli to attracts consumers' attention in the context
of social commerce [14]. This finding also implies that stimulus factors
may directly affect response factors.
In Table 5, we show the stimulus and organism factors that influence
consumers to search for information (i.e.,information seeking and
browsing) on social networking sites.The stimulus factors include
content and interaction characteristics, whereas the organism factors
include personal traits, value, self-oriented,and social/relational-
oriented perceptions.Among the antecedents,research has shown
that information-related factors are important in affecting consumers'
searching activities. For instance, information availability and valence
are postulated as helpful stimuli [5,70]. Similarly, consumers' suscepti-
bility to interpersonal influence and opinion leadership are also found
to significantly affect their information seeking behavior [4].
Table 6 shows that only one study examined the influence of
stimulus factor (i.e., tie strength) in the evaluation stage. A majority of
the other studies focus on explicating various types of organism factors.
For instance, many of them show that value perceptions like hedonic,
social, and utilitarian value are likely to shape consumers' evaluation
(i.e., attitude) on social networking sites (e.g., [57,62,88]). This suggests
that consumers tend to achieve favorable evaluations if they are able to
recognize the positive values of social commerce. Besides the stimulus
and organism factors,we also found that response factors such as
information seeking and website usage are important predictors [48,
64]. This confirms that response factors in different stages may be inter-
related and not necessarily follow a linear sequence.
Compared with the need recognition, search, and evaluation stages,
the purchase and post-purchase stages attract more research attention
in the social commerce literature.We find that many studies were
interested in investigating the antecedents of consumers'purchase
Table 3
Factors associated with the consumer decision-making process.
Stage Construct Definition Studies
Need recognition Attention attraction Consumers' attention is attracted by a social networking site [14]
Search Information seeking Consumers search for information like eWOM on a social networking site[4,5,47,48]
Browsing Consumers browse a social networking site for information [70,83,102]
Evaluation Attitude The attitudinal response because of consumers' evaluation of products,
brands, or social networking sites
[1,48,57,62–64,88,99,105,106]
Purchase Purchase behavior The willingness or actual behavior of consumers' purchase behavior [3,26,27,31,32,34,35,41,47,48,50–53,57,62–
64,70,74,75,78,81–83,98,99,102,103]
Information disclosure Consumers will disclose financial information for their purchase behavior[87]
Social commerce intentionConsumers are willing to purchase products, and receive and share
shopping information on a social networking site
[30,65,108]
Post-purchase Website usage Consumers' intention, continuance intention, or actual behavior of using a
social networking site
[20,65,81–84,88,105,106]
Participation Consumers participate (e.g.,read, forward, and reply to messages) in
brand pages of a social networking site
[7,17,19,20,36,46,49,86,90,93,95,96,109,110]
Information sharing Consumers are willing to share information (e.g.,eWOM) on a social
networking site
[4,8,9,12,13,27,42,44,58,61,64,70,83,105,106,110]
Brand loyalty Consumers are loyal to a brand and willing to repurchase its products and
recommend them to others on a social networking site
[3,6,20,24,28,58–60,84,110]
1 A list of the antecedents and their definitions is available from the authors upon
request.
100 K.Z.K. Zhang, M. Benyoucef / Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108

activities (i.e.,purchase behavior,information disclosure,and social
commerce intention) on social networking sites (See Appendix A). A
number of stimulus, organism,and response factors are identified in
this stage. The stimulus factors include content, network, and interac-
tion characteristics. The organism factors include personal traits, value
perceptions,affections,self-oriented,and social/relational-oriented
perceptions. Finally, the response factors include browsing, information
seeking, attitude, information sharing, participation, and website usage.
Among the antecedents, we found that hedonic value, utilitarian value,
perceived ease of use, and trust are most widely examined given their
important roles in the purchase stage (e.g., [52,75,82,83]).
