Cultural Influence On Consumers' Usage of Social Networks and Its' Impact On Online Purchase Intentions

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services
Volume 18, Issue 4, July 2011, Pages 348–354
Cultural influence on consumers' usage of

social networks and its' impact on online
purchase intentions
 Sanjukta Pookulangara ,
,
 Kristian Koesler
 School of Merchandising and Hospitality Management, University of North Texas, 1155

Union Circle, #311100, Denton, TX 76203-5017, USA
Abstract
Information technology has created an innovative way in which people communicate and
interact. Particularly, social networking websites have become a popular virtual meeting place
for consumers to converge and share information. Social networks allow consumers to
voluntarily post personal information, upload photographs, send and receive messages, join
groups, and blog at their leisure. Consumers now have the means to communicate their opinions
about products and companies to other consumers “like themselves” at a critical point in the
sales cycle—the beginning.
Retailers have a lot to gain by utilizing and harnessing the power of social networking to
enhance their overall marketing strategy. Social networking provides the opportunity to learn
about their consumers' needs, and then respond proactively and offers creative and effective
ways to obtain insights not previously available. Additionally, social networking has moved
from the fringes, become more mainstream and started influencing culture. Even though cross-
cultural differences may exist and have an impact on the way people use social networking, at
the end of the day it is all about being connected to each other and sharing information. It is
imperative for retailers to incorporate social networking in their marketing strategy, as in today's
business having social networking as a part of the business model is the rule rather than the
exception. This conceptual paper puts forth a research model using Hofstede's cultural
dimensions and Technology Acceptance Model 3 to examine the cultural influence on social
networking and its influence on purchase intention.
Keywords
 Social networking;
 Culture;
 TAM3
1. Introduction
Consumers today are increasingly utilizing technology as an effective tool in their shopping
experience. The popularity of Web 2.0 has helped in the growth and public popularity of social
networks and has created a new world of collaboration and communication. Shopping has
always been a social experience and social networking allows consumers to interact with
individuals—many of whom are likely strangers. Social networks have not only transformed the
research and purchase consideration phase, but it also provides shoppers a platform to advocate
for the products and stores they love. Advocacy has always existed, but social networking has
made this stage even more critical, amplifying the size of the audience reached (Swedowsky,
2009).
The internet has become one of the most important communication channels in the world and
growing internet usage is motivating some changes in the consumer purchasing process (Casalo
et al., 2007). Consumers are increasingly turning to social networks in order to get information
on which to base their decisions (Kozinets, 2002). They are using several online formats (e.g.,
blogs, podcasts, social networks, bulletin boards, and wikis) to share ideas about a given product,
service, or brand and contact other consumers, who are seen as more objective information
sources (Kozinets, 2002). This consumer-generated-content refers to online content that is
produced by people, who were hitherto assumed to be only users or consumers of online content
(Dwyer, 2007). The consumer-generated-media is defined as any positive or negative statement
about a product or service made by potential, actual, or former customers, which is available to a
multitude of people and institutions via the Internet (Stauss, 2000).
The impact of social networks is increasingly pervasive, with activities ranging from the
economic (e.g., shopping) and marketing (e.g., brand building) to the social (e.g., MySpace) and
educational (e.g., distance education) (Teo et al., 2003). The otherwise fleeting word-of-mouth
targeted to one or a few friends has been transformed into enduring messages visible to the entire
world (Duan et al., 2008). Social networks allow organizations to track customer sentiment,
customer service problems and dissatisfaction in their customer base. There is a greater sense of
urgency for retailers to integrate this new emerging medium in their marketing plan and create a
social network based strategy that is true to the brand and allows the company to control the
service experience for their customers.
Retailers are utilizing the technology available today to sell their products or services over the
Internet, respond to customer questions, offer additional products and services based on previous
purchases, and evaluate customers' satisfaction with their offerings—all without dealing with the
customer in person (Kasim and Ismail, 2009). However, it is important to note that social
networks is not a panacea and retailers should treat it as a catalyst for fresh thinking on how
companies can improve service in the digital age (Swartz, 2009). Social networks have put
power in the consumers' hands and forces companies to deliver on their promises. The use of
social networking by retailers to shape their service strategy is still in its nascence and needs to
be explored further especially since alignment of social networking strategy and service strategy
is crucial to the success of their business.
In the same vein, consumers' usage of social networks for information, brand recognition, and
opinions about brand and/or retailers are influenced by their cultural background. Research has
indicated that consumers differ in their service quality expectation based on their culture
(Doonthu and Yoo, 1998). In general, consumers' cultural values affect their expectations and
perceptions of products or services, and therefore, their purchase choices and buying behavior
(Kueh and Voon, 2007). Using deductive knowledge, it can be stated that culture will also
influence usage of social networks. Social networking has given rise to the “culture of sharing”
with individuals providing input on product and services for everyone to see. Given that culture
may impact the way people behave and interact, it is imperative to examine cultures' influence in
social networking websites where much of the information is usually user generated. Little or no
work has been undertaken to examine cultural influence on social networking which is
increasingly used by consumers for sharing their experiences both good and bad.
Usage of social networking is increasing at a tremendous speed, and it is influencing how people
share knowledge across the globe. There is a lack of information on how this new media coupled
with its international appeal is influencing purchase behavior and needs to be examined. Thus,
this paper puts forth a conceptual model that utilizes Hofstede, 1980 and Hofstede, 2001 and
Venkatesh and Bala's (2008) Technology Acceptance Model 3(TAM3). Hofstede's Cultural
Dimensions are used as a guide for the adapted research model because the dimensions help to
explain elements of ethos within cultures. TAM3 is used as a guide for the adapted research
model because it helps to establish the key factors in which consumers accept social networking.
The remainder of this article is organized as follows. The first section provides relevant
information related to previous studies. Then, the model is developed in two stages. First, the
adapted TAM3 is presented, which is the core model. In the second stage, culture is introduced
and the new conceptual model is presented that can be adopted to examine both the influence of
technology acceptance of social networking as well as the influence of culture on the variable in
the study. Finally, the article concludes by re-affirming the importance of social networks on the
retail landscape and its' emerging importance in the marketing mix.
2. Related literature
Internet and virtual communities have transformed consumers, societies, and corporations with
wide spread access to information, better social networking and enhanced communication
abilities (Kucuk and Krishnamurthy, 2007). A recent study of Deloitte Touché USA revealed
that 62% of US consumers read consumer generated online reviews and 98% of them find these
reviews reliable enough; 80% of these consumers said that reading these reviews has affected
their buying intentions (Industry statistics, n.d.). Consumers have also started utilizing social
networks increasingly to learn more about brands as well as visit retail websites. For example,
the active users on Facebook, who on average spend 15 h on the site per week contributes more
than 3% of all traffic to the top retail sites online, with almost 25% of all the users posting links
to other companies, products or services (Mahoney, 2009). Another study by Jansen et al. (2009)
found that 19% of the Twitter users mention an organization or product brand in some way in
their “tweets” with about 20% of all microblogs mentioning a brand, expressing a sentiment or
opinion concerning that company, product, or service.
Retailers are also pushing forward with inclusion of social networking in their marketing mix
with 40% of e-retailers maintaining a social network page and 59% of top US retailers having a
“fan page” on Facebook (Social-Network-Driven, 2009). According to Internet Retailer large
majorities of the top 100 companies had a profile on Facebook (79%), Twitter (69%) or both
(59%) (What's in a Retail email?, 2009). Thus, it can be inferred that use of social networking for
shopping or “social shopping” is transforming the retail industry especially e-retail, enabled by
consumer technology, customer reviews and referrals, mobile capabilities and social networking
sites (Social-Network-Driven, 2009).
Previous studies have focused on electronic recommendation agents (Gershoff et al., 2003,
Häubl and Murray, 2003, Häubl and Trifts, 2003 and Swaminathan, 2003), brand communities
(McAlexander et al., 2002), and on companies' usage of online consumer conversations to
extract marketing knowledge (Sawhney et al., 2005). Studies have also examined the effect of
social influence on consumers' purchase decisions across a variety of contexts, (Argo et al.,
2006, Argo et al., 2008, Bell and Song, 2007, Manski, 1993 and Manski, 2000) as well as peer
influence (Iyengar et al., 2008). The impact of technology on purchase intention has also been
examined, including technical specifications of an online store (Zhou et al., 2007), website
quality (Zhang and von Dran, 2002), intention to use, and ease of use (Ha and Stoel, 2009).
Social search has also been examined with social interactions often used as the first stage of
search intention to use (Evans and Chi, 2009), and respondents preferring social sites over search
engines for opinion and recommendation questions (Morris et al., 2010); however, there is
relatively little theoretical and empirical work available in adaption of new technology such as
social networking and how this influences purchase behavior.
3. Culture and Social Networks

