The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1757-5818.htm

Online apparel
Online apparel retailing: roles of retailing
e-shopping quality and
experiential e-shopping motives
197
Sejin Ha
Department of Consumer Sciences and Retailing, Purdue University, Received 9 February 2011
West Lafayette, Indiana, USA, and Revised 13 August 2011
Accepted 23 September 2011
Leslie Stoel
Department of Consumer Sciences, The Ohio State University,
Columbus, Ohio, USA

Abstract
Purpose – The objectives of this paper are to: examine e-shopping quality dimensions; explore how
e-shopping quality factors influence consumer shopping outcomes (e-shopping satisfaction and
e-shopping intention); and test the moderating effects of consumer experiential e-shopping motives on
the e-shopping quality – e-shopping outcomes links within the context of online apparel retailing.
Design/methodology/approach – Data were gathered from 298 college students in the USA using
a self-administered online survey.
Findings – Among four e-shopping quality factors identified (privacy/security, web site
content/functionality, customer service, and experiential/atmospheric), web site content/functionality
and atmospheric/experiential quality have significant impact on e-shopping satisfaction contributing to
e-shopping intention, while privacy/security and customer service have significant impact on
e-shopping intention but not on e-shopping satisfaction. Furthermore, this study provides some support
for the moderating roles that experiential e-shopping motives plays in the e-shopping quality –
e-shopping outcomes links.
Research limitation/implications – This paper shows that experiential e-shopping motives as an
individual characteristic play a role in controlling the dynamics among e-shopping quality, e-shopping
satisfaction, and e-shopping intention. However, the data consisting of self-reported measures from a
single segment of online retail industry warrants caution in generalization in relation to common
method bias.
Practical implications – This paper entails useful implications for internet- and multichannel retail
marketers delivering apparel/fashion goods to better understand the online consumer response
process and determine effective e-store management strategies that reflect the differing customer
evaluation processes.
Originality/value – This study extends and complements the e-tail service literature by examining
whether and how experiential e-shopping motives moderate the relationships among e-shopping
quality dimensions, e-shopping satisfaction, and e-shopping intention.
Keywords E-shopping quality, Experiential e-shopping motives, Online apparel shopping,
Electronic commerce, Customer services quality, Garment industry, United States of America
Paper type Research paper

Journal of Service Management

Vol. 23 No. 2, 2012
pp. 197-215
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
The authors would like to thank the editor and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive 1757-5818
comments and suggestions. DOI 10.1108/09564231211226114
JOSM Introduction
23,2 As the online shopping channel begins to mature and growth slows (Ross, 2010), the
intensity of competition for online retailers will continue to increase. Such a competitive
environment, coupled with the increase in numbers and diversity of e-consumers, has
made the issue of understanding key factors that drive consumers to shop online
increasingly important. Despite the growing interest among researchers and retail
198 marketers, still, there is a general lack of research on, and a need to extend knowledge
about the drivers of consumer e-shopping behavior.
Effectively managing online stores that induce customer satisfaction is a critical
factor underlying sustained growth, not only for pure e-tailers but also for multi-channel
retailers because of the reciprocal effects across channels (Venkatesan et al., 2007).
A satisfactory experience with an online store is desirable since it can lead to positive
outcomes such as customer trust (Fassnacht and Köse, 2007), customer retention and
referral, online conversion, and e-shopping stickiness (Bansal et al., 2004) and online
loyalty (Anderson and Srinivasan, 2003; Chiou et al., 2009; Fassnacht and Köse, 2007;
Rodgers et al., 2005). Noting the importance of cross-channel effects, van Birgelen et al.
(2006) reveal that customer online satisfaction and offline satisfaction (e.g. employee
performance and offline area performance) interact to influence customer behavioral
intentions. Similarly, customers who have a bad online experience appear to be reluctant
to shop through the retailer’s other channels (Finn, 2008), raising a question regarding
what matters for online shopping satisfaction.
In particular, industry observers call for better understanding of the effects of online
shopping quality features on customer satisfaction and subsequent behaviors while
taking consumer characteristics into account (Ross, 2010). Gaining full understanding
of online shopping quality also enables e-tailers to monitor and improve their store
operations to maximize performance. In response, a number of studies have developed
scales for measuring online service quality in a variety of industry and product
settings (Francis, 2009; Loiacono et al., 2007; Parasuraman et al., 2005; Wolfinbarger
and Gilly, 2003; Yoo and Donthu, 2001; Zeithaml et al., 2000). Accordingly, it seems
timely to re-examine current e-shopping quality scales in an online retail operation
setting.
The current study employs Oliver’s (1997) quality-satisfaction-behavioral intention
link model as a framework to examine potential drivers and outcomes of customer
satisfaction in an apparel online shopping environment. In addition, as discussed in
recent consumer behavior research, investigation of moderating factors (e.g. e-shopping
motives) that are unique to an online shopper enriches our understanding of online
consumer behavior (Nysveen et al., 2005; Parasuraman et al., 2005; Rodgers et al., 2005).
For example, Parasuraman et al. (2005) point out the need to examine whether or not
shopping motives (e.g. experiential, goal-directed) moderate the relationships between
e-shopping quality and customers’ evaluation of e-stores, as part of their call for an
investigation into e-shopping quality relating to experiential shopping aspects. Yet,
there is a lack of empirical evidence on consumer online behavior that takes into
account such moderator. To fill this gap in the existing literature, this study aims to
empirically:
.
delineate e-shopping quality dimensions;
.
investigate the e-shopping quality – satisfaction – behavioral intentions link; and
 .
examine the moderating effects of consumer experiential e-shopping motives in Online apparel
the e-shopping quality – satisfaction – behavioral intentions link within the retailing
context of online apparel retailing.