Similarly, we find that many studies shed light on the antecedents of
the post-purchase (website usage, participation, information sharing,
and brand loyalty) on social networking sites (See Appendix B). The
antecedents of this stage also share similar components with those of
the purchase stage, which implies that the two groups of studies may
have comparable theoretical insights. Meanwhile, we notice that more
factors are investigated in certain components of the post-purchase
stage,such as the component of content characteristics and social/
relational-oriented perceptions. This suggests a growing interest in the
informational and social elements ofsocial commerce.Among the
antecedents in this stage, we found that the influences of informational
content, hedonic value, social value, utilitarian value, normative
influence,trust, and consumer engagement are extensively studied
(e.g., [8,60,61,88]).
Our framework has provided a process-oriented view to understand
the antecedents of consumers' decision-making stages. We further posit
the need to consider moderating factors in the process. This is consistent
with the contingency perspective in social commerce [104]. That is, the
strength of the main antecedents may vary under different conditions
(i.e., contingency factors). Table 7 depicts the moderators we identified
in the social commerce literature. We found that a number of modera-
tors are proposed for the evaluation,purchase,and post-purchase
stages. For instance, culture is a salient factor that plays a moderating
role across the three stages [64,98].
5.4. Complete theoretical framework
Finally, we summarize the factors in each decision-making stage by
providing a detailed framework for consumer behavior in social com-
merce. Building upon Fig. 4, a holistic view of our complete theoretical
framework is depicted in Fig. 6.
6. Discussion
The purpose of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the
literature on consumer behavior in social commerce. Social commerce
has been shown to exercise a noteworthy influence on consumers'
behavior, while research on this issue is new and largely fragmented.
The definitions of social commerce are also inconsistent throughout
the extant literature. We concur with Yadav et al.'s [104] conceptualiza-
tion of social commerce, and we focus on reviewing empirical research
Fig. 5. Number of studies for each decision-making stage.
Table 4
Antecedents of the need recognition stage factor.
Category Component Construct Studies
Stimulus Content characteristics Consumer-focused content [14]
Photograph [14]
Other characteristics Credential [14]
Table 5
Antecedents of the search stage factors.
Category Component Construct Studies
Stimulus Content characteristics Customized advertisements [70]
Information availability [70]
Information valence [5]
Trend discovery [70]
Interaction characteristicsSocializing [70]
Other characteristics Adventure [70]
Authority and status [70]
Convenience [70]
Product selection [70]
Organism Personal traits Brand consciousness [48]
Brand-loyalty consciousness [48]
Confusion from overchoice [48]
Consumer susceptibility to
interpersonal influence
[4]
High quality consciousness [48]
Impulsiveness [48]
Novelty consciousness [48]
Price consciousness [48]
Recreational orientation [48]
Value perceptions Hedonic value [70,83,102]
Social value [47]
Utilitarian value [70,83]
Self-oriented perceptionsConsumer self-confidence [47]
Social/relational-oriented
perceptions
Consumer opinion leadership[4]
Normative influence [47]
Other factors Culture [102]
101K.Z.K. Zhang, M. Benyoucef / Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108

that examines all consumers' decision-making stages on social
networking sites. A total of 77 journal articles are identified through a
systematic and rigorous search in prominent academic databases and
journal outlets. The collected literature shows an increasing publication
trend in the emerging area of socialcommerce.In our review, we
categorize the studies in two groups by elucidating how they interpret
the research contexts.Further,we discuss what important theories
and methods are adopted and how they are adopted, and finally we
propose an integrative framework to understand the literature on
consumer behavior in social commerce. Our framework is built upon
the SOR model and the five-stage consumer decision-making process.
It explains that stimulus factors can affect organism factors,which
further lead to responses factors.The five decision-making stages
compose the response factors. We apply this framework to show how
different antecedents affect the various stages in socialcommerce.
This enables us to achieve a holistic understanding of consumer
behavior in this setting.