Technology is, to a considerable extent, socially and culturally constructed (Schwarz and
Thompson, 1990) and cannot be separated from human beings (Hendriks and Zouridis, 1999).
Culture influences lifestyle, and lifestyle influences the way individuals communicate and
interact with new media technologies (Brandtzæg, 2010). Online social networks have become a
cultural phenomenon. Social networks, such as Facebook and Myspace have witnessed a rapid
growth in their membership, and with the increase in popularity of social networking websites, it
is safe to say that the world is becoming “smaller” and people are now inter-connected more than
ever.
The social aspect of shopping has been ingrained in consumer culture for a long time with
shopping seen as an outlet to socialize. Asking someone where she got that great outfit, hearing
about the latest sale from a friend or socializing at the mall are all integral parts of consumer
culture. Social networking has enabled consumers to utilize technology to “social shop” online
seamlessly. With the increased usage of social networks, it is important to understand the
influence of culture on the usage of social networking especially with the wide spread popularity
of this technology. Facebook's introduction of natural language interfaces in several markets has
helped propel the site to 153% growth, with an overall usage of social media growing to 25%
worldwide during 2008 (Social Networking Explodes, 2008). Additionally, Nielsen Global
Online Consumer Survey (Global Advertising, 2009) found that recommendations from personal
acquaintances or opinions posted by consumers online are the most trusted forms of advertising
worldwide. Culturally, every region of the world is different; hence it is important to understand
whether social networks has homogenized culture and created consumers who think alike and
behave in a similar fashion.
Culture has been shown to affect marketing, including advertising, marketing strategies and
buying habits (Green, 1999, Grier and Brumbaugh, 1999, Simester et al., 2000, Taylor and
Miracle, 1996 and Ueltschy and Ryans, 1997), but relatively little theoretical and empirical work
is available in a cross-cultural adaption of emerging technology of social networking. Culture as
a predictor for online purchase has resulted in mixed findings regarding its impact on online
purchase behavior (Kim et al., 2009). While some studies recommending online stores to adapt
their atmospherics to the nuances of a given culture (Chau et al., 2002). Cole et al. (2000) felt
cultural differences do not affect online retailers' ability to attract and retain customers, citing
that established online stores such as Amazon are globally successful using a standardized
customer interface. Culture and lifestyle deeply influences behavior and with a greater usage of
social networking by individuals it is soon becoming the lifestyle of choice across generations
and cultures and needs to be examined more closely.
Regardless of whether the retailers use cultural specific or global approach in their marketing it
is urgent that they recognize the more pressing issue of incorporating social network in their
infrastructure. Social media usage has fundamentally altered the consumer landscape, and for
brands to remain relevant in this environment, they will need to adapt to both emerging
technologies and shifting consumer behavior without delay (Feed, 2008). Hence, the majority of
online effort by the retailers should be concentrated on reaching shoppers where they are already
congregating by participating and encouraging conversations through third-party tools such as
social networks (Swedowsky, 2009). In examining the extent to which social networks influence
consumers' involvement and eventually their purchase intention, this conceptual paper proposes
examining the cultural influence on consumer intention of using social networking websites and
its impact on purchase intention by using an adapted Technology Acceptance Model3 (TAM3)
(Venkatesh and Bala, 2008) .
4. Technology acceptance Model 3 (TAM3)

Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) is one of most widely used models to explain users'
behavioral intention to use a technological innovation. By treating social networking as a
technology system and the consumer using the social networking websites as a computer user,
we can apply TAM and test how well it predicts user intention to use the technology, i.e., the
social networking sites. TAM, adapted from the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) (Fishbein
and Ajzen, 1975) and originally proposed by Davis (1986), assumes that an individual's
information systems acceptance is determined by two major variables: (1) Perceived Usefulness
(PU) and (2) Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU). TAM3 (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008) is an integrated
model of technology acceptance that combines TAM2 (Venkatesh and Davis, 2000) and the
model of the determinants of perceived ease of use (Venkatesh, 2000).
Venkatesh and Davis (2000) proposed an extension of TAM – TAM2 – by identifying and
theorizing about the general determinants of perceived usefulness – that is, subjective norm,
image, job relevance, output quality, result demonstrability, and perceived ease of use – and two
moderators—that is, experience and voluntariness. TAM3 emphasizes the unique role and
processes related to perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use and theorizes that the
determinants of perceived usefulness will not influence perceived ease of use and vice versa
(Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).
4.1. Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) and Perceived Usefulness (PU)
TAM posits that consumers' intention to use a new technology like social networking is affected
by two beliefs: (1) Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) and (2) Perceived Usefulness (PU). The
former concerns “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would
enhance his or her job performance” (Davis, 1989); while the latter reflects the degree to which a
person believes that using a particular system would be free of effort (Davis, 1989). In our
model, PEOU and PU are examined with relation to using social networks by consumers. The
model suggests that PU will be influenced by perceived ease of use because, other things being
equal, the easier a technology is to use, the more useful it can be (Venkatesh, 2000) In general
PEOU has a significant positive influence on intention (Lee et al., 2003). PU is a strong predictor
of behavioral intention (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008) which in this study is the intention to use
social networks for online shopping.
4.2. Subjective norm
Subjective norm suggests that behavior is instigated by one's desire to act as important referent
others (e.g., friends, family, or society in general) think one should act, or as these others
actually act (Bearden et al., 1989). In other words, subjective norms are the perceived social
pressures an individual faces when deciding whether to behave in a certain way. Subjective norm
is included as a direct determinant of behavioral intention in TRA (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975)
and the subsequent theory of planned behavior (TBP) (Ajzen, 1991). The rationale for a direct
effect of subjective norm on intention is that people may choose to perform a behavior to comply
with important referents even if they are not themselves favorable toward the behavior or its
consequences (Venkatesh and Davis, 2000). Subjective norm has been found to have a positive
link with perceived usefulness (Venkatesh and Davis, 2000). Additionally, the direct influence of
subjective norm on intention has yielded mixed results with Mathieson (1991) finding no
significant effect of subjective norm on intention, whereas Taylor and Todd (1995) did find a
significant effect. It has been suggested that when subjective norms positively influence intention
in the early stages of implementation of new technology (Taylor and Todd, 1995) and as the use
of social networks for online shopping is relatively new we will assume for that subjective norms
will positively influence intention.
4.3. Social search
Social search can be defined as the process of finding information online with the assistance of
social resources (e.g., friends and unknown persons) online for assistance (Morris et al., 2010).
This kind of search may also involve conducting a search over an existing database of content
previously provided by other users, such as searching over the collection of public opinion of
websites such as amazon.com or the micro-blogging site Twitter. Social search is used
increasingly by individuals to answer many type of questions. Additionally information
generated by social networks impact purchase intention is a positive manner (Lim and Dubinsky,
2005). Thus, we suggest that consumers will use social search to learn more about brands and/or
product via social networking websites and hence their perceived usefulness for social networks
as well as intention to use social network will be influence by social search.
4.4. Self-efficacy
Self-efficacy can be defined as individual judgments of a person's capabilities to perform a

behavior. The stronger the perceived self-efficacy, the more active the efforts (Bandura, 1977).
Efficacy in dealing with one's environment is not a fixed act or simply a matter of knowing what
to do; rather, it involves a generative capability in which component cognitive, social, and
behavioral skills must be organized into integrated courses of action to serve innumerable
purposes (Bandura, 1982). Applied to using social networks, self-efficacy refers to consumers'
judgments of their own capabilities to participate in social networks and will impact their
perceived ease of use. Previous research has indicated the relationship between self-efficacy and
PEOU is positive (Venkatesh, 2000 and Davis and Venkatesh, 2004) and hence we propose.
4.5. Intention to use social networks and purchase intention
A survey conducted by American Marketing Association indicated 47% of the consumers would
visit social networking sites to search for and discuss holiday gift ideas, and 29% said they
would buy products there (Horovitz, 2006). Social networks utilizing social shopping
applications have enormous potential to transform the apparel retail landscape. Social networks
allow consumers to embrace the inherent social nature of shopping by not only providing
relevant information via postings online but go beyond the traditional realm by satisfying much
more hedonic needs: the need for approval from peers, the desire for self expression, and the
desire for entertainment (Cohn and Park, 2007). Individuals adopt innovations with mainly
private personal, individual consequences and, whether an individual considers an innovation for
adoption is strongly determined by compatibility between the characteristics of an innovation
and the needs of the individual (Valente and Rogers, 1995). In today's connected world it would
be safe to assume that social networks are an important technology innovation that directly
impact consumers and eventually will impact their perception with regards to purchasing
intention online.
5. Culture and TAM3