Literature review
E-shopping quality
E-shopping quality refers to consumer perceptions of an e-store’s performance and 199
effectiveness in terms of its product and/or service offerings. As e-shopping entails a
variety of encounters such as browsing and searching, engaging in a transaction, and
post-purchase evaluation, the multidimensionality of e-shopping quality seems
reasonable. The multi-faceted aspects of e-shopping quality have been extensively
discussed in e-shopping quality studies (Collier and Bienstock, 2006; Cristobal et al.,
2007; Francis, 2009; Heinonen and Strandvik, 2009; La and Kandampully, 2002;
Parasuraman et al., 2005; Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003; Yoo and Donthu, 2001).
Similarly, a number of scales have been presented by researchers. Examples, among
numerous, are SITEQUAL (Yoo and Donthu, 2001), e-SERVQUAL (Zeithaml et al.,
2000), WebQual (Loiacono et al., 2007), internet retail service quality (IRSQ) ( Janda et al.,
2002), eTailQ (Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003), E-S-QUAL (Parasuraman et al., 2005),
e-Trans Qual (Bauer et al., 2006), quality of electronic service (QSE) (Fassnacht and
Koese, 2006), PeSQ (Cristobal et al., 2007), e-service quality scale (Sohn and Tadisina,
2008), and RECIPE (Francis, 2009).
However, somewhat surprisingly there have been limited approaches in research to
understand qualities of the internet-mediated retail operation. First, as shown in the
aforementioned list of scales, research has been somewhat too active in the development
of scales measuring e-service quality. The presence of many scales invites follow-up
research validating the applicability of the scales. Second, some studies developed
e-shopping quality scales based on the premise that e-retailing and its service quality are
uniform, irrespective of types of products and delivery methods that retailers offer
(Collier and Bienstock, 2006). Thus, their scales tend to be biased towards capturing
well-rounded service quality dimensions which fit all types of online retail operations.
Third, some studies examined e-shopping quality with a restricted focus such as web
site interface attributes (e.g. WebQuale, SITEQUAL) (Loiacono et al., 2007; Yoo and
Donthu, 2001) and a goal-directed, transaction-specific shopping assessment (Francis,
2009), neglecting the potential quality associated with consumers’ holistic experiences
and comprehensive evaluation of online shopping. Therefore, an investigation into
online retail service quality which considers the type of online retailing as well as all
phases of the online shopping experience may be beneficial.
There are studies investigating e-service quality comprehensively beyond the web
site interface and/or the transaction-focused shopping attribute (Collier and Bienstock,
2006; Cristobal et al., 2007; Francis, 2009; Heinonen and Strandvik, 2009;
Parasuraman et al., 2005; Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003). Wolfinbarger and Gilly
(2003) develop a 40-item online retail quality scale composed of eight factors – ease of
use, fulfillment/reliability, customer service, personalization, experiential/atmospheric,
selection, informativeness, and security/privacy – in which both web site interface and
marketing attributes are included. The final eTailQ scale consists of 14 items capturing
four dimensions: web site design (all elements that a consumer experiences at the web
site such as information search capability, order processing, personalization,
JOSM and product selection), security/privacy (security of payments and privacy of given
23,2 information), fulfillment/reliability (the precise presentation of a product and delivery of
the right product at the right time promised), and customer service (ready and
supportive service that is quick to respond to customer inquiries). More recently,
Heinonen and Strandvik (2009) look into value-in-use (customer-experienced value) of
e-service in the context of travel agency service and conceptualize e-service value as a
200 function of four dimensions: technical value (content, tangibles, and price),
functional value (process easiness/functionality, security, entertainment, decision
support, and dependability), temporal value (temporal efficiency/usefulness, speediness,
and temporal latitude), and spatial value (spatial latitude, visual layout, channel
functionality and navigation). These two scales constitute a comprehensive evaluation
of the service quality of an online shopping encounter, capturing a holistic view of online
shopping.
Parasuraman et al. (2005) separate electronic service quality into two steps and
develop a scale for each: the E-S-QUAL scale capturing e-core service quality aspects
(efficiency, fulfillment, system availability, and privacy) and the E-RecS-QUAL scale
measuring e-recovery service quality (responsiveness, compensation, and contact).
Taking consumer perceptions of online service quality into account with the entire
online experience, Collier and Bienstock (2006) find three dimensions of e-service
quality: process quality (functionality, information accuracy, design, privacy, and ease
of use), outcome quality (order accuracy, order condition, and timeliness), and recovery
quality (interactive fairness, procedural fairness, and outcome fairness). These scales
by Parasuraman et al. (2005) and Collier and Bienstock (2006) hold unique merit as they
employ a two-phase approach which accounts for service quality of post-purchase
recovery evaluation in addition to the core aspects of the purchasing process.
Such divergence of e-shopping quality dimensions identified in past research may
be due to the differences in the type of products delivered online (services vs goods) and the
method of purchase fulfillment (electronic vs offline fulfillment) (Francis and White, 2004).
Online fulfillment lets customers acquire and, sometimes, consume (an) ordered item(s)
online when placing an order, while offline fulfillment requires that customers obtain the
order at a short time interval via mail/delivery service or a visit to the physical retail store.
Based on these two criteria, Francis (2009) segments online retailing into four
categories: offline-goods (e.g. clothing, groceries), offline-services shopping (e.g. hotels,
travel), electronic-goods shopping (e.g. software, digital journals), and electronic-services
shopping (e.g. banking, trading), and develops four category-specific quality measurement
scales, labeled RECIPE scales. Differences in e-shopping quality dimensions were found
across the four internet retailing categories. While customer service and security
dimensions are common across the four categories, each entails unique dimensions of
service quality: web site and exchange in offline goods, web site and reservation/purchase
in offline services, product details and exchange in electronic goods, and account set-up
and online services in electronic services. As such, many service quality dimensions often
are not replicated in different service contexts (Collier and Bienstock, 2006), suggesting the
importance of considering the dynamics of online service quality in relation to the type of
online retailing. The current study particularly focuses on online apparel retailing and
would belong to the offline-goods shopping category (Francis, 2009).
Apparel is often described as an experience product because the acquisition of
product information is difficult during shopping and the quality evaluation is possible
after consumers purchase and use apparel goods (Girard et al., 2002; Klein, 1998). It is Online apparel
also called a hedonic product, as it enables consumers to achieve pleasure, fun, and retailing
experiential consumption (Dhar and Wertenbroch, 2000). Needless to say, both
functional and hedonic features of online stores are important in order to satisfy apparel
shoppers; moreover, hedonic/experiential features that an online store generates may be
more important for apparel shopping than for other products because the hedonic nature
of apparel shopping will add product-related/shopping-elicited experiential value to 201
utilitarian value which together will facilitate consumers’ favorable reactions to the store
(Mano and Oliver, 1993). Consequently, it is predicted that apparel online shopping
involves multiple dimensions of service quality, a dimension pertinent to
experiential/holistic shopping quality included.