6.1. Implications
We believe that the findings of this study carry several important
implications. First, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first study
to conduct a thorough literature review on consumer behavior in social
commerce. While existing studies in this area are emerging, their find-
ings are fragmented and come with inconsistencies and ambiguities. It
is thus difficult to obtain conclusive insights regarding how social
networking sites influence consumers. In this respect, we provide an
overview of the current state of the literature and uncover the research
contexts,theories,and methods.More importantly, we propose a
theoretical framework to show and synthesize the antecedents of con-
sumers'decision-making stages. This can advance our knowledge of
how consumers behave in socialcommerce,as well as provide a
notable theoretical foundation for future research.
Second, ours is one of the very few studies that conceptualize social
commerce with the various decision-making stages. This broad view
directs us to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of social
commerce and to examine consumers'activities occurring before,
during, and after purchases in this context [104].Our findings, as
shown in Section 4.1 and Fig. 5, reveal that different research emphases
are placed on the decision-making stages, with less emphasis on the
need recognition stage and more on the post-purchase stage. This indi-
cates the significance of the post-purchase activities in social commerce.
To leverage the marketing potential of social networking sties, compa-
nies are thus advised to pay particular attention to the post-purchase
stage. In fact, a recent study further contends that companies may con-
template the shift from pre-purchase to post-purchase investments on
these sites [22].
Third, the stimulus and moderating factors identified in our integra-
tive framework are likely to help companies to better harness the power
of social commerce.The stimulus factors concentrate on content,
network and interaction characteristics. Thus, companies may consider
manipulating the factors ofthese aspects to stimulate consumers'
behavior on social networking sites. Meanwhile, the influence of
moderators, such as consumers' demographics (e.g., gender), personal
traits (e.g., price consciousness), content characteristics (e.g., content
type), and culture, suggests that the antecedent factors may vary their
impacts under different contingency conditions. On one hand, it may
help to explain the inconclusive impacts from key predictors in previous
studies. On the other hand, it informs companies on the crucial roles of
these contingency factors, which may aid them to realize when they
could effectively leverage the marketing potential of social networking
sites.
6.2. Opportunities for future research
Our literature review also enables us to highlight some opportunities
for future research. First, our review shows that a majority of the empir-
ical studies adopt the survey method (see Fig. 3). In contrast, research
Table 6
Antecedents of the evaluation stage factors.
Category Component Construct Studies
Stimulus Network characteristics Tie strength [99]
Organism Personal traits Brand consciousness [48]
Brand-loyalty consciousness [48]
Confusion from overchoice [48]
High quality consciousness [48]
Impulsiveness [48]
Novelty consciousness [48]
Price consciousness [48]
Recreational orientation [48]
Value perceptions Hedonic value [57,62,88,105,106]
Social value [57,105,106]
Utilitarian value [57,62,88]
Affections Arousal [62]
Valence [62]
Self-oriented perceptions Behavioral control [105,106]
Social/relational-oriented perceptions Altruism [57]
Market mavenism [105,106]
Normative influence [105,106]
Identification [99]
Trust [57]
Other factors Involvement [99]
Perceived ease of use [57,62]
Reputation [57]
Response Evaluation Information seeking [48]
Post-purchase Website usage [1,63,64]
Table 7
Moderators in different stages.
Stage Moderators Studies
Evaluation Content type, need for uniqueness, culture [63,64,99]
Purchase Brand-loyalty consciousness, price
consciousness, product-related risk, culture
[47,75,98]
Post-purchase Content type, gender, user expertise, interaction
frequency, involvement, retailer reputation,
service ambidexterity, culture
[7,64,75,84,109]
102 K.Z.K. Zhang, M. Benyoucef / Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108

methods such as qualitative (e.g.,focus group interview) and other
quantitative methods (e.g.,experiment) are relatively less adopted
in the literature. This suggests that diversifying research methods
in future studies may be useful to uncover more and different empirical
evidence with respect to consumer behavior on socialnetworking
sites. In addition, we observe that two prior studies adopt mixed
methods. Future research may thus consider similar approaches.