Culture is a conceptually complex idea that has defied a comprehensive and agreed-on definition
(Lam et al., 2009). Hofstede, 1980 and Hofstede, 2001 focused on the cultural dimensions of
individualism, power distance, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation.
Individualism is defined as the degree to which a society emphasizes the role of the individual.
Power distance is the degree to which the less powerful members of organizations accept that
power is distributed unequally. Masculinity is the degree to which a society emphasizes tradition
masculine values as opposed to feminine values. Uncertainty avoidance is the extent to which
people feel threatened by unstructured and ambiguity. Lastly, long term orientation is defined as
the extent to which a society exhibits a pragmatic, future-oriented perspective rather than a
conventional historic or short-term perspective (Hofstede, 2001). Individualism, uncertainty
avoidance, and long term avoidance are the three dimensions of culture that will be included in
this study.
Individualistic societies indicate looser bonds between the members, and hence, it is anticipated
that the social interactions among the members of the society will not be strong, which could
lessen the importance of influence of referents. On the other hand, in collectivistic cultures
people for stronger bonds and hence it could be inferred that these individuals will be highly
influenced by other members of the society.
Societies that are high in uncertainty avoidance continuously feel the inherent uncertainty in life
while societies low in uncertainty avoidance more easily accept uncertainty (Stremersch and
Tellis, 2004 and Yaveroglu and Donthu, 2002). Additionally, uncertainty avoidance is related to
customers' risk perception (Jarvenpaa and Tractinsky, 1999) and thus we can infer that
depending on their level of uncertainty avoidance consumers will react differently to towards
social networking.
Individuals' perceptions can also differ based on orientation with individuals in short-term
orientation cultures expect to see quick outcomes while individuals in long-term orientation
cultures prefer long-term goals. Thus, individuals in short-term orientation cultures experience
materialist consumption pressures (i.e. keeping up with trends such as social networking)
(Dwyer et al., 2005) and adopt new technology rapidly.
Subjective norm is not only influence by individual level differences but also by cultural and
societal value and norms (Hofstede, 2001 and Triandis, 1989). Since cultural norms are a
primary influence on marketing perceptions and consumption behavior (Winsted,
1997 and Furrer et al., 2000), and any approach to marketing that does not account for the
influence of culture on subjective norms is lacking foresight. Finally, self-efficacy is the
confidence one has in their own abilities; however, ability is only as good as its execution
(Bandura, 2007). Bandura (1986) suggested that self-efficacy is, in part, socially constructed and
that such construction may differ as a function of national culture. Just as our culture teaches us
what ideals to hold and what beliefs to endorse (Rokeach, 1973), it plays a role in how we
construct our self-efficacy.
5.1. Moderating effects of culture
Srite and Karahanna's (2006) study tested a model in which Hofstede's four main cultural
dimensions moderated the relationships between PU and PEOU. The result of the study found
that only masculinity—femininity dimension moderated the relationship between PEOU and
intention. Additionally, Karahanna et al.'s (2005) study suggested that culture can moderate the
relationship between subjective norm and the behavioral intention.
Fig. 1 depicts the research model and the hypotheses based on the above information have been
presented in Table 1.
Fig. 1.
Explaining online purchase intention using TAM3 and culture.
Figure options
Table 1.
Summary of hypotheses.
P1a PU will be positively influenced by PEOU.

P1b Intention to use social networks will be positively influenced by PEOU.
P2 Intention to use social networks will be positively influence by PU.
P3a PU will be positively influence by subjective norms.
P3b Intention to use social networks will be positively influenced by subjective norms.
H4a PU will be positively influence by social search.
H4b Intention to use social networks will be positively influenced by social search.
Perceived ease of use will be positively influenced by self-efficacy of using social
P5
networks.
Subjective norm will be influenced differently by members of individualistic and
P6a1
collectivistic cultures.
Subjective norm will be influenced differently by members of low uncertainty
P6a2
avoidance and high uncertainty avoidance cultures.
Subjective norm will be influenced differently by members of short term orientation
P6a3
and long term orientation cultures.
Social search will be influenced differently by members of individualistic and
P6b1
Social Search will be influenced differently by members of low uncertainty
P6b2
Social Search will be influenced differently by members of short term orientation
P6b3
and long term orientation cultures.
Self-efficacy will be influenced differently by members of individualistic and
P6c1
Self-efficacy will be influenced differently by members of low uncertainty
P6c2
Self-efficacy will be influenced differently by members of short term orientation and
P6c3
long term orientation cultures.
The relationship between subjective norm and intention to use social networks for
P6d1
online shopping will be moderated by individualism/collectivism.
P6d2
online shopping will be moderated by uncertainty avoidance.
P6d3
online shopping will be moderated by orientation.
The relationship between PEOU and intention to use social networks for online
P6e1
shopping will be moderated by individualism/collectivism.
P6e2:
shopping will be moderated by uncertainty avoidance.
P6e2
shopping will be moderated by orientation.
P7 : Intention to use social networks will positively influence online purchase intention.
Table options
6. Study Implications
Social networking is bringing changes to communication patterns and interpersonal relationships
(Byrne, 2007, Hargittai, 2007 and Humphreys, 2007). Social networking is a recent phenomenon
and its proliferation and growing cultural impact is confirmation of the growing influence of
technology on the consumer decision process. Social networking allows organizations to engage
in timely and direct end-consumer contact at relatively low cost and higher levels of efficiency,
making it a very attractive alternative to the more traditional communication tools (OECD,
2007). Culture influences how people think and perceive an event and social networking is a
massive convergence of culture, giving new meaning to basic cultural terms as “knowledge,”
“wisdom,” “authority,” “trust” and “social transmission of meaning” (Maj and Derda-
Nowakowski, 2009). Social networking has allowed the evolution of new culture where it is no
longer shaped just by individual values and ideologies but also by new rituals and
communication tools in the social space of Web 2.0.
According to eMarketer, the number of people creating content online will rise from 88.8 million
in 2009 to 114.5 million in 2013 (The Future of User-Generated Content, 2010). Consumers via
social networks are exerting an increasingly profound influence over culture and economy, with
various industries transforming the way they do business. Retail industry is a prime example of
this phenomenon with over 81% of people using consumer reviews in their purchase decisions
(Leggatt, 2009). Social networks are providing retailers with an opportunity to reach a new
variety of consumers. Information generated by consumers in a social network platform is a
considerable added value for other users and lack of such information on a retailer's website
would cause them to seek information, and possibly products, elsewhere (Vreeland, 2010). Thus,
it can be clearly stated that not incorporating social networks as a part of the marketing mix is
not only poor customer service, but also a surefire way to lose consumers.
Culture has not been given its due when examining impact on new technology. Successful
marketers are increasingly recognizing culture as the most powerful determinant of consumer
attitudes, lifestyles, and behaviors (Cleveland and Chang, 2009). Additionally, retailers must
address the possibility of behavioral heterogeneity and homogeneity within and across countries
and cultures (Broderick et al., 2007, Tung, 2008 and Yavas et al., 1992). Cultural groups and
social phenomenon such as usage of social networks across countries are subject to continued
influence by global culture which reshapes individuals' ‘personal’ cultures thereby strengthening
the validity of horizontal global segments (Eckhardt and Houston, 2007, Kjeldgaard and
Askegaard, 2006 and Malhotra et al., 1996). Utilizing a study that incorporates culture as both a
predictor as well as a mediator variable to new technology acceptance will add crucial new
information and theory to this emerging area of research. Retailers must listen to and engage
their customers through social networks by participating and encouraging conversations. The end
result will improve customer service and will help turn loyal customers into passionate
advocates.
References
1.
o Ajzen, 1991
o I. Ajzen
o The theory of planned behavior
o Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2) (1991), pp. 179–
211
o Article
PDF (2237 K)
View Record in Scopus
| Cited By in Scopus (55)
2.
o Argo et al., 2006
o J.J. Argo, D.W. Dahl, A.C. Morales
o Consumer contamination: how consumers react to products touched by others
o Journal of Marketing, 70 (2) (2006), pp. 81–94
o Full Text via CrossRef
3.
o Argo et al., 2008
o J.J. Argo, D.W. Dahl, A.C. Morales
o Positive consumer contagion: responses to attractive others in a retail context
o Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (6) (2008), pp. 690–701
o View Record in Scopus
Full Text via CrossRef
4.
o Bandura, 1977
o A. Bandura
o Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
o Psychological Review, 84 (1977), pp. 191–215