E-shopping quality – satisfaction – behavioral intention link

Given the multi-dimensionality of online apparel retailing an important question
concerns how different service quality dimensions contribute to shopping outcomes
(e.g. e-shopping satisfaction and e-shopping intention). Built on Bagozzi’s (1992)
appraisal – emotional response – coping framework, Oliver’s (1997) quality –
satisfaction – behavioral intention link framework proposes that cognitive e-shopping
quality evaluation (appraisal) drives e-shopping satisfaction evaluation (affective
response), contributing to the continuance of satisfaction levels (Gotlieb et al., 1994) and
the development of reactions that underlie future behavioral intention (copying) such
as e-shopping intention. One’s appraisal process concerns a past or present occurrence
(e.g. a shopping experience) and results in two consequences: outcome-desired conflict
and outcome-desired fulfillment. The outcome-desired conflict occurring when a
person fails to meet a goal or experiences an unpleasant event develops negative
emotional reactions (e.g. dissatisfaction, anger, disappointment) which lead him/her to
avoid or correct the unpleasant occurrence. The outcome-desired fulfillment which
occurs when a person achieves a goal, experiences a pleasant event, or avoids an
unpleasant event derives positive emotional responses (e.g. satisfaction, pleasure,
relief), and thus, leads him/her to maintain the pleasant outcome (Bagozzi, 1992).
Although the dynamics of initial evaluation-emotional response-copying behaviors
have been widely applied to explain consumer responses to such service marketing
environments as service quality and service recovery in various businesses (e.g. retail,
tourism) (Brady and Robertson, 2001; Cronin et al., 2000; Lam et al., 2004; Lee and Lin,
2005; McDougall and Levesque, 2000; Zourrig et al., 2009), this study intends to check
the e-shopping – e-shopping satisfaction – e-shopping intention relationships in the
context of online apparel retailing. Doing so offers additional evidence in support of
e-shopping quality affecting e-shopping satisfaction as well as e-shopping intention; at
the same time, it allows examination of whether or not, and if so, how an individual
characteristic (i.e. experiential e-shopping motives) moderates the dynamics among
e-shopping quality, e-shopping satisfaction, and e-shopping intention. This study
posits that satisfaction with e-shopping derived from the e-shopping quality
assessment will predict intention to shop online (behavioral intention). From the
consumers’ viewpoint, e-shopping satisfaction is defined as a consumer’s evaluation of
an online store in response to its set of retail offerings (Oliver, 1997; Westbrook, 1981)
and e-shopping intention indicates one’s subjective probability of shopping via the
online store in the future (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980):
JOSM H1. E-shopping satisfaction influences intent to shop online.
23,2 H2. E-shopping quality factors influence e-shopping satisfaction.
H3. E-shopping quality factors influence e-shopping intention.

The moderating role of experiential e-shopping motives

202 Shopping motives refer to consumers’ needs and wants to shop using a certain retail
format (Sheth, 1983). Shopping motive research identifies e-shopping motives as
goal-directed and experiential and finds various shopping goals prompt shopping
behaviors in different ways (Novak et al., 2003). Recently, other motives driving
consumers to shop online besides goal-directed motives have received growing attention
(Parasuraman et al., 2005). This study specifically focuses on experiential e-shopping
motives, where shoppers seek benefits including fun, entertainment, uniqueness, and
escapism from shopping at a chosen online store (Childers et al., 2001), and are driven by
experiential motives for online outlet selection, rather than for shopping a given product.
Research notes experiential motives as ritualistic, hedonic, intrinsically motivated,
heutisric, holistic, and enduring (Novak et al., 2003; Sivaramakrishnan et al., 2007;
Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2001). Such nature of experiential motives can influence
consumers’ information processing in that people having high experiential motives tend
to employ heuristic and less effortful processing (Adaval, 2001; Shiv and Fedorikhin,
1999), leading them to be attentive to hedonic, heuristic, and peripheral information cues
(Petty and Cacioppo, 1986; Smith et al., 2005). Therefore, people who seek pleasure,
fantasy, sensuality, and enjoyment from e-shopping would pay more attention to similar
e-shopping cues such as aesthetic appeal and service quality and use them to make their
evaluations and purchase intention relative to those who are less attentive to experiential
motives of e-shopping. However, there exist inconsistent findings regarding the
moderating role that consumers’ experiential e-motives would play in the effects of
e-shopping quality assessment on their attitudinal and behavioral responses
(Sivaramakrishnan et al., 2007; Wang et al., 2010). While studies show that experiential
motives enhance the hedonic or experiential-driven e-shopping quality – consumer
response links (Wang et al., 2010), Sivaramakrishnan et al. (2007) fail to reveal the effects
of experiential motives on the social cues – attitude and purchase intention associations:
H4. Experiential e-shopping motives moderate the effects of e-shopping quality
on e-shopping satisfaction so that consumers having high experiential
e-shopping motives exhibit stronger impact of e-shopping quality,
particularly hedonic/experiential e-shopping-related quality, on e-shopping
satisfaction.
H5. Experiential e-shopping motives moderate the effects of e-shopping
quality and satisfaction on e-shopping intention so that consumers having
high experiential e-shopping motives exhibit stronger impact of e-shopping
quality, particularly hedonic/experiential e-shopping-related quality and
satisfaction, on e-shopping intention.

Method
This study uses a survey design to examine the proposed hypotheses in the context of
young consumers’ online shopping for apparel/fashion accessory products. In the USA,
the apparel, accessories and footwear category surpassing computers hit the top of the Online apparel
online sales rankings in 2007 (National Retail Federation, 2007), providing evidence of retailing
strong e-commerce sales in the category. Such popularity of apparel/fashion product
categories in e-tail industry is worldwide: more than half of UK online shoppers
(52 percent) buy clothes/fashion items online, followed by films and music (47 percent)
and groceries and food (24 percent) (Office for National Statistics, 2010).
The sample was chosen from a representative group of online shoppers: college 203
students as young adults in tech-savvy Generation Y (age 18-32). According to Pew
Internet & American Life Style Project (2009), young adults between the ages of 18 and 32
comprise the biggest group to shop online, accounting for 30 percent of internet-using
population, followed by the 33-44 years-old age group (23 percent) and the 45-54 years-old
age group (22 percent) in the USA. As with e-shopping product categories, clothing is the
most popular product category for this young adults group compared to other products
(Case and King, 2003; Seock and Norton, 2008). At the same time, concentrating on this
e-shopping leading group helps this study examine the proposed moderating effects of
experiential e-shopping motives by controlling potential biases in association with ages.
Therefore, the selection of college students of young adults is reasonable.

Pre-test
Prior to hypothesis testing, a pretest was conducted in an undergraduate class to capture
e-shopping quality dimensions pertaining to an apparel online shopping context. This
study employed a pre-existing online shopping quality measurement scale in order to
re-assess the validity and suitability of the scale. Since it was anticipated that e-shopping
quality items embrace all phases of a customer’s interactions and experiences with a
store comprehensively, this study adopted a preliminary scale with a large item pool
rather than a final, refined scale. Among many, Wolfinbarger and Gilly’s (2003) eTailQ
scale seems appropriate for this study as the scale taps consumers’ entire experiences
with online shopping for offline-goods category. Bauer et al. (2006) argue that the final
eTailQ 14-item scale failed to embrace hedonic, experiential, and emotional aspects of
e-shopping experiences which are deemed important in online apparel retailing. Also,
retailer web sites have become more sophisticated since the development of the 14-item
scale in 2003. As a consequence, Wolfinbarger and Gilly’s original eTailQ 40 items were
used (Table 2 in Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003).
The survey contained a series of questions designed to tap three areas:
(1) e-shopping quality;
(2) shopping outcomes of satisfaction and behavioral intention; and
(3) demographics.