For instance,it could integrate the panel data and survey methods
to collect both objective and perceptual measures. This can minimize
common method bias and provide more rigorous and convincing
findings.
Second,this study shows that a number of theories have been
adopted to explain consumer behavior on social networking sties (See
Table 2). The purpose of many empirical studies is to test theories and
develop explanatory models. Nevertheless, future research should also
consider the importance of generating exploratory insights in social
commerce,for example,using qualitative methods.This is because
social commerce is a new and fast-evolving area,where existing
theories may be insufficient to provide accurate and complete under-
standings. In addition, given that a large quantity of panel data can be
collected on social networking sites, predictive analytics may become
a useful tool for further studies to perform exploratory data analysis
and predictive modelling.Shmueli and Koppius [89] posited that
predictive analytics is more data-driven and can further help to
generate new theory, compare existing theories, and assess the predict-
ability of a phenomenon. Thus, one possible direction for future research
is to adopt this tool to detect new behavioral patterns, identify complex
relationships between variables, and finally generate a new theory for
social commerce.Predictive models of users'participation behavior
may be developed to help companies assess users' engagement levels
after conducting marketing campaigns on social networking sites.
Third, this study utilizes the integrative framework to identify a wide
range of antecedents for each of the decision-making stages. It shows
that many of these factors are actually studied only once (see Tables 4
to 6, Appendices A and B),which indicates that the emerging social
commerce literature is rather disjointed.Therefore,future research
should allocate more effort to identify the key factors and resolve possi-
ble inconsistent effects from them.Our integrative framework is an
initial attempt to pinpoint and classify the important antecedent factors
We hope that more research can be conducted to synthesize prior
studies and provide conclusive empirical findings about the influences
and interrelations of key factors.
Fourth, our integrative framework also covers several components
that categorize different stimulus and organism antecedents. Among
them,context-specific components such as network characteristics,
interaction characteristics, and social/relational-oriented perceptions
appear to be what distinguish socialcommerce from traditionale-
commerce. Future studies should pay more attention to factors in these
components. This research effort will allow academics to delve into the
social and interactive nature of social commerce. It will further bring
new context-specific insights to the academic research and provide im-
portant practical guidelines to harness the power of social commerce.
Finally, our framework uses five decision-making stages to explore
consumers' response activities in social commerce. We find that most
of the previous studies examine only one or two stages. Future research
should be aware of such decentralized investigations and try to under-
stand the full process of consumer behavior on socialnetworking
sites. It will also be interesting to investigate when and how consumers
move from one decision-making stage to another and then to highlight
the interrelationships between different stages. In addition, Yadav et al.
[104] noted that consumers actually do not need to follow the sequence
of the five stages in social commerce. Thus, it may be useful to look into
Fig. 6. Complete theoretical framework for consumer behavior in social commerce.
103K.Z.K. Zhang, M. Benyoucef / Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108

non-linear activities such as impulse buying behavior in consumers'
decision-making process within this context.
6.3. Limitations
An important limitation of this study is that our findings are largely
subject to the pool of journal articles that meet our selection criteria.
For instance, we only consider social networking sites as representative
of social commerce websites.We collect empiricalstudies without
incorporating non-empirical ones. In addition, conference proceedings
(e.g., some with a reputation of quality) are not included in our review.
Thus, further literature review studies could enlarge the pool of articles
and elicit more insights about consumer behavior in social commerce.
Another limitation is that this study primarily focuses on consumers'
behavior. It will also be interesting to include some aspects of compa-
nies in social commerce.In this case,future studies could achieve a
more complete understanding regarding how social commerce brings
substantial influences to both consumers and companies.
6.4. Conclusion
This study provides a systematic review of consumer behavior in
social commerce.We derive insights through a discussion of the
research contexts,theories,and research methods of these studies.
Moreover,we propose an integrative framework to elicit stimulus,
organism, and response factors in consumers' decision-making process.