5.
o Bandura, 1982
o A. Bandura
o Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency
o American Psychologist, 37 (2) (1982), pp. 122–147
6.
o Bandura, 1986
o A. Bandura
o Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory
o Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, NJ (1986)
o
7.
o Bandura, 2007
o A. Bandura
o Much ado over faulty conception of perceived self-efficacy grounded in faulty
experimentation
o Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 26 (6) (2007), pp. 641–758
o
8.
o Bearden et al., 1989
o W.O. Bearden, R.G. Netemeyer, J.E. Teel
o Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence
o Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (4) (1989), pp. 473–481
9.
o Bell and Song, 2007
o D.R. Bell, S. Song
o Neighborhood effects and trial on the internet: evidence from online grocery
retailing
o Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 5 (4) (2007), pp. 361–400
10.
o Brandtzæg, 2010
o P.B. Brandtzæg
o Towards a unified Media-User Typology (MUT): a meta-analysis and review of
the research literature on media-user typologies
o Computers in Human Behavior, 26 (5) (2010), pp. 940–956
o Article
PDF (341 K)
11.
o Broderick et al., 2007
o A.J. Broderick, G.E. Greenley, R.D. Mueller
o The behavioral homogeneity evaluation framework: multi-level evaluations of
consumer involvement in international segmentation
o Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (5) (2007), pp. 746–763
12.
o Byrne, 2007
o D.N. Byrne
o Public discourse, community concerns, and civic engagement: exploring black
social networking traditions on BlackPlanet.com
o Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13 (1) (2007), pp. 319–340
13.
o Casalo et al., 2007
o L. Casalo, C. Flavian, M. Guinalıu
o The impact of participation in virtual brand communities on consumer trust and
loyalty. The case of free software
o Online Information Review, 31 (6) (2007), pp. 775–792
14.
o Chau et al., 2002
o P.Y.K. Chau, M. Cole, A.P. Massey, M. Montoya-Weiss, R.M. O'Keefe
o Cultural differences in the online behavior of consumers
o Communications of the ACM, 45 (10) (2002), pp. 138–143
15.
o Cleveland and Chang, 2009
o M. Cleveland, W. Chang
o Migration and materialism: the roles of ethnic identity, religiosity, and generation
o Journal of Business Research, 62 (10) (2009), pp. 963–971
o Article
PDF (617 K)
16.
o Cohn and Park, 2007
o Cohn, A., Park, J., 2007. Social Shopping: How technology is reshaping the
consumer experience in apparel retailing. Retrieved from World Wide Web on
March 7 2010, from
〈http://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/digital/Research/ResearchProjects/ResearchSoci
alShopping.pdf〉.
o
17.
o Cole et al., 2000
o M. Cole, R.M. O'Keefe, H. Siala
o From the user interface to the consumer interface
o Information Systems Frontiers, 53 (4) (2000), pp. 349–361
18.
o Davis, 1986
o Davis, F.D., 1986. A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new
end-user information systems: Theory and results. Doctoral dissertation, Sloan
School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
o
19.
o Davis, 1989
o F.D. Davis
o Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information
technology
o MIS Quarterly, 13 (3) (1989), pp. 319–340
20.
o Davis and Venkatesh, 2004
o F.D. Davis, V. Venkatesh
o Toward preprototype user acceptance testing of new information systems:
implications for software project management
o IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 51 (1) (2004), pp. 31–46
1.
o Duan et al., 2008
o W. Duan, B. Gu, A.B. Whinston
o The dynamics of online word-of-mouth and product sales—an empirical
investigation of the movie industry
o Journal of Retailing, 84 (2) (2008), pp. 233–242
o Article
PDF (526 K)
2.
o Donthu and Yoo, 1998
o N. Donthu, B. Yoo
o Cultural influences on service quality expectations
o Journal of Service Research, 1 (2) (1998), pp. 178–186
3.
o Dwyer, 2007
o P. Dwyer
o Measuring the value of electronic word of mouth and its impact in consumer
communities
o Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21 (2) (2007), pp. 63–79
o Article
PDF (600 K)
4.
o Dwyer et al., 2005
o S. Dwyer, H. Mesak, M. Hsu
o An exploratory examination of the influence of national culture on cross-national
product diffusion
o Journal of International Marketing, 13 (2) (2005), pp. 1–27
5.
o Eckhardt and Houston, 2007
o G.M. Eckhardt, M.J. Houston
o On the distinction between cultural and cross-cultural psychological approaches
and its significance for consumer psychology
o N.K. Malhotra (Ed.), Review of Marketing Research, M.E. Sharpe Inc., Armonk,
NY (2007), pp. 81–108
6.
o Evans and Chi, 2009
o B.M. Evans, E.D. Chi
o An elaborated model of social search
o Information Processing & Management (2009)
o
7.
o Feed: The Razorfish Consumer Experience Report, 2008
o Feed: The Razorfish Consumer Experience Report, 2008. Retrieved from World
Wide Web on October 20 2009, from
〈http://d27vj430nutdmd.cloudfront.net/2587/6896/6896.pdf〉.
o
8.
o Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975
o M. Fishbein, I. Ajzen
o Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research
o Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA (1975)
o
9.
o Furrer et al., 2000
o O. Furrer, B.S.-C. Liu, D. Sudharshan
o The Relationships between culture and service quality perceptions
o Journal of Service Research, 2 (4) (2000), pp. 355–371
10.
o Gershoff et al., 2003
o A.D. Gershoff, A. Mukherjee, A. Mukhopadhyay
o Consumer acceptance of online agent advice: extremity and positivity effects
o Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13 (1&2) (2003), pp. 161–170
o Article
PDF (3827 K)
11.
o Global Advertising: Consumers Trust Real Friends and Virtual Strangers the
Most, 2009
o Global Advertising: Consumers Trust Real Friends and Virtual Strangers the
Most, 2009. Retrieved on September 08, 2010 from:
〈http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/consumer/global-advertising-consumers-
trust-real-friends-and-virtual-strangers-the-most/〉.
o
12.
o Green, 1999
o C. Green
o Ethnic evaluations of advertising: interaction effects of strength of ethnic
identification, media placement and degree of racial composition
o Journal of Advertising, 28 (1) (1999), pp. 49–64
13.
o Grier and Brumbaugh, 1999
o S.A. Grier, A.M. Brumbaugh
o Noticing cultural differences: ad meanings created by target and non-target
markets
o Journal of Advertising, 28 (1) (1999), pp. 79–93
|
14.
o Ha and Stoel, 2009
o S. Ha, L. Stoel
o Consumer e-shopping acceptance: antecedents in a technology acceptance model
o Journal of Business Research, 62 (5) (2009), pp. 565–571
o Article
PDF (369 K)
15.
o Hargittai, 2007
o E. Hargittai
o Whose space? differences among users and non-users of social network sites
16.
o Häubl and Murray, 2003
o G. Häubl, K. Murray
o Preference construction and persistence in digital marketplaces: The role of
electronic recommendation agents
o Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13 (1) (2003), pp. 75–91
o Article
PDF (4237 K)
|
17.
o Häubl and Trifts, 2003
o G. Häubl, V. Trifts
o Information availability and consumer preference: Can online retailers benefit
from providing access to competitor price information?
o Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13 (2) (2003), pp. 149–159
o
18.
o Hendriks and Zouridis, 1999
o F. Hendriks, S. Zouridis
o Cultural biases and new media for the public domain: Cui Bonn?
o M. Thompson, G. Grendstad, P. Selle (Eds.), Cultural Theory as Political Science,
Routledge, London (1999), pp. 121–137
o
19.
o Horovitz, 2006
o Horovitz, B., 2006, November 23). Survey: Social network sites could also lure
shoppers. USA Today. Retrieved from World Wide Web on March 7 2010, from
〈http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2006-11-23-social-shopping_x.htm〉.
o
20.
o Hofstede, 1980
o G.H. Hofstede
o Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values
o Sage Publication, Beverly Hills (1980)
o
1.
o Hofstede, 2001
o G.H. Hofstede
o Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and
organizations across nations