The inclusion of variables reflecting shopping outcomes was to confirm the main
survey instruments. In answering a survey, respondents indicated their perception
and evaluation of the online apparel retailer they had most recently visited. All variables
except for demographic information were rated on seven-point Likert scales
(1 ¼ strongly disagree; 7 ¼ strongly agree). Among 120 undergraduate students
participating in an online survey, over 60 percent of respondents (62.5 percent, n ¼ 75)
indicated they had experience buying apparel items online; the rest (n ¼ 45) had only
browsed online for apparel items.
JOSM An exploratory factor analysis with the maximum likelihood method and direction
23,2 oblimin rotation was performed. Items that showed poor psychometric properties
(, 0.30 communality, , 0.40 factor loading, or . 0.20 cross-loading) were dropped.
A minimum eigenvalue of 1.0 and the scree plot were employed to determine the number
of factors. The analysis extracted four e-shopping quality dimensions: privacy/security,
web site content/functionality, customer service, atmospheric/experiential quality. Four
204 factors accounted for 68.6 percent of total variance in e-shopping quality and showed
adequate reliabilities exceeding 0.76. The 17 items comprising the four e-shopping
quality constructs were used to assess e-shopping quality in the main test (Table I).
Main test
Online surveys were administered to college students at a large Midwestern university
in the USA. Invitation e-mails containing a link to the survey site were sent to a list of
2,500 students. 151 were returned as non-deliverable and 385 responses were gathered
(response rate ¼ 16.4 percent). After excluding 51 incompletes and 36 participants who
had neither browsed, nor purchased apparel items online, 298 valid responses remained.
The questionnaire comprised six parts: e-shopping experience, experiential
e-shopping motives, e-shopping quality, e-shopping satisfaction, e-shopping
intention, and demographic characteristics. Two screening questions asking whether
or not they had experience:
(1) buying; and
(2) browsing for apparel over the internet were used to sort e-shoppers.

Participants were asked to name an e-store they had most patronized for apparel shopping
and think about their most recent experiences with the e-store indicated previously to
answer questions. Five items adopted from Wolfinbarger and Gilly (2001) and Parsons
(2002) were used to measure experiential e-shopping motives on a five-point Likert scale
(5 ¼ very important). E-shopping satisfaction was measured using items reflecting
affective responses derived from cognitive evaluation of e-shopping quality (Bagozzi,
1992), and e-shopping intention was assessed with items addressing behavioral intentions
to shop online, rather than the attitudinal loyalty intentions used in Wolfinbarger and Gilly
(2001). E-shopping satisfaction (three items) and e-shopping intention (two items), adopted
from Oliver (1993) and Vijayasarathy (2004), respectively, were assessed on a seven-point
Likert scale (7 ¼ strongly agree). The scales used to measure experiential e-shopping
motives, e-shopping satisfaction and e-shopping intention are shown in the Appendix.
Approximately two thirds of respondents were females (64.5 percent). The mean age
was 26 years, where 82.5 percent of respondents were between 20 and 30 years.
Comparison of demographic information and variables among early participants and
late participants did not reveal any significant differences, suggesting that the sample
is free of non-response bias (Armstrong and Overton, 1977).

Results
Measurement model
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was employed to assess the measurement model of
all factors for the research structural model. Applying a series of scale purification
processes suggested that removing two e-shopping quality items (one web site
content/functionality item and one customer service item) would provide a better fit.
 Online apparel
EFA CFA
Std. retailing
Factor Factor Factor Factor factor Construct
Factors/items 1 2 3 4 loading reliability AVE

Factor 1. Web site content/functionality 0.89 0.73

The site does not waste my time 0.87 0.04 20.05 2 0.04 0.91 205
I can go to exactly what I want quickly 0.74 0.04 20.05 2 0.03 0.85
The organization and layout of the web
site facilities searching for products 0.57 2 0.00 20.05 2 0.28 0.80
The site gives me enough information so
that I can identify the item to the same
degree as if I am in the storea 0.41 0.08 20.01 2 0.15 na
Factor 2. Customer service 0.89 0.67
The company is ready and willing to
respond to customer needs 0.00 0.95 0.08 2 0.13 0.87
The web site has reasonable shipping
and handling costs 0.01 0.91 20.02 2 0.07 0.55
Customer service personnel are always
willing to help you 20.02 0.71 20.13 2 0.06 0.91
Inquiries are answered promptly 0.04 0.55 20.10 0.10 0.89
When you have a problem, the web site
shows a sincere interest in solving ita 0.16 0.48 20.08 0.04 na
Factor 3. Privacy/security 0.95 0.81
I feel like my privacy is protected at this
site 0.05 0.04 20.92 0.01 0.97
I feel safe in my transactions with this
web site 20.08 0.07 20.92 2 0.04 0.91
I feel I can trust this web site 0.12 0.08 20.81 2 0.02 0.94
The web site has adequate security
features 20.12 0.05 20.70 2 0.14 0.87
The company behind the site is reputable 0.30 2 0.18 20.57 2 0.11 0.79
Factor 4. Experiential/atmospheric 0.75 0.51
It is really fun to shop at this web site 0.09 0.13 0.08 0.92 0.78
The site almost says, “come in and shop” 0.00 0.07 20.17 0.78 0.75
Buying at this web site is exciting for
mea 0.00 2 0.07 20.09 0.66 0.60
Eigenvalue 12.88 1.76 1.48 1.04
Variance (%) 51.51 7.05 5.91 4.15 Table I.
Cronbach alpha 0.90 0.76 0.83 0.90 Exploratory factor
analysis and CFA:
Note: aItems that were removed from CFA e-shopping quality

Therefore, the final model consisted of 20 items, including 15 items assessing the four
e-shopping quality dimensions, three items measuring e-shopping satisfaction, and two
items measuring e-shopping intention. The model exhibited acceptable fits to the data:
x 2 ¼ 369.07, df ¼ 155, x 2/df ¼ 2.38, NFI ¼ 0.93, IFI ¼ 0.96, TLI ¼ 0.95, CFI ¼ 0.96,
and RMSEA ¼ 0.067 [90 percent CI ¼ 0.059; 0.077]. Construct reliabilities, internal
reliabilities using Cronbach’s alphas, unidimensionality, convergent and discriminant
validity of each factor were examined and confirmed (Tables I and II).
JOSM
Web site
23,2 Privacy/ content/ Customer Experiential/ E-shopping E-shopping
security functionality service atmospheric satisfaction intention

Privacy/security 0.81 0.27 0.22 0.31 0.10 0.01

Web site
206 content/
functionality 0.73 0.30 0.31 0.14 0.08
Customer
service 0.67 0.31 0.11 0.11
Experiential/
atmospheric 0.51 0.18 0.08
Satisfaction 0.82 0.48
E-shopping
intention 0.70
Notes: The numbers in diagonal line are the average variance extracted by each construct, the
Table II. numbers above the diagonal show the squared correlation coefficients between the constructs,
Discriminant validity discriminant validity meets if the AVE is greater than squared correlation coefficients