We believe that our literature review and theoretical framework will
contribute to the understandings of this domain and inspire more
related research in the future.
Acknowledgements
The work described in this study was supported by grants from Na-
tional Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71201149), Fundamen-
tal Research Funds for the Central Universities of China (No.
WK2040160013), Mitacs Canada (No. 310331-110199), and Natural
Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (No.210005-
110199-2001).
Appendix A. Antecedents of the purchase stage factors
Category Component Construct Studies
Stimulus Content characteristics Customized advertisements [70]
Information availability [70,74]
Information valence [26]
Informational content [26]
Personalization [108]
Trend discovery [70]
Network characteristics Homophily [78]
Network centrality [78]
Network density [78]
Tie strength [78,98,99]
Interaction characteristics Interactivity [108]
Social media marketing [50,51]
Socializing [70,108]
Other characteristics Adventure [70]
Authority and status [70]
Convenience [70,74]
Product selection [70]
Social commerce constructs [32]
Website quality [65]
Organism Personal traits Brand consciousness [48]
Brand-loyalty consciousness [48]
Confusion from overchoice [48]
High quality consciousness [48]
Impulsiveness [48]
Novelty consciousness [48]
Price consciousness [48]
Recreational orientation [48]
Value perceptions Brand equity [50]
Hedonic value [3,34,52,53,57,62,70,83,102]
Social value [47,52,57]
Utilitarian value [3,31,52,53,57,62,70,83,87]
Value equity [50]
Affections Arousal [62]
Familiarity [75]
Flow [108]
Intimacy [51,75]
Valence [62]
Self-oriented perceptions Brand engagement in self-concept [81,82]
Consumer self-confidence [47]
Knowledge creation [53]
Perceived ownership [87]
Perceived personality match [81,82]
Social/relational-oriented perceptions Altruism [57]
Identification [53,57,99]
Normative influence [47,103]
Online social connection [57]
Perceived social presence [57,108]
Perceived surveillance [87]
Relationship equity [50]
Relationship quality [30,65,81]
Social support [30,65,108]
Trust [27,31,32,35,47,51,57,75,82,102]
104 K.Z.K. Zhang, M. Benyoucef / Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108

(continued)
Category Component Construct Studies
Other factors Consumer engagement [41]
Culture [27,63,102]
Involvement [41,78,99]
Perceived diagnosticity [98]
Perceived ease of use [34,57,62,87]
Perceived linkage [87]
Perceived privacy risk [87]
Perceived relevance [87]
Privacy apathy [87]
Reputation [57]
Response Search Browsing [70,83,102]
Information seeking [47,48]
Evaluation Attitude [48,57,62]
Post-purchase Information sharing [27,35]
Participation [83]
Website usage [27,31,64]
Appendix B. Antecedents of the post-purchase stage factors
Category Component Construct Studies
Stimulus Content characteristics Argument quality [7]
Customized advertisements [70]
Entertaining content [17,19]
Information availability [70]
Informational content [8,17,19,90]
Links [86]
Photograph [86]
Position [19]
Posts attractiveness [7]
Posts popularity [7]
Time [17,36,86]
Trend discovery [70]
Valence of comments [19]
Videos [86]
Vividness [17,19]
Network characteristics Homophily [13]
Number of followers [36]
Tie strength [13]
Interaction characteristics Freedom of expression [6]
Interactivity [17,19,58]
Openness [58]
Rewards and recognition [6,17]
Socializing [70]
Other characteristics Adventure [70]
Authority and status [70]
Convenience [70]
Product selection [70]
Supplier salesperson and retailer social media usage [84]
Website quality [6,65]
Organism Personal traits Broadcasting [46]
Communicating [46]
Consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence [4]
Extraversion [46]
Neuroticism [46]
Openness to experiences [46]
Value perceptions Brand community value [6,60,93]
Co-creation value [20]
Hedonic value [3,7,20,28,42,49,70,83,88,93,105,106]
Monetary benefits [28,49,93]
Perceived benefits [24,110]
Perceived costs [9,110]
Social value [20,28,42,49,61,93,105,106]
Utilitarian value [3,7,9,20,49,70,83,88,93]
Affections Brand love [9,93]
Brand page experience [9]
Emotional attachment [44]
Satisfaction [24]
Self-oriented perceptions Behavioral control [105,106]
Brand engagement in self-concept [81,82]
Brand use [60]
(continued on next page)
105K.Z.K. Zhang, M. Benyoucef / Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108

(continued)
Category Component Construct Studies
Organism Selfriented perceptions Community engagement self-efficacy [61]
Perceived personality match [81,82]
Self-congruence [20,109]
Self-construal [61]
Social media dependence [95]
Social/relational-oriented perceptions Commitment [109,110]
Consumer opinion leadership [4]
Identification [95]
Impression management [60]
Informational influence [13]
Market mavenism [105,106]
Normative influence [13,88,105,106]
Obligation to society [60]
Parasocial interaction [58,95]
Partner quality [109]
Relationship quality [44,65,81]
Shared consciousness [60]
Shared rituals and traditions [60]
Social networking [60]
Social support [42,65,88]
Trust [13,24,60,82,88,109]
Other factors Consumer engagement [6,20,28,60]
Culture [12,27,95]
Involvement [20]
Perceived ease of use [9,93]
Perceived privacy risk [96]
Response Search Browsing [70,83]
Evaluation Attitude [88,105,106]
References
[1] E. Akar, B. Topçu,An examination of the factors influencing consumers'atti-
tudes toward social media marketing, Journal of Internet Commerce 10
(2011) 35–67.
[2] N. Amblee, T. Bui, Harnessing the influence of social proof in online shopping: the
effect of electronic word of mouth on sales of digital microproducts, International
Journal of Electronic Commerce 16 (2011) 91–114.
[3] K.C. Anderson,D.K.Knight,S. Pookulangara,B. Josiam,Influence of hedonic and
utilitarian motivations on retailer loyalty and purchase intention: a Facebook
perspective, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 21 (2014) 773–779.
[4] A. Bilgihan, C. Peng, J. Kandampully, Generation Y's dining information seeking and
sharing behavior on social networking sites, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management 26 (2014) 349–366.
[5] F. Bronner, R. de Hoog, Social media and consumer choice, International Journal of
Market Research 56 (2014) 51–71.
[6] T.K.H.Chan,X. Zheng,C.M.K.Cheung,M.K.O.Lee,Z.W.Y.Lee,Antecedents and
consequences of customer engagement in online brand communities,Journal of
Marketing Analytics 2 (2014) 81–97.
[7] Y.-T. Chang, H. Yu, H.-P. Lu, Persuasive messages, popularity cohesion, and message
diffusion in social media marketing,Journal of Business Research 68 (2015)
777–782.
[8] P. Chatterjee, Drivers of new product recommending and referral behaviour on so-
cial network sites, International Journal of Advertising 30 (2011) 77–101.
[9] H. Chen, A. Papazafeiropoulou, T.-K. Chen, Y. Duan, H.-W. Liu, Exploring the com-
mercial value of social networks, Journal of Enterprise Information Management
27 (2014) 576–598.
[10] C.M.K. Cheung, D.R. Thadani, The impact of electronic word-of-mouth communica-
tion: a literature analysis and integrative model,Decision Support Systems 54
(2012) 461–470.
[11] V. Choudhury, E. Karahanna, The relative advantage of electronic channels: a mul-
tidimensional view, MIS Quarterly 32 (2008) 179–200.
[12] S.-C. Chu, S.M. Choi, Electronic word-of-mouth in social networking sites: a cross-
cultural study of the united states and china, Journal of Global Marketing 24 (2011)
263–281.
[13] S.-C.Chu,Y. Kim,Determinants of consumer engagement in electronic word-of-
mouth (eWOM) in social networking sites,International Journal of Advertising
30 (2011) 47–75.
[14] T. Cox,J.H. Park, Facebook marketing in contemporary orthodontic practice: a
consumer report,Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists 3 (2014)
e43–e47.
[15] R.G. Curty, P. Zhang, Social commerce: looking back and forward, Proceedings
of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 48 (2011)
1–10.
[16] R.G. Curty, P. Zhang, Website features that gave rise to social commerce: a his-
torical analysis,Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 12 (2013)
260–279.
[17] I.P.Cvijikj,F. Michahelles,Online engagement factors on Facebook brand pages,
Social Network Analysis and Mining 3 (2013) 843–861.
[18] R. Davis, I. Piven, M. Breazeale, Conceptualizing the brand in social media commu-
nity: the five sources model,Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 21
(2014) 468–481.
[19] L. de Vries, S. Gensler, P.S.H. Leeflang, Popularity of brand posts on brand fan pages:
an investigation of the effects of social media marketing,Journal of Interactive
Marketing 26 (2012) 83–91.
[20] N.J. De Vries, J. Carlson, Examining the drivers and brand performance implications
of customer engagement with brands in the social media environment, Journal of
Brand Management 21 (2014) 495–515.
[21] G. Dennison,S. Bourdage-Braun,M. Chetuparambil,Social Commerce Defined,
White Paper No. 23747, IBM, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2009.
[22] D.C. Edelman, Branding in the digital age: you're spending your money in all the
wrong places, Harvard Business Review 88 (2010) 62–69.
[23] J.F. Engel, D.T. Kollat, Blackwell, Consumer Behavior, Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
New York, 1973.
[24] A.M. Gamboa, H.M. Gonçalves, Customer loyalty through social networks: lessons
from Zara on Facebook, Business Horizons 57 (2014) 709–717.
[25] D. Gefen,D.W. Straub,Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail:
an extension to the technology acceptance model,MIS Quarterly 21 (1997)
389–400.
[26] K.-Y. Goh, C.-S. Heng, Z. Lin, Social media brand community and consumer behav-
ior: quantifying the relative impact of user- and marketer-generated content,
Information Systems Research 24 (2013) 88-V.
[27] K. Goodrich, M. de Mooij, How ‘social’ are social media? A cross-cultural compari-
son of online and offline purchase decision influences,Journal of Marketing
Communications 20 (2014) 103.
[28] J. Gummerus, V. Liljander, E. Weman, M. Pihlström, Customer engagement in a
Facebook brand community, Management Research Review 35 (2012)
857–877.
[29] M.R. Habibi, M. Laroche,M.-O. Richard, Brand communities based in social
media: how unique are they? Evidence from two exemplary brand com-
munities, International Journal of Information Management 34 (2014)
123–132.
[30] M.N. Hajli, The role of social support on relationship quality and social commerce,
Technological Forecasting and Social Change 87 (2014) 17–27.
[31] M.N. Hajli, A study of the impact of social media on consumers,International
Journal of Market Research 56 (2014) 387–404.
[32] N. Hajli, Social commerce constructs and consumer's intention to buy, International
Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 183–191.
[33] N. Hajli, L. Xiaolin, M. Featherman, W. Yichuan, Social word of mouth: how trust
develops in the market,InternationalJournal of Market Research 56 (2014)
673–689.
[34] B. Han, I play, I pay? An investigation of the user's willingness to pay on hedonic
social network sites,InternationalJournal of Virtual Communities and Social
Networking 4 (2012) 19–31.
[35] L. Harris, C.Dennis, Engaging customers on Facebook: challenges for e-retailers,
Journal of Consumer Behaviour 10 (2011) 338–346.
[36] A. Hassan Zadeh,R. Sharda,Modeling brand post popularity dynamics in online
social networks, Decision Support Systems 65 (2014) 59–68.
106 K.Z.K. Zhang, M. Benyoucef / Decision Support Systems 86 (2016) 95–108