o Sage Publication Inc., Thousand Oaks (2001)
o
2.
o Humphreys, 2007
o L. Humphreys
o Mobile social networks and social practice: a case study of dodgeball
3.
o Industry statistics, n.d.
o Industry statistics, n.d. Retrieved from World Wide Web on October 20 2008,
from 〈www.bazaarvoice.com〉.
o
4.
o Iyengar et al., 2008
o Iyengar, R., Van den Bulte, C., Valente, T.W., 2008. Opinion leadership and
social contagion in new product diffusion. Working paper, University of
Pennsylvania.
o
5.
o Jansen et al., 2009
o B.J. Jansen, M. Zhang, K. Sobel, A. Chowdhury
o Twitter power: tweets as electronic word of mouth
o Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60 (11)
(2009), pp. 2169–2188
6.
o Jarvenpaa and Tractinsky, 1999
o S.L. Jarvenpaa, N. Tractinsky
o Consumer trust in anI nternet store: a cross-cultural validation
o Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 5 (2) (1999), pp. 1–35
o
7.
o Karahanna et al., 2005
o E. Karahanna, J.R. Evaristo, M. Srite
o Levels of culture and individual behavior: an integrative perspective
o Journal of Global Information Management, 13 (2) (2005), pp. 1–20
|
8.
o Kasim and Ismail, 2009
o N.M. Kasim, S. Ismail
o Investigating the complex drivers of loyalty in e-commerce settings
o Measuring Business Excellence, 13 (1) (2009), pp. 56–71
o
9.
o Kim et al., 2009
o Kim, J., Kim, J.-H., Lee, K.-H., 2009. Redefining factors affecting online
purchase: a comparison of US and Korean online shoppers. in: Proceedings of the
ITAA, 66.
o
10.
o Kozinets, 2002
o R.V. Kozinets
o The field behind the screen: using netnography for marketing research in online
communities
11.
o Kjeldgaard and Askegaard, 2006
o D. Kjeldgaard, S. Askegaard
o The glocalization of youth culture: the global youth segment as structures of
common difference
o Journal of Consumer Research, 33 (2) (2006), pp. 231–247
12.
o Kucuk and Krishnamurthy, 2007
o S.U. Kucuk, S. Krishnamurthy
o An analysis of consumer power on the internet
o Technovation, 27 (1/2) (2007), pp. 47–56
o
13.
o Kueh and Voon, 2007
o K. Kueh, B.H. Voon
o Culture and service quality expectations: evidence from generation Y consumers
in Malaysia
o Managing Service Quality, 17 (6) (2007), pp. 656–680
14.
o Lam et al., 2009
o D. Lam, A. Lee, R. Mizerski
o The effects of cultural values in word-of-mouth communication
o Journal of International Marketing, 17 (3) (2009), pp. 55–70
15.
o Lee et al., 2003
o Y. Lee, K. Kozar, K. Larsen
o The technology acceptance model: past, present, and future
o Communications of the AIS, 12 (50) (2003), pp. 752–780
o
16.
o Leggatt, 2009
o Leggatt, H., 2009. What reaction do consumers have to negative reviews?
BizReport. Retrieved on September 9, 2010 from:
〈http://www.bizreport.com/2009/02/what_reaction_do_consumers_have_to_neg
ative_reviews.html#〉.
o
17.
o Lim and Dubinsky, 2005
o H. Lim, A.J. Dubinsky
o Determinants of consumers' purchase intention on the Internet: an application of
theory of planned behavior
o Psychology and Marketing, 22 (10) (2005), pp. 833–855
18.
o Mahoney, 2009
o Mahoney, S., 2009. Social media expected to drive holiday shoppers. Marketing
Daily. Retrieved from World Wide Web on October 20 2009, from
〈http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?
fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=115513〉.
o
19.
o Malhotra et al., 1996
o N.K. Malhotra, J. Agarwal, M. Peterson
o Methodological issues in cross-cultural marketing research: a state of the art
review
o International Marketing Review, 13 (5) (1996), pp. 7–43
20.
o Maj, 2009
o A. Maj, M. Derda-Nowakowski
o Cyber-communities in their quest for free culture. User-generated content portals
in the anthropological perspective
o In: The Real and the Virtual: Critical Issues in Cybercultures Oxford, UK, Inter-
Disciplinary Press (2009)
o
1.
o Manski, 1993
o C.F. Manski
o Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem
o Review of Economic Studies, 60 (3) (1993), pp. 531–542
2.
o Manski, 2000
o C.F. Manski
o Economic analysis of social interactions
o Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14 (3) (2000), pp. 115–136
3.
o Mathieson, 1991
o K. Mathieson
o Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the
theory of planned behavior
o Information Systems Research, 2 (3) (1991), pp. 173–191
4.
o McAlexander et al., 2002
o J.H. McAlexander, J.W. Schouten, H.F. Koenig
o Building brand community
o Journal of Marketing, 66 (1) (2002), pp. 38–54
5.
o Morris et al., 2010
o Morris, M.R., Teevan, J., Panovich, K., 2010. What do people ask their social
networks, and why? a survey study of status message Q&A behavior. In:
Proceedings of CHI, 2010.
o
6.
o OECD, (2007)
o OECD. 2007. Participative web and user-created content: web 2.0, wikis, and
social networking. Paris, Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development.
o
7.
o Rokeach, 1973
o M. Rokeach
o The nature of human values
o Free Press, New York (1973)
o
8.
o Sawhney et al., 2005
o M. Sawhney, G. Verona, E. Prandelli
o Collaborating to create: the internet as a platform for customer engagement in
product innovation
o Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19 (4) (2005), pp. 4–17
o Article
PDF (285 K)
9.
o Schwarz, 1990
o M. Schwarz, M. Thompson
o Divided We Stand: Redefining Politics, Technology and Social Choice
o Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York (1990)
o
10.
o Simester et al., 2000
o D.I. Simester, J.R. Hauser, B. Wernerfelt, R.T. Rust
o Implementing quality improvement programs designed to enhance customer
satisfaction: quasi-experiments in the United States and Spain
11.
o Social-Network-Driven Retail Transformation, 2009
o Social-Network-Driven Retail Transformation, 2009. Retrieved from World Wide
Web on March 7 2010, from
〈http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac79/docs/pov/eretail_survey_2009_070109_
shortFINAL.pdf〉.
o
12.
o Social Networking Explodes Worldwide as Sites Increase their Focus on Cultural
Relevance, 2008
o Social Networking Explodes Worldwide as Sites Increase their Focus on Cultural
Relevance, 2008. Retrieved on September 9, 2010 from:
〈http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2008/08/Social_Netw
orking_World_Wide〉.
o
13.
o Srite and Karahanna, 2006
o M. Srite, E. Karahanna
o The influence of national culture on the acceptance of information technologies:
an empirical study
o MIS Quarterly, 30 (3) (2006), pp. 679–704
14.
o Stauss, 2000
o B. Stauss
o Using new media for customer interaction: a challenge for relationship marketing
o T. Henning-Thurau, U. Hansen (Eds.), Relationship Marketing (2000)
o
15.
o Stremersch and Tellis, 2004
o S. Stremersch, G.J. Tellis
o Understanding and managing international growth of new products
o International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21 (4) (2004), pp. 421–438
o Article
PDF (311 K)
16.
o Swaminathan, 2003
o V. Swaminathan
o The impact of recommendation agents on consumer evaluation and choice: the
moderating role of category risk, product complexity and consumer knowledge
o Journal of Consumer Psychology, Special Issue on Consumers in Cyberspace, 13
(1&2) (2003), pp. 93–101
o Article
PDF (1630 K)
17.
o Swartz, 2009
o Swartz, J., 2009. Social media like Twitter change customer service. USA Today.
Retrieved on September 9, 2010 from:
〈http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2009-11-18-twitterserve18_ST_N.htm〉.
o
18.
o Swedowsky, 2009
o Swedowsky, M., 2009. A social media 'how-to' for retailers. Retrieved from
World Wide Web on October 20 2009, from
〈http://www.gourmetretailer.com/gourmetretailer/content_display/news/e3id273
5b8f1234ea9cdf76f00120c43211〉.
o
19.
o Taylor and Miracle, 1996
o C.R. Taylor, G.E. Miracle
o Foreign elements in Korean and U.S. television advertising
o S.Tamer Cavusgil, Charles R. Taylor (Eds.), Advances in International
Marketing, vol. 7JAI Press Inc., Greenwich, CT (1996), pp. 175–195
o
20.
o Taylor and Todd, 1995
o S. Taylor, P.A. Todd
o Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models
o Information Systems Research, 6 (1995), pp. 144–176

1.
o Teo et al., 2003
o H.H. Teo, H.C. Chan, K.K. Weib, Z. Zhang
o Evaluating information accessibility and community adaptivity features for
sustaining virtual learning communities
o International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 59 (5) (2003), pp. 671–697
o Article
PDF (248 K)
2.
o The Future of User-Generated Content, 2010
o The Future of User-Generated Content, 2010. Retrieved on September 9, 2010
from: 〈http://www.modusassociates.com/ideas/newsletter/spring-2010/〉.
o
3.
o Triandis, 1989
o H.C. Triandis
o The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts
o Psychological Review, 96 (3) (1989), pp. 506–520
4.
o Tung, 2008
o R.L. Tung
o The cross-cultural research imperative: the need to balance cross national and
intra-national diversity
o Journal of International Business Studies, 39 (1) (2008), pp. 41–46

5.
o Ueltschy and Ryans, 1997
o L. Ueltschy, J. Ryans
o Advertising strategies to capitalize on Spain's second golden age
o International Journal of Management, 4 (13) (1997), pp. 456–467
o
6.
o Valente and Rogers, 1995
o T.W. Valente, E.M. Rogers
o The origins and development of the diffusion of innovations paradigm as an
example of scientific growth
o Science Communication, 16 (3) (1995), pp. 242–273
7.
o Venkatesh and Bala, 2008
o V. Venkatesh, H. Bala
o Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a research agenda on interventions
o Decision Sciences, 39 (2) (2008), pp. 273–315
8.
o Venkatesh and Davis, 2000
o V. Venkatesh, F.D. Davis
o A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal
field studies
o Management Science, 46 (2) (2000), pp. 186–204
9.
o Venkatesh, 2000
o V. Venkatesh
o Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation,
and emotion into the technology acceptance model
o Information Systems Research, 11 (4) (2000), pp. 342–365
10.
o Vreeland, 2010.
o Vreeland, J., 2010. Retailers sacrifice customer reviews for ―social shopping
Merchants focus on social networking even though most consumers don't use
those sites when making a purchase. Retrieved on May 24, 2010 from:
〈http://www.collegenews.com/index.php?/money/retailers_sacrifice_customer_r
eviews_for_social_shopping_0504201020132526/〉.
o
11.
o What's in a Retail email?, 2009
o What's in a Retail email? 2009. Retrieved from World Wide Web on October 20
2009, from 〈http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?R=1007294〉.
o
12.
o Winsted, 1997
o K.F. Winsted
o The service experience in two cultures: a behavioral perspective
o Journal of Retailing, 73 (3) (1997), pp. 337–360
o Article
PDF (2445 K)
13.
o Yaveroglu and Donthu, 2002
o I.S. Yaveroglu, N. Donthu
o Cultural influences on the diffusion of new products
o Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 14 (4) (2002), pp. 49–63
14.
o Yavas et al., 1992
o U. Yavas, B.J. Verhage, R.T. Green
o Global consumer segmentation versus local market orientation: empirical findings
o Management International Review, 32 (3) (1992), pp. 265–273
o
15.
o Zhang and von Dran, 2002
o P. Zhang, G. von Dran
o User expectations and rankings of quality factors in different web site domains
o International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6 (2) (2002), pp. 9–33
16.
o Zhou et al., 2007
o L. Zhou, L. Dai, D. Zhang
o Online shopping acceptance model—a critical survey of consumer factors in
online shopping
o Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 8 (1) (2007), pp. 1–62
o
Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 9405652439; fax: +1 9405654348.

Cultural Influence On Consumers' Usage of Social Networks and Its' Impact On Online Purchase Intentions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Cultural Influence On Consumers' Usage of Social Networks and Its' Impact On Online Purchase Intentions

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cultural Influence On Consumers' Usage of Social Networks and Its' Impact On Online Purchase Intentions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services

Volume 18, Issue 4, July 2011, Pages 348–354

Cultural influence on consumers' usage of

 School of Merchandising and Hospitality Management, University of North Texas, 1155

3. Culture and Social Networks

4. Technology acceptance Model 3 (TAM3)

4.2. Subjective norm

4.3. Social search

Self-efficacy can be defined as individual judgments of a person's capabilities to perform a

4.5. Intention to use social networks and purchase intention

5. Culture and TAM3

5.1. Moderating effects of culture

Explaining online purchase intention using TAM3 and culture.

P1a PU will be positively influenced by PEOU.

View Record in Scopus

| Cited By in Scopus (55)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (31)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (8437)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (2862)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (39)

View Record in Scopus

| Cited By in Scopus (16)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (8)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (35)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (43)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (109)

View Record in Scopus

| Cited By in Scopus (10)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (11)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (1)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (100)

View Record in Scopus

| Cited By in Scopus (129)

| Cited By in Scopus (174)

View Record in Scopus

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (63)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (52)

| Cited By in Scopus (5)

View Record in Scopus

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (40)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (58)

Full Text via CrossRef

| Cited By in Scopus (7)