Structural model
The structural equation model also indicated that the model has acceptable model fit:
x 2 ¼ 369.07, df ¼ 155, x 2/df ¼ 2.38, NFI ¼ 0.93, IFI ¼ 0.96, TLI ¼ 0.95, CFI ¼ 0.96,
RMSEA ¼ 0.068 [90 percent CI ¼ 0.059; 0.077]. The model fit indexes all exceed their
respective common acceptance levels, indicating that the displayed model fits the data
reasonably.
H1 predicting the influence of e-shopping satisfaction on e-shopping intention is
supported. H2 and H3 are partially supported. That is, among the four e-shopping
quality factors, web site content/functionality and atmospheric/experiential quality
significantly influence e-shopping satisfaction but not e-shopping intention while
privacy/security and customer service significantly influence e-shopping intention but
not e-shopping satisfaction (Figure 1). The model explains 21.3 percent and 54.4 percent
of the variances in e-shopping satisfaction and e-shopping intention, respectively.
Based on the findings, bootstrapping analysis was performed to examine the indirect
effects of e-shopping quality on e-shopping intention through e-shopping satisfaction
(MacKinnon et al., 2007). The results provide statistical support that, in addition to their
direct effects, web site content/functionality and atmospheric/experiential quality have
indirect effects on e-shopping intention via e-shopping satisfaction. Thus, the results
imply that e-shopping satisfaction mediates the links between these two e-shopping
quality dimensions and e-shopping intention.

Tests for measurement invariance

Tests for moderation must accomplish a measurement invariance test across two
groups, namely, high- and low-experiential e-shopping motives for testing moderation
of experiential e-shopping motives. Measurement invariance was tested by examining:
.
the invariance of the factor patterns;
.
the equality of factor loadings; and
.
the equality of factor covariances/variances (Byrne, 2001; Suh and Yi, 2006).
 Online apparel
Privacy/ 0.05 (0.64)
Security retailing
0.27 (2.97)**
e-shopping
Satisfaction
Website 0.21 (1.88)* R2 = 0.213 207
Content/
Functionality
0.04 (0.64)
0.99***
(8.53)
0.08 (1.09)
Customer
Service 0.16 (2.40)* e-shopping
Intention
R2 = 0.544
0.27 (2.83)**

Atmospheric
/Experiential –0.02 (–0.27)

Notes: *p-value < 0.05, **p-value < 0.01, ***p-value < 0.001; numbers are Figure 1.
Research structural model
standardized coefficients with z-values in parentheses

A median-split method was applied to divide the respondents into the two groups:
low-experiential (n ¼ 149) vs high-experiential (n ¼ 149) e-shopping motive groups.
First, a test for invariance of factor pattern yielded a good fit with the baseline
model, indicating the invariance in the factor pattern across the two groups:
experiential e-shopping motives ( x 2 ¼ 299.37, df ¼ 208, x 2/df ¼ 1.44, NFI ¼ 0.93,
IFI ¼ 0.97, TLI ¼ 0.97, CFI ¼ 0.98, RMSEA ¼ 0.04). Next, an invariance model in
which equality constraints on factor loadings, factor variances and covariances were
imposed across the two groups from the baseline model. The invariance model was
supported in that the x 2 difference between the nonrestricted (baseline) model and
the invariance model was insignificant: experiential e-shopping motives
( x2diff: ð32Þ ¼ 42:50, p ¼ 0.10). Thus, the measurement model is equivalent across
high- and low-experiential e-shopping motive groups.

Testing moderating effects of experiential e-shopping motives

H4 and H5 predict the moderating effects of experiential e-shopping motives on the
associations among the constructs in the model. To analyze them, two multiple-sample
models, an unconstrained model and an equal paths model were tested. The results
of the test of equality show that the two models differ (df ¼ 10, x2diff: ¼ 67:72, p , 0.01).
x 2 difference tests between two groups were performed (Table III). A series of
comparison between the unconstrained model and the restricted model in which the
hypothesized path coefficient is constrained to be equal for both groups (df ¼ 1) revealed
that: three paths (web site content/functionality to satisfaction, customer service to
e-shopping intent, and satisfaction to e-shopping intent) are significantly moderated by
experiential e-shopping motives as anticipated (Table III). That is, the influences that:
JOSM
High experiential Low experiential
23,2 e-shopping motive e-shopping motive
Path (H4-H5) (n ¼ 149) (n ¼ 149) x 2 differencesa

EQ1 ! e-shopping satisfaction 0.07 (0.56)b 0.12 (0.92) 0.059 ( p ¼ 0.807)

EQ2 ! e-shopping satisfaction 0.30 (2.12) * 20.04 (20.99) 4.770 ( p ¼ 0.029)
208 EQ3 ! e-shopping satisfaction 20.06 (20.62) 0.19 (1.95) * 3.320 ( p ¼ 0.068)
EQ4 ! e-shopping satisfaction 0.32 (2.44) * 0.19 (1.24) 0.509 ( p ¼ 0.476)
EQ1 ! e-shopping intention 20.35 (22.35) *b 20.03 (21.42) 3.025 ( p ¼ 0.082)
EQ2 ! e-shopping intention 0.01 (0.05) 20.01 (21.11) 0.050 ( p ¼ 0.823)
EQ3 ! e-shopping intention 0.26 (2.25) * 0.00 (0.21) 4.587 ( p ¼ 0.032)
EQ4 ! e-shopping intention 20.01 (20.07) 0.02 (0.97) 0.753 ( p ¼ 0.386)
E-shopping 0.81 (6.05) * * * 0.10 (4.62) * * * 19.599 ( p , 0.001)
satisfaction ! e-shopping intention
Table III. Notes: Significant at: *p , 0.05, * *p , 0.01 and * * *p , 0.001; EQ1 (privacy/security), EQ2
Multiple-group (web site content/functionality), EQ3 (customer service), EQ4 (experiential/atmospheric); athe
moderation analyses by difference in parameter between the two groups is inferred from the difference in model fit between the
experiential e-shopping unconstrained model and the equal path model; bunstandardized path coefficients and t-values in
motives parentheses

(1) content/functionality has on e-shopping satisfaction;

(2) customer service has on e-shopping intention; and
(3) e-shopping satisfaction has on e-shopping intention are greater for the high
experiential e-shopping motive group relative to the low-experiential group
(Table III).

Thus, H4 and H5 are partially supported.

Discussion and implications

Results of the study suggest that apparel online shopping quality consists of four
dimensions:
(1) web site content/functionality;
(2) customer service;
(3) privacy/security; and
(4) experiential/atmospheric qualities.

Similar constructs are discussed in research examining apparel e-shopping (Kim and
Kim, 2004; Kim and Stoel, 2004). The explained variance of the first factor, web site
content/functionality (51.51 percent), was greater than the other three factors. This
indicates that web site content/functionality service makes the most significant
contribution, accounting for the greatest proportion of variation in overall perceptions
of apparel e-shopping quality.
Research suggests that the dimensionality of web site quality may differ by online
retail category (e.g. product type and/or delivery method) (Francis, 2009; Francis and
White, 2004; Peterson et al., 1997). Online apparel retailing, as an offline-product category,
comprises four e-shopping quality dimensions: privacy/security, web site
content/functionality, customer service, and atmospheric/experiential qualities.
There are some overlaps and differences between e-shopping quality dimensions Online apparel
identified in this study and those in other studies (Francis, 2009; Parasuraman et al., 2005; retailing
Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003). First, privacy/security and web site content/functionality
are commonly found in studies of various product retail settings (e.g. eTailQ scale,
E-S-QUAL scale, RECIPE scale), implying that online store features relating to these two
dimensions are fundamental qualities contributing to the customer perceptions’ of
e-shopping quality, perhaps, for all types of online retailers. Moreover, stable roles 209
that individual e-shopping quality factors play on shopping outcomes are observed.
For example, consistent with the findings in past research, this study shows that: privacy
influences loyalty intention (Parasuraman et al., 2005); customer service directly
influences loyalty intention; and web site content/functionality directly influences
e-shopping satisfaction (Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003).
On the other hand, unlike other scales, this study revealed that the
atmospheric/experiential dimension is a critical e-shopping quality factor in
developing customers’ evaluations of online stores, at least, for apparel/fashion
online retailers. This finding supports our anticipation that, while shopping online for
apparel items, customers seek and value atmospheric/experiential features such as
those generating feelings of fun, excitement, or pleasure and consider these features as
distinct benefits which influence their overall assessment of e-stores. It is also
noteworthy that, differing from past research (Francis, 2009; Parasuraman et al., 2005;
Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003) items representing fulfillment aspects were dropped
from the exploratory factor analysis, thus failing to appear in the final four-factor
service quality model. A possible reason for the neglected fulfillment factor could be
that, whether or not an order will be completed without errors may be no longer be a
concern for online shoppers. That is, consumers take the fulfillment aspect (accurate
order fulfillment and prompt delivery) for granted since the continuance of the retail
business depends on the ability to fulfill orders, thus fulfillment seems hardly to
contribute to customers’ perception of e-shopping quality. However, the inconsistency
in e-shopping quality dimensions warrants further exploration.
The results of this study support Oliver’s (1997) quality – satisfaction – behavioral
intention link model in an e-shopping context for apparel/fashion product shopping. That
is, among four dimensions of e-shopping quality, e-shoppers’ perceptions of web site
content/functionality and atmospheric/experiential quality influence their shopping
satisfaction which, in turn contributes to e-shopping intention. The findings also
contribute to Bagozzi’s (1992) appraisal – emotional response – coping framework by
confirming the notion in an online shopping environment. The finding that e-shopping
quality (web site content/functionality and atmospheric/experiential) affects e-shopping
intention through e-shopping satisfaction also supports the mediating role that emotional
response plays on the appraisal – coping association. Additional results reveal that
e-shopping quality (privacy/security and customer service) has a direct impact on
e-shopping intention, consistent with prior research (McDougall and Levesque, 2000).
Prior research suggests that consumer responses to technology-mediated
environments are susceptible to individual characteristics such as shopping motives
but the dynamics were not examined with respect to the roles that they may play in
evaluation of e-shopping quality aspects. Focusing on e-shopping motives directed at
hedonic, intrinsically motivated, autotelic activities in a virtual store (i.e. experiential
e-shopping motives), this study tests experiential e-shopping motive’s moderating
JOSM effects on consumer e-shopping behavior. Results provide some evidence to support the
23,2 proposition that high experiential e-shopping motives would strengthen the role that
experiential and hedonic e-shopping quality plays on e-shopping satisfaction.
Specifically, web site content/functionality increases e-shopping satisfaction as
experiential e-shopping motives increase. The observation that high experiential
e-shopping motives increase the experiential/atmospheric – e-shopping satisfaction link
210 directionally but not statistically also adds support to the proposition. Contrary to
prediction, however, experiential e-shopping motives do not moderate the effects of
experiential and hedonic e-shopping quality on e-shopping intention. Indeed, it is shown
that task-related e-shopping quality (customer service) increases e-shopping intention as
experiential e-shopping motives increase. Additionally, the influence of e-shopping
satisfaction on e-shopping intention becomes stronger when experiential e-shopping
motives are high compared to low experiential e-shopping motives. The findings suggest
that the moderation of consumers’ experiential e-shopping motives in e-shopping
contexts may occur along the nature of outcomes rather than predictors. Accordingly,
experiential e-shopping motives enhance behavioral response (e-shopping intention)
derived from goal/task-related e-shopping quality (privacy/security) and emotional
response (e-shopping satisfaction) in association with experiential/hedonic e-shopping
quality (web site content/functionality). Further investigation of experiential e-shopping
motive moderation in different e-shopping settings will be worthwhile.
The findings provide useful information for e-tail marketers to better understand the
online consumer response process and determine effective e-store management
strategies that reflect the differing customer evaluation processes by the experiential
shopping motives. First, online retailers selling apparel goods can promote customer
satisfaction with and intent to shop at their e-stores by managing their service quality
execution in terms of privacy/security, web site content/functionality, customer service,
and atmospheric/experiential quality. This is also important for multi-channel retailers
in that the web site is a major path leading shoppers to make purchases at stores. Second,
retailers targeting hedonic or experience-driven shoppers and/or hedonic-dominant
retail categories particularly need to make special efforts to create high-quality web site
content/functionality and customer service features, since a high level of consumer
e-shopping satisfaction exerts a stronger impact on e-shopping intention. For instance,
technical supports such as try-it-on, digital TV station, and live chat features can elicit
hedonic shoppers to visualize products and involve social interaction pleasantly which
will eventually enhance their virtual shopping experiences.

Limitations and suggestions for future research

The findings from this study should be interpreted with caution for several reasons.
First, the results have been accomplished using a single segment of the retail industry
(i.e. online apparel retailing). Hence, caution should be noted in applying the results to
other areas of retailing, such as service and/or product categories which are less likely to
entail look and feel attributes. Related to this, the conceptualization of e-shopping
quality dimensions and their effects on consumer e-shopping behavior might benefit
from additional investigation into other industry domains. For example, a typology of
internet retailing suggested by Francis (2007, 2009) can serve as a cornerstone for
delineating e-shopping quality dimensions corresponding to each e-tail category. Next,
the satisfaction scale used in this study was chosen to focus on emotional/affective state
in response to an online apparel store rather than cognitive-affective combined state. Online apparel
Different approaches to and measures of satisfaction may observe different findings retailing
regarding quality perceptions – satisfaction – behavioral intention associations, given
that various measurements exist for satisfaction. Last, a limitation of common method
bias in relation to the use of self-reported measure invites a unique approach to test the
proposed model utilizing other measures such as industry statistics.
The results of this study invite further research attention. The model under 211
investigation explains relatively low variances in e-shopping satisfaction (21.3 percent).
The lack of explanatory power by the proposed model warrants a need for investigating
additional antecedents to e-shopping satisfaction. In addition, future research in need is
to examine the influence of additional online shopping motive dimensions (e.g. social
shopping motive) on online shopping behavior. For example, Dholakia et al. (2004)
identify social motive factors (e.g. social enhancement) as reasons for participating in a
virtual community. Also, utilizing social cues such as an Avatar, live chat service, voice,
and interactive humanlike features is an effective strategy for online retailers to satisfy
customers with humanlike interactive/collaborative experiences and emotional
connections in a virtual world (Wang et al., 2007). Social shopping motives may
incorporate interactive and symbolic aspects of attitude, differing from utilitarian
motives as well as experiential shopping motives, possibly. Finally, an in-depth
examination of underlying e-shopping motives through a qualitative approach
(e.g in-depth interviews, narrative analyses) will lend insights into a better
understanding of how customers derive a satisfying online shopping experience.

References
Adaval, R. (2001), “Sometimes it just feels right: the differential weighting of affect-consistent and
affect-inconsistent product information”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28, pp. 1-17.
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Amstrong, J.S. and Overton, T.S. (1977), “Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys”, Journal
of Marketing Research, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 396-402.
Anderson, R.E. and Srinivasan, S.S. (2003), “E-satisfaction and e-loyalty: a contingency
framework”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 123-38.
Bagozzi, R.P. (1992), “The self regulation of attitudes, intentions, and behavior”, Social Psychology
Quarterly, Vol. 55 No. 22, pp. 178-204.
Bansal, H.S., McDougall, G.H.G., Dikolli, S.S. and Sedatole, K.L. (2004), “Relating e-satisfaction to
behavioral outcomes: an empirical study”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 4,
pp. 290-302.
Bauer, H.H., Falk, T. and Hammerschmidt, M. (2006), “eTailQuality: a transaction process-based
approach for capturing service quality in online shopping”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 59 No. 7, pp. 866-75.
Brady, M.K. and Robertson, C.J. (2001), “Searching for a consensus on the antecedent role of
service quality and satisfaction: an exploratory cross-national study”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 53-60.
Byrne, B. (2001), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS, LEA, Mahwah, NJ.
Case, C.J. and King, D.L. (2003), “Quantifying student internet purchasing behavior”, Business
Research Yearbook: Global Business Perspectives, Vol. X, University Press of America,
Lanham, MD, pp. 1-16.
JOSM Childers, T.L., Carr, C.L., Peck, J. and Carson, S. (2001), “Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for
online retail shopping behavior”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77, pp. 511-35.
23,2 Chiou, J.-S., Wu, L.-Y. and Sung, Y.-P. (2009), “Buyer satisfaction and loyalty intention in online
auctions: online auction web site versus online auction seller”, Journal of Service
Management, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 521-43.
Collier, J.E. and Bienstock, C.C. (2006), “Measuring service quality in e-retailing”, Journal of
212 Service Research, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 260-75.
Cristobal, E., Flavian, C. and Guinaliu, M. (2007), “Perceived e-service quality: measurement
validity and effects on consumer satisfaction and web site loyalty”, Managing Service
Quality, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 317-40.
Cronin, J.J., Brady, M.K. and Hult, G.T.M. (2000), “Assessing the effects of quality, value, and
customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environment”, Journal
of Retailing, Vol. 76 No. 2, pp. 193-218.
Dhar, R. and Wertenbroch, K. (2000), “Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitarian goods”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 37, pp. 60-71.
Dholakia, U.M., Bagozzi, R.P. and Pearo, L.K. (2004), “A social influence model of consumer
participation in network- and small-group-based virtual communities”, International
Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 241-63.
Fassnacht, M. and Koese, I. (2006), “Quality of electronic services: conceptualizing and testing a
hierarchical model”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 19-37.
Fassnacht, M. and Köse, I. (2007), “Consequences of web-based service quality: uncovering a
multi-faceted chain of effects”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 35-54.
Finn, G. (2008), “The mandate of multichannel customer experiences”, available at: http://
multichannelmerchant.com/retail/the-mandate-of-multichannel-customer-experiences/
(accessed 8 March 2010).
Francis, J.E. (2007), “Internet retailing quality: one size does not fit all”, Managing Service Quality,
Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 341-55.
Francis, J.E. (2009), “Category-specific RECIPEs for internet retailing quality”, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 7, pp. 450-61.
Francis, J.E. and White, L. (2004), “Value across fulfillment-product categories of internet
shopping”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 14 Nos 2/3, pp. 226-34.
Girard, T., Silverblatt, R. and Korgaonkar, P. (2002), “Influence of product class
on preference for shopping on the internet”, Journal of Computer Mediated
Communication, Vol. 8 No. 1, available at: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue1/girard.
html (accessed 30 July 2011).
Gotlieb, J.B., Grewal, D. and Brown, S.W. (1994), “Consumer satisfaction and perceived quality:
complementary or divergent constructs?”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79 No. 6,
pp. 875-85.
Heinonen, K. and Strandvik, T. (2009), “Monitoring value-in-use of eservice”, Journal of Service
Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 33-51.
Janda, S., Trocchia, P.J. and Gwinner, K.P. (2002), “Consumer perceptions of internet retail
service quality”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 13 No. 5,
pp. 412-33.
Kim, E.Y. and Kim, Y.-K. (2004), “Predicting online purchase intentions for clothing products”,
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38 No. 7, pp. 883-97.
Kim, S. and Stoel, L. (2004), “Apparel retailers: website quality dimensions and satisfaction”,
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 109-17.
Klein, L.R. (1998), “Evaluating the potential of interactive media through a new Online apparel
lens: search versus experience goods”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 41 No. 3,
pp. 195-203. retailing
La, K.V. and Kandampully, J. (2002), “Electronic retailing and distribution of services: cyber
intermediaries that serve customers and service providers”, Managing Service Quality,
Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 100-16.
Lam, S.Y., Shankar, V., Erramilli, M.K. and Murthy, B. (2004), “Customer value, satisfaction, 213
loyalty, and switching costs: an illustration from a business-to-business service context”,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 293-311.
Lee, G.-G. and Lin, H.-F. (2005), “Customer perception of e-service quality in online shopping”,
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 161-76.
Loiacono, E.T., Watson, R.T. and Goodhue, D.L. (2007), “WebQual: an instrument for consumer
evaluation of web sites”, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 11 No. 3,
pp. 51-87.
McDougall, G.H.G. and Levesque, T. (2000), “Customer satisfaction with services: putting
perceived value into the equation”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 392-410.
MacKinnon, D.P., Fairchild, A.J. and Fritz, M.S. (2007), “Mediation analysis”, Annual Review of
Psychology, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 593-614.
Mano, H. and Oliver, R.L. (1993), “Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption
experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20
No. 3, pp. 451-66.
National Retail Federation (2007), “Online clothing sales surpass computers, according to
shop.org/Forrester research study”, 14 May, available at: www.nrf.com/modules.php?
name¼news&op¼viewlive&sp_id¼292/ (accessed 15 April 2010).
Novak, T.P., Hoffman, D.L. and Dukacheck, A. (2003), “The influence of goal-directed and
experiential activities on online flow experiences”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 13
Nos 1/2, pp. 3-16.
Nysveen, H., Pedersen, P.E. and Thorbjornsen, H. (2005), “Explaining intention to use mobile
chat services: moderating effects of gender”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 5,
pp. 247-56.
Office for National Statistics (2010), “Internet access 2010: households and individuals”,
available at: www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/iahi0810.pdf (access 15 December 2010).
Oliver, R.L. (1993), “Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response”, Journal
of Retailing, Vol. 20, pp. 418-30.
Oliver, R.L. (1997), Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, McGraw-Hill,
New York, NY.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Malhotra, A. (2005), “E-S-QUAL: a multiple-item scale
for assessing electronic service quality”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 7 No. 3,
pp. 213-33.
Parsons, A.G. (2002), “Non-functional motives for online shoppers: why we click”, Journal of
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 380-92.
Peterson, R.A., Balasubramanian, S. and Bronnenberg, B.J. (1997), “Exploring the implications of
the internet for consumer marketing”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 25
No. 4, pp. 329-46.
Petty, R.E. and Cacioppo, J.T. (1986), Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral
Routes to Attitude Change, Springer, New York, NY.
JOSM Pew Internet & American Life Style Project (2009), “Generations online in 2009”, 28 January,
available at: http://pewinternet.org/, /media//Files/Reports/2009/PIP_Generations_2009.
23,2 pdf (accessed 15 December).
Rodgers, W., Negash, S. and Suk, K. (2005), “The moderating effect of on-line experience on the
antecedents and consequences of on-line satisfaction”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 22
No. 4, pp. 313-31.
214 Ross, M. (2010), “Maturing ecommerce means web retailers must think differently”, 13 April,
available at: www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3c4e8a36-1fc3-11df-8975-00144feab49a.html/ (accessed
30 April).
Seock, Y.-K. and Norton, M.J.T. (2008), “College students’ perceived attributes of internet
websites and online shopping”, College Student Journal, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 186-97.
Sheth, J.N. (1983), “An integrative theory of patronage preference and behavior”, in Darden, W.C.
and Lusch, R.F. (Eds), Patronage Behavior and Retail Management, Elsevier, New York,
NY, pp. 9-28.
Shiv, B. and Fedorikhin, A. (1999), “Heart and mind in conflict: the interplay of affect and
cognition in consumer decision making”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 26 No. 3,
pp. 278-92.
Sivaramakrishnan, S., Wan, F. and Tang, Z. (2007), “Giving an ‘e-human touch’ to e-tailing: the
moderating roles of static information quantity and consumption motive in the
effectiveness of an anthropomorphic information agent”, Journal of Interactive Marketing,
Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 60-75.
Smith, D., Menon, S. and Sivakumar, K. (2005), “Online peer and editorial recommendations,
trust, and choice in virtual markets”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 3,
pp. 15-37.
Sohn, C. and Tadisina, S.K. (2008), “Development of e-service quality measure for internet-based
financial institution”, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 19 No. 9,
pp. 903-18.
Suh, J.-C. and Yi, Y. (2006), “When brand attitudes affect the customer-satisfaction loyalty
relation: the moderating role of product involvement”, Journal of Consumer Psychology,
Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 145-55.
van Birgelen, M., de Jong, A. and de Ruyter, K. (2006), “Multi-channel service retailing: the effects
of channel performance satisfaction on behavioral intentions”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 82
No. 4, pp. 367-77.
Venkatesan, R., Kumar, V. and Ravishanker, N. (2007), “Multichannel shopping: causes and
consequences”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 71 No. 2, pp. 114-32.
Vijayasarathy, L.R. (2004), “Predicting consumer intentions to use on-line shopping: the case for
an augmented technology acceptance model”, Information & Management, Vol. 41 No. 6,
pp. 747-62.
Wang, L.C., Baker, J., Wagner, J.A. and Wakefield, K. (2007), “Can a retail website be social?”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 143-57.
Wang, Y.J., Hernandez, M.D. and Minor, M.S. (2010), “Web aesthetics effects on perceived online
service quality and satisfaction in an e-tail environment: the moderating role of purchase
task”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 63 Nos 9/10, pp. 935-42.
Westbrook, R.A. (1981), “Sources of consumer satisfaction with retail outlet”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 68-85.
Wolfinbarger, M. and Gilly, M.C. (2001), “Shopping online for freedom, control, and fun”,
California Management Review, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 34-55.
Wolfinbarger, M. and Gilly, M.C. (2003), “e-TailQ: dimensionalizing, measuring and predicting Online apparel
etail quality”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 183-98.
Yoo, B. and Donthu, N. (2001), “Developing a scale to measure the perceived quality of an internet
retailing
shopping site (SITEQUAL)”, Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 2 No. 1,
pp. 31-46.
Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A. and Malhotra, A. (2000), “A conceptual framework
for understanding e-service quality: implications for future research and 215
managerial practice”, Working Paper No. 00-115, Marketing Science Institute,
Cambridge, MA.
Zourrig, H., Chebat, J.-C. and Toffoli, R. (2009), “Exploring cultural differences in customer
forgiveness behavior”, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 404-19.

Appendix. Measure of research constructs

Experiential e-shopping motives
Respondents indicated the importance of each item on a seven-point scale (1 ¼ not important at
all, 7 ¼ very important):
(1) When deciding to shop online, it is important to me that the online retailer offers
enjoyment and excitement.
(2) When deciding to shop online, it is important to me that the online retailer allows me to
look for new or unique ideas.
(3) When deciding to shop online, it is important to me that the online retailer allows me to
check my favorites regularly.
(4) When deciding to shop online, it is important to me that the online retailer helps me try
new sites.
(5) When deciding to shop online, it is important to me that the online retailer offers
opportunities for diversion from the routine of daily life.
E-shopping satisfaction
Respondents indicated the performance of the online apparel store (1 ¼ strongly disagree,
7 ¼ strongly agree):
(1) My choice to shop using the web site is a wise idea.
(2) I am satisfied with my decision to shop this web site.
(3) I have really enjoyed shopping from this web site.
E-shopping intention
Respondents indicated their intention to shop apparel online (1 ¼ strongly disagree,
7 ¼ strongly agree):
(1) I intend to use the internet frequently to shop for apparel.
(2) I intend to use the internet whenever appropriate to do apparel shopping.

Corresponding author
Sejin Ha can be contacted at: ha5@purdue.edu

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints