sustainability

Article
Understanding Consumers’ Purchase Intention for
Online Paid Knowledge: A Customer
Value Perspective
Luyan Su, Ying Li * and Wenli Li
School of Economics and Management, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China;
suluyan@foxmail.com (L.S.); wlli@dlut.edu.cn (W.L.)
* Correspondence: yingli@dlut.edu.cn




Received: 5 September 2019; Accepted: 29 September 2019; Published: 30 September 2019


Abstract: Online knowledge platforms have been undergoing a transformation from providing
free knowledge to online paid knowledge (OPK). As customers play a key role in the sustainable
development and success of the new business model, we focused on the factors that drive consumers’
online knowledge purchase intention. Drawing on the cognitive–affective–conative framework
and customer value theory, we propose that consumers rationally evaluate the customer values of
OPK in the cognitive stage, followed by generating trust and identification in the affective stage,
then leading to a purchase decision. Six factors were extracted from three dimensions of customer
value: Functional, emotional, and social values. The hypotheses were tested using survey data
obtained from 504 respondents using structural equation modeling. The findings confirm that
customer value and identification with the knowledge contributor significantly influence trust in
OPK. Trust in OPK and identification with the knowledge contributor both significantly influence
purchase intention, whereas trust in the platform neither influences consumers’ trust in OPK nor
purchase intention. The findings of this study will help OPK platforms to increase their sales of
knowledge products.

Keywords: online paid knowledge; customer value; trust; identification; purchase intention

1. Introduction
Online paid knowledge (OPK) has attracted many consumers, and the OPK market is growing
quickly. The OPK market size in China was about 4.91 billion Yuan (USD $720 million) in 2017,
increasing by 300% compared with the previous year [1]. OPK transactions usually occur on online
knowledge platforms, which are online communities where users can share, sell, seek, and buy
knowledge, such as question and answer (Q&A) sites (e.g., Quora an Zhihu in China) and online
course platforms (e.g., Coursera and edX). Originally, the content on these platforms was free, so most
platforms’ revenue relied on advertising. However, as more content value and different knowledge
platforms emerge, the quality of knowledge may not be maintained. For example, the quality of both
questions and answers in Q&A sites seems to have been diluted [2]. As a result, users have to spend
more time and effort screening large amounts of free knowledge to obtain the desired knowledge [3].
To attract both knowledge seekers and contributors, some knowledge platforms offer OPK as a service
that allows knowledge contributors and platforms to charge knowledge seekers for specific knowledge.
Such practice creates a sustainable profit model that creates tripartite benefits to platforms, knowledge
contributors, and consumers. For knowledge contributors, they can obtain economic returns and create
social reputation by contributing their successful methods, experiences, and unique thoughts [4,5].
For consumers, they can draw value from OPK [6] from subscriptions such as “receiving the best

Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420; doi:10.3390/su11195420 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 2 of 19

management tips in five minutes”. For platforms, they can receive stable revenue in the forms of direct
sales, commissions, value-added services, and advertisement. To better attract and retain consumers,
online knowledge platforms as well as knowledge contributors must understand why consumers pay
for the knowledge, to help build a profitable and sustainable business model [4,7].
As the OPK phenomenon is relatively new in practice, the psychological mechanism that
influences customer purchases of OPK is still unclear. Prior research has mainly focused on users’
knowledge-seeking or adoption behaviors in a free context, which has provided some insights. For
example, people who participate in online knowledge searches are more concerned about knowledge
characteristics such as specialty, preciseness, and diversity [8]. High-quality information is usually the
main driver for people to use a free knowledge search engine or learning systems [9–14]. With the
development of social media, social factors also became important, such as social support [10] and
social responses [14]. People may also want to establish an erudite self-image by showing impressive
opinions and spreading useful contents. In doing so, they may get more social support in social
interactions. In contrary, if they lack knowledge, they may have negative emotions, such as anxious,
in communicating with others. These people need a reliable and high-quality source of knowledge.
However, with the explosion of information online, users require much more time to find and examine
their wanted knowledge. Current online knowledge platforms allow users to pay for high-quality
content. However, as it is a paid service, the extra value customers derive from OPK and how customers
make the purchase decision are still unclear.
To answer the above research questions, we investigated the factors influencing consumers’
intention to purchase OPK on online knowledge platforms. First, drawing on customer value theory,
we focused on three dimensions of customer value when consumers decide to purchase OPK: Functional,
emotional, and social values. Functional value in terms of knowledge quality and price utility is a basic
value for which customers pay [15,16]. In addition, we think that OPK could offer extra value that free
knowledge may not. In this regard, the emotional and social values may fulfill customers’ higher-level
needs, such as enjoyment and receiving comfort from obtaining knowledge, creating a positive social
image as well as building social relationships. Second, we attempted to understand the process of a
customer’s purchase decision by applying the cognitive-affective- conative framework [17]. According
to the framework, the cognitive stage focuses on what values are important when customers consider
purchasing OPK and how they rationally evaluate the OPK’s value. The affective stage is the emotional
or feeling state. In our context, trust is vital, and customer value may build trust in OPK. As knowledge is
subjective and conveys the knowledge contributor’s characteristics, we further examined identification
with the knowledge contributor and trust in the platform during the affective stage. Finally, affective
factors may influence consumers’ purchase intention (conative stage). The proposed model was tested
using survey data in China.

2. Theoretical Background

2.1. Customer Value Theory

Customer value is a customer’s evaluation of a product [18] and needs gratification [16]. Previous
studies considered customer value to be an important predictor of customer purchase decision [19–22].
The value framework incorporates three pertinent dimensions of customer consumption value:
Functional, emotional, and social values [23].
Functional value is the perceived utility of a product based on the item’s capacity for functional
or utilitarian performance. Quality factors (information quality, service quality, and system quality)
are vital determinants of trust [24]. OPK’s functional value may be derived from its characteristics or
attributes, including specialty, preciseness, diversity, usefulness, up-to-date information, time-saving,
effort-saving, and reasonable price. Hsiao and Chen [15] proved that perceived content and perceived
price are determinants of perceived value, whereas technical factors are not important in e-book
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 3 of 19

subscription. Perceived usefulness and perceived fee significantly influence perceived value in paid
content [22].
Emotional value is the perceived utility of a product based on the item’s capacity to generate
feelings or affective states. Previous studies focused on arousing positive feelings or affective states and
perceived enjoyment, and suggested that perceived enjoyment is a vital factor in purchase intention
for online content services [22] and digital items in social networking communities [21]. A consumer’s
perceived enjoyment is positively associated with the consumer’s intention to use [25–27] and trust
beliefs [27–29]. Rouibah et al. [27] examined the role of perceived enjoyment in trust formation on
online payment.
Social value is the perceived utility of a product based on the item’s ability to enhance one’s
social self-concept. A consumer is influenced by the way in which they view themselves or wish
to be viewed by others. Social value (self-image expression and relationship support) significantly
influences purchase intention in social networking communities [21]. Knowledge community users are
usually influenced by social factors [4,5,10,14]. Community social responses [14] and users’ community
participation [30] help users’ social relationships and influence consumer behavior.

2.2. Cognitive–Affective–Conative Framework

Consumers’ purchase decisions involve three stages: Cognitive, affective, and conative [17]. The
cognitive stage is the intellectual, mental, or rational state of a consumer’s mind. The affective stage
refers to the emotional or feeling state. The conative stage indicates the striving state, related to the
tendency to treat objects as positive or negative goals [17].
In the cognitive stage, consumers perceive the elements related to the product and evaluate the
value rationally. Fang et al. [31] examined the role of perceived value in the cognitive stage in an
e-commerce context. Cognitive aspects, such as ideas, are important in decision making [32]. Yoo et
al. [33] applied the cognition-to-action framework and suggested that quality is an important factor in
the cognitive phase.
In the affective stage, consumers generate feelings about OPK, knowledge contributors, and
platforms. For example, consumers feel trust if they perceive a product is more valuable [31] or high
quality [34]. Identification with the knowledge contributor is consumers’ sense of oneness or belonging
with the knowledge contributor’s identity [35], and customer identification with the seller is positively
related to purchase intention in the conative stage [36].

3. Research Model and Hypotheses

Figure 1 presents our proposed model in this study. Based on the cognitive–affective–conative
framework and customer value theory, we propose that consumers rationally evaluate OPK value in
the cognitive stage, including functional value (price utility and knowledge quality), emotional value
(perceived enjoyment and anxiety relief), and social value (knowledge-image expression and social
relationship support). In the affective stage, we propose that consumers generate feelings or affective
states about OPK (trust in OPK), the platform (trust in the platform), and the knowledge contributor
(identification with the knowledge contributor). We further propose that perceived customer value in
the cognitive stage influences trust in OPK in the affective stage. Affective elements, such as consumers’
trust in and identification with the knowledge contributor, positively impact on purchase intention
(conative stage).
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 4 of 19
Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 19

Cognitive stage Affective stage Conative stage

Functional value
Knowledge
quality

Indentification
Price utility with knowledge
H6 contributor
Emotional value H7
H5 H4
Perceived
enjoyment H8
Trust in Purchase
H9 paid knowledge H1 intention
Anxiety relief
H10
H3 H2
Social value
Social H11 Trust in
knowledge-image platform
expression
Social
relationship
support

Figure 1. Research model. H1–H11 indicate hypotheses 1–11, respectively.

Figure 1. respectively.

3.1.
3.1. Affective
Affective Elements
Elements
Trust
Trust in
in paid
paid knowledge
knowledge is is defined
defined as as the
the consumer
consumer perception
perception that
that the
the OPK
OPK provided
provided by by the
the
knowledge contributor has characteristics that benefit the consumer. A consumer
knowledge contributor has characteristics that benefit the consumer. A consumer pays knowledge pays knowledge
contributors
contributors for
for useful
useful knowledge,
knowledge, which
which may
may save
save time
time andand effort
effort when
when seeking
seeking needed
needed knowledge
knowledge
due
due to the vast amounts of available information. The literature indicates that consumers’ trust
to the vast amounts of available information. The literature indicates that consumers’ trust in
in the
the
product provided by an e-vendor is associated with purchase intention in e-commerce
product provided by an e-vendor is associated with purchase intention in e-commerce [37–39]. Trust [37–39]. Trust
also
also influences
influences information
informationadoption
adoptionin inthe
thewiki
wiki[13].
[13]. If
If aa consumer
consumer believes
believes thethe OPK
OPK is
is reliable,
reliable, they
they
may be more likely to pay for it. Therefore, the following hypothesis
may be more likely to pay for it. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed: is proposed:

Hypothesis 11 (H1).
Hypothesis (H1): Trust in
in OPK
OPK provided
provided by
by the
the knowledge
knowledge contributor
contributor positively
positively affects
affects intention
intention to
to
purchase OPK.
purchase OPK.
Trust in the online knowledge platform is defined as the consumer’s perception that the online
Trust in the online knowledge platform is defined as the consumer’s perception that the online
knowledge platform has characteristics that benefit the consumer [40]. Consumers’ perceptions of
knowledge platform has characteristics that benefit the consumer [40]. Consumers’ perceptions of
OPK may be influenced by the knowledge sources, one of which is the platform. Online knowledge
OPK may be influenced by the knowledge sources, one of which is the platform. Online knowledge
platforms provide places where consumers and knowledge contributors can exchange value and
platforms provide places where consumers and knowledge contributors can exchange value and
provide the facilities and management to complete a successful transaction. Platforms select or invite
provide the facilities and management to complete a successful transaction. Platforms select or invite
professional knowledge contributors and may cooperate with providers to produce paid courses to
professional knowledge contributors and may cooperate with providers to produce paid courses to
guarantee consumers’ rights. Trust in the online knowledge platform may influence the consumers’
guarantee consumers’ rights. Trust in the online knowledge platform may influence the consumers’
reliance on the credibility of the OPK. The literature indicates that consumers’ trust in a community
reliance on the credibility of the OPK. The literature indicates that consumers’ trust in a community or
or website is associated with purchase intention in e-commerce [41–43]. In the context of information
website is associated with purchase intention in e-commerce [41–43]. In the context of information
or knowledge, trust in the platform influences the intention to obtain information [42,44], adopt
or knowledge, trust in the platform influences the intention to obtain information [42,44], adopt
information [13], and share knowledge [45]. If consumers do not trust a platform but trust the e-seller,
information [13], and share knowledge [45]. If consumers do not trust a platform but trust the e-seller,
they are less likely to engage in purchase behavior with the e-sellers through the platform and may
choose other methods of transacting with them [44]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 5 of 19

they are less likely to engage in purchase behavior with the e-sellers through the platform and may
choose other methods of transacting with them [44]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 2 (H2). Trust in the platform positively affects intention to purchase OPK.

Perceptions about the website (e.g., usefulness) positively affect trust in the vendor [46]. According
to trust transfer theory, a buyer’s trust in a platform positively affects their trust in a seller [37]. The
OPK platform is a place where the professionalism of knowledge contributors and the reliability of the
OPK can be demonstrated. Site trust affects information trust [47]. If consumers feel the platform is
more reliable, consumers tend to trust the OPK on this platform. Therefore, the following hypothesis
is proposed:

Hypothesis 3 (H3). Trust in the platform positively affects trust in the OPK.

Identification with the knowledge contributor refers to the extent to which individuals perceive
oneness or belongingness with the knowledge contributor identity [35]. Social identity theory suggests
that people typically exceed their identity to develop a social identity, through which they can
distinguish themselves from others in social contexts [48]. Consumers are more likely to be attracted
by a company identity that has prestige or that is similar to their own identity or has distinctive traits
that consumers value. Consumer identification with the company will affect consumer behaviors [49].
A consumer who highly identifies with a seller would have a higher level of purchase intention [36,50]
and loyalty [51]. A company may share the same knowledge interest with consumers in the context of
OPK, so the knowledge contributor’s identity may attract consumers and lead consumers to pay for
OPK. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 4 (H4). Identification with the knowledge contributor positively affects intention to purchase OPK.

Consumer identification with a brand is positively related to trust [52] and resilience to negative
information, which means that consumers tolerate defects in information [53]. Online knowledge
platforms users tend to have a common identity and purpose, and they feel bonded with the knowledge
contributor and other members interested in the same provider [54]. The knowledge contributor and
brand may influence consumers. When consumers are attracted by the provider’s identity, consumers
tend to believe the OPK is trustworthy and ignore the negative information about the provider or OPK.
Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 5 (H5). Identification with the knowledge contributor positively affects trust in OPK.

3.2. Customer Value Elements

In this section, we discuss the impacts of customer value elements on trust in paid knowledge.
We extract six factors from the three dimensions of customer value. In this research context, we
consider knowledge quality and price utility as functional values, perceived enjoyment and anxiety
relief as emotional values, and social knowledge-image expression and social relationship support as
social values.
Knowledge quality is defined as the perceived degree to which the OPK helps meet needs.
Knowledge quality includes the appropriate format (e.g., texts or video) and accurate information.
Consumers may perceive higher-quality OPK as containing more useful methods or up-to-date
information that save consumer time and effort. Therefore, consumers may tend to believe that the
knowledge contributor respects consumers’ rights and payments and offers reliable OPK. Studies
suggested that high-quality information enhances users’ trust of knowledge communities and
engagement because the information they gain from the communities is useful [10,14,37]. Information
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 6 of 19

quality is an important determinant of online learning usage [9,55]. Perceived information usefulness
significantly influences purchase online content services [22]. Studies have shown that quality is vital
in trust formation and e-commerce success [24]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 6 (H6). Knowledge quality positively affects trust in OPK.

Price utility refers to the extent to which a consumer perceives a product is worth the price.
As suggested by previous research, perceived price significantly influences purchase intention of online
content [15,22]. Pricing policy significantly affects retailer trust [56]. In the context of OPK, when
consumers perceive the OPK’s price is rational and the use of money is more effective, consumers tend
to believe that the knowledge contributor considers consumers’ rights when offering reliable OPK.
Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 7 (H7). Price utility positively affects trust in OPK.

Perceived enjoyment is defined as the extent to which a consumer perceives that the activity of
acquiring specific OPK is enjoyable in its own right, with no consideration of instrumental benefits
from the gained knowledge [25]. Perceived enjoyment is an aspect of perceived value that positively
affects purchase intention in the context of online content services [22]. It also positively influences
a consumer’s intention to use [25–27] and trust beliefs [27–29] in online services. Rouibah et al. [27]
confirmed the role of perceived enjoyment in trust formation on online payment. In the context of OPK,
consumers who perceive enjoyment when using OPK may have an emotional tendency to trust the
OPK, which is helpful for establishing a long-term emotional attachment to OPK product. Achieving
long-term results by learning OPK often requires consumers’ time and effort, so consumers tend
to believe that enjoyable OPK is more likely to be used in the long-term. Therefore, the following
hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 8 (H8). Perceived enjoyment positively affects trust in OPK.

Anxiety relief refers to the extent to which a consumer perceives the activity of purchasing or using
specific OPK helps alleviate anxiety. People may experience considerable anxiety regarding success,
fierce competition, time pressure, and limited energy. Negative emotions, such as fear and anxiety,
significantly influence users’ behavior [57,58]. Negative emotions increase people’s engagement in
problem-solving and seeking of utilitarian products [59]. Research suggests that anxiety promotes
buying [60]. OPK can help consumers upgrade skills and solve problems, which provides consumers
the emotional value of relieving anxiety. Anxiety negatively affects e-trust [28] and website trust beliefs
for an unfamiliar site [29]. OPK is a useful tool for relieving consumers’ anxiety, so may influence
consumers’ perception of its benefits and credibility. Buying behavior can alleviate negative emotional
arousal [61]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 9 (H9). Anxiety relief positively affects trust in OPK.

Social knowledge-image expression refers to a consumer’s perception of OPK’s capability to build

and enhance one’s image of knowledge in the eyes of others. Consumers’ relationships with other
consumers positively influence trust [62]. Self-image expression significantly influences purchase
intention in social networking communities [21]. OPK may help a consumer to know more than others,
be more insightful, show competence at work, etc., which help to build an image of a knowledgeable
person. People tend to develop a positive self-concept of being knowledgeable [63] and professional
reputations [5]. If consumers believe that OPK can help them create a knowledgeable image, they
may perceive the goods are more reliable and worth the investment of time and effort. Therefore, the
following hypothesis is proposed:
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 7 of 19

Hypothesis 10 (H10). Social knowledge-image expression positively affects trust in OPK.

Social relationship support refers to a consumer’s perception of OPK’s capability to help establish,
develop, and enhance interpersonal relationships. Studies suggested that social responses and
emotional support affect users’ seeking behaviors and information adoption [10,14]. Consumers’
relationships with other consumers positively influence trust [62]. OPK is a kind of channel that helps
consumers understand more topics and obtain up-to-date information when they communicate with
others. The OPK themes can help consumers to find social circles where they share similar interests or
focus on achieving the same goals. If consumers believe that OPK helps with their social relationships,
they may perceive the goods are more reliable. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 11 (H11). Social relationship support positively affects trust in OPK.

We also considered several control variables that might influence OPK purchase behavior: Age,
sex, education, and experience with online knowledge platforms.

4. Research Methodology

4.1. Development of Instruments

All the measurement items used in this study were adapted from prior validated scales, as shown
in Table 1. These items were measured using a seven-point Likert scale ranging from one, strongly
disagree, to seven, strongly agree. All the survey items were pilot-tested using samples collected from
43 participants. The results indicated that the measurement model fulfilled the criteria for reliability,
convergent validity, and discriminant validity.

Table 1. Measurement scales.

Construct Item Wording Sources

PU1 The knowledge product sold offers value for my money. [23]
Price utility (PU) PU2 The knowledge product sold here is appropriate for
the price.
KQ1 The knowledge product sold provides relevant [23,24]
knowledge that meets my needs.
KQ2 The knowledge product sold presents the knowledge in
an appropriate format (e.g., appropriate words, pictures,
audio, live example, or summary).
Knowledge quality (KQ) KQ3 The knowledge product sold has an acceptable standard
of quality.
KQ4 The knowledge product on the online knowledge
platform is up-to-date enough for my purposes.
KQ5 The knowledge product on the online knowledge
platform provides me with the precise information
I need.
PE1 Using the knowledge sold here stimulates my curiosity. [21,25]
PE2 Using the knowledge sold here arouses my imagination.
Perceived enjoyment (PE)
PE3 I find using knowledge enjoyable.
PE4 I have fun using knowledge.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 8 of 19

Table 1. Cont.

Construct Item Wording Sources

AR1 Using the knowledge sold reduces the fear I feel of a lack [60]
of knowledge.

Anxiety relief (AR) AR2 Using the knowledge sold reduces my feeling of being
upset or feeling panic about the lack of knowledge.
AR3 Using the knowledge sold reduces my worries about the
lack of knowledge.
SKE1 Using the knowledge sold enhances my image of being [23]
knowledgeable to others.
SKE2 Using the knowledge sold improves my
Social knowledge-image
knowledge-expression to others.
expression (SKE)
SKE3 Using the knowledge sold makes a good knowledge
impression on others.
SKE4 Using the knowledge sold improves how I am perceived.
SRS1 Using the knowledge sold better enables me to form [21]
interpersonal bonds with others.
SRS2 Using the knowledge sold helps me maintain my social
Social relational support relationships with others.
(SRS)
SRS3 Using the knowledge sold helps me make new friends.
SRS4 Using the knowledge sold enhances my social
relationships with others.
TK1 The performance of this online paid knowledge meets [38,41]
my expectations.
Trust in online paid
knowledge (TK) TK2 This paid knowledge can be relied upon as a good
knowledge product.
TK3 This paid knowledge is a reliable knowledge product.
TP1 This online knowledge platform is a reliable online [39]
knowledge platform.
TP2 This online knowledge platform gives the impression
Trust in the platform (TP)
that it keeps promises and commitments.
TP3 I believe that this online knowledge platform has my
best interests in mind.
IKC1 This knowledge contributor indicates the kind of person [51,64]
I am.
Identification with the IKC2 This knowledge product provider’s knowledge-image
knowledge contributor and my knowledge-image are similar.
(IKC) IKC3 I am attached to the knowledge product provider.
IKC4 The knowledge product provider produces a strong
sense of belonging.
PI1 I am very likely to buy the knowledge product. [65]
Purchase intention(PI) PI2 I would consider buying the knowledge product.
PI3 I intend to buy the knowledge product.

4.2. Sample and Procedure

A web-based survey questionnaire was distributed to collect data. As we focused on consumers’
purchase intention in the context of OPK, we limited our respondents to those who have used known
online knowledge platforms. We set a screening question to allow only those who had previously
used platforms to qualify to participate. Each respondent was asked to select a platform they recently
used that could help them recall the experience. Then, we displayed a typical OPK introduction page
on the platform they had just chosen. The respondents were asked to answer each question to the
extent to which they agreed with each statement. The questionnaire contained a few nominally scaled
background questions (Table 2).
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 9 of 19

Table 2. Demographic statistics of the respondents.

Demographic Variable Frequency (n) Percentage (%)

Sex
Male 257 50.99%
Female 247 49.01%
Age
Less than 18 years 10 1.98%
18–25 years 459 91.07%
26–30 years 31 6.15%
More than 31 years 4 0.79%
Education status
Doctorate degree 7 1.39%
Master degree 166 32.94%
Bachelor degree 323 64.09%
College or less 8 1.59%
Experience with online knowledge platforms
Less than 1 year 175 34.72%
1–2 years 210 41.67%
3–4 years 108 21.43%
More than 5 years 11 2.18%
Monthly spent on paid knowledge on platforms
Less than 50 yuan 292 57.94%
51–100 yuan 141 27.98%
101–300 yuan 56 11.11%
More than 301 yuan 15 2.98%
Usage Frequency
Every day 60 11.91%
Every three days 119 23.61%
Every week 104 20.64%
Every month 93 18.45%
More than a month 128 25.40%
Monthly expenses
Less than 1000 yuan 79 15.68%
1001–2000 yuan 323 64.09%
2001–3000 yuan 71 14.09%
3001–4000 yuan 18 3.57%
More than 4000 13 2.58%

We collected data in a university with about 41,000 students. We prepared both online and offline
versions of questionnaires and randomly distributed them to students on campus. Each student was
only allowed to fill in one survey. From 29 November 2017 to 30 December 2017, 570 questionnaires
were returned. We removed some questionnaires that included contradicting responses, as these
respondents might not have read and answered the questionnaire carefully. Finally, we had 504 surveys
for our data analysis. The descriptive characteristics of the sample are listed in Table 2.

5. Data Analysis and Results

In this research, we analyzed a path model using the partial least squares (PLS) structural equation
modeling (SEM) technique using SmartPLS 3.0 (SmartPLS GmbH, Bönningstedt, Germany) [66] to test
our hypotheses. PLS was used for data analysis since it places minimum restrictions on samples size,
measurement scales, and residual distributions [67,68]. PLS is more appropriate for analyzing complex
and larger models [69]. Specifically, the two main reasons for choosing PLS-SEM rather than other SEM
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 10 of 19

technique were: (1) The PLS technique examines the measurement and structural model by ignoring
other covariance that is not explicitly stated in the model [70]. This method is particularly useful for
estimating the exploratory relationships and for theory building. (2) PLS is regarded as being more
suitable when the purpose of the model is prediction rather than testing well-established theory [71].
In our study, we had new constructs, such as anxiety relief, which have not been previously used in the
OPK context. We used a two-step approach to conduct data analysis. First, the reliability and construct
validity were assessed. Then, the structure model was examined in the second step to test the research
hypothesis. In the study, we used SmartPLS 3.0 and SPSS 22.0 (SPSS IBM, New York, NY, USA) in our
data analysis.

5.1. Model Fit

Henseler et al. [72] recommend the evaluation of global model fit as the preliminary step in PLS
model assessment. They suggested examining three model fit indexes: (1) The standardized root mean
squared residual (SRMR), (2) the unweighted least squares discrepancy (dULS ), and (3) the geodesic
discrepancy (dG ). The SRMR is defined as the difference between the observed correlation and the
model implied correlation matrix [73]. SRMR values below the threshold of 0.08 are considered a
good fit. If dULS and dG exceed bootstrap-based 95(I95) or 99% (HI99) percentiles, the model is likely
inaccurate [73]. For our model, the SRMR was 0.05, indicating an acceptable model fit. The value
of dULS was 1.16, less than the bootstrapped HI 99% of dULS . The value of dG was 0.75, less than the
bootstrapped HI 99% of dG . Together, the results indicate that the model fit the data well.

5.2. Measurement Model

Data analysis was conducted using SmartPLS 3.0. The quality of a measurement model is
usually evaluated based on the criteria of reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity [74].
Reliability is usually assessed by two indicators: Cronbach’s α and composite reliability. Table 3 lists
the reliability indicators of the constructs. The lowest composite reliability was 0.90, and the lowest
Cronbach’s α was 0.84, which is higher than the recommended minimum value of 0.7 [75], indicating
the adequate reliability of the measurement for each construct.

Table 3. Reliability of measurement items.

Composite Average Variance

Construct Mean SD Cronbach’s α
Reliability Extracted (AVE)
Anxiety relief (AR) 5.24 1.14 0.93 0.95 0.87
Knowledge quality (KQ) 5.04 1.16 0.88 0.91 0.73
Price utility (PU) 5.29 1.09 0.88 0.91 0.67
Perceived enjoyment (PE) 5.24 1.13 0.90 0.93 0.78
Trust in knowledge (TK) 4.72 1.31 0.93 0.96 0.88
Trust in platform (TP) 4.74 1.24 0.87 0.94 0.89
Social knowledge-image expression (SKE) 5.04 1.17 0.92 0.95 0.81
Social relational support (SRS) 4.71 1.26 0.93 0.95 0.83
Identification with knowledge
5.33 1.06 0.92 0.95 0.85
contributor (IKC)
Purchase intention (PI) 5.07 1.26 0.84 0.90 0.75

Construct validity can be assessed using convergent validity and discriminant validity. Convergent
validity is defined as the degree to which the measurement items are related to the construct to which
they were theoretically predicted to be related. Table 4 shows that all of the items exhibited a
loading higher than 0.7 for their respective constructs, and Table 3 showed that all the average
variances extracted (AVEs) ranged from 0.669 to 0.89 and were higher than 0.5, which is the threshold
recommended by Fornell and Larcker [76], indicating good convergent validity.
Discriminant validity refers to the extent to which measures of different model constructs are
unique. In this study, we evaluated the discriminant validity by comparing the correlations between
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 11 of 19

constructs and the square root of the AVE of each construct. Table 5 lists the correlations among
constructs, with the square root of the AVE on the diagonal. The square root of each construct’s AVE is
much higher than the construct’s correlations with all of the other constructs, suggesting sufficient
discriminant validity [75]. Table 3 shows the cross-loading of the items on all latent constructs used in
the model, also indicating reasonable discriminant validity.

Table 4. Factor loadings and cross-loadings. Factor loadings are shown in bold.

AR IKC KQ PE PI PU SKE SRS TK TP

AR1 0.92 0.35 0.51 0.49 0.30 0.39 0.39 0.30 0.50 0.31
AR2 0.94 0.36 0.42 0.44 0.33 0.35 0.45 0.33 0.48 0.28
AR3 0.95 0.34 0.45 0.42 0.34 0.39 0.40 0.33 0.47 0.29
IKC1 0.36 0.88 0.52 0.43 0.42 0.52 0.44 0.34 0.55 0.42
IKC2 0.29 0.86 0.43 0.33 0.40 0.46 0.43 0.40 0.44 0.34
IKC3 0.35 0.86 0.49 0.41 0.43 0.51 0.43 0.34 0.61 0.40
IKC4 0.25 0.81 0.35 0.31 0.40 0.43 0.40 0.45 0.41 0.31
KQ1 0.45 0.44 0.85 0.47 0.40 0.49 0.35 0.21 0.53 0.33
KQ2 0.41 0.46 0.80 0.46 0.39 0.54 0.35 0.26 0.47 0.36
KQ3 0.43 0.49 0.82 0.49 0.29 0.53 0.39 0.24 0.54 0.41
KQ4 0.35 0.34 0.80 0.42 0.25 0.36 0.31 0.17 0.47 0.24
KQ5 0.39 0.43 0.82 0.43 0.36 0.46 0.40 0.27 0.52 0.38
PE1 0.46 0.40 0.47 0.89 0.35 0.44 0.50 0.36 0.49 0.30
PE2 0.38 0.39 0.44 0.84 0.39 0.41 0.49 0.38 0.47 0.28
PE3 0.42 0.37 0.54 0.89 0.32 0.49 0.47 0.35 0.54 0.38
PE4 0.45 0.39 0.52 0.91 0.34 0.51 0.50 0.36 0.52 0.37
PI1 0.32 0.45 0.37 0.35 0.93 0.47 0.33 0.32 0.52 0.22
PI2 0.32 0.46 0.40 0.39 0.94 0.43 0.34 0.33 0.55 0.24
PI3 0.33 0.45 0.38 0.38 0.94 0.46 0.36 0.35 0.53 0.24
PU1 0.42 0.58 0.59 0.51 0.43 0.95 0.40 0.34 0.57 0.47
PU2 0.34 0.48 0.50 0.47 0.48 0.93 0.34 0.31 0.51 0.41
SKE1 0.40 0.44 0.39 0.48 0.32 0.33 0.88 0.50 0.45 0.31
SKE2 0.42 0.48 0.44 0.55 0.34 0.38 0.91 0.39 0.55 0.33
SKE3 0.40 0.45 0.38 0.48 0.35 0.34 0.92 0.49 0.51 0.32
SKE4 0.38 0.43 0.38 0.48 0.31 0.37 0.89 0.40 0.49 0.30
SRS1 0.31 0.44 0.28 0.38 0.33 0.33 0.49 0.90 0.35 0.29
SRS2 0.32 0.41 0.25 0.37 0.31 0.30 0.47 0.92 0.33 0.25
SRS3 0.28 0.39 0.25 0.36 0.32 0.30 0.41 0.89 0.32 0.24
SRS4 0.33 0.37 0.25 0.38 0.33 0.32 0.42 0.93 0.31 0.23
TK1 0.51 0.55 0.59 0.55 0.57 0.57 0.55 0.37 0.92 0.42
TK2 0.46 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.49 0.51 0.50 0.33 0.92 0.37
TK3 0.46 0.56 0.58 0.49 0.51 0.51 0.50 0.30 0.93 0.44
TP1 0.29 0.40 0.38 0.35 0.20 0.41 0.33 0.25 0.39 0.89
TP2 0.27 0.40 0.38 0.31 0.26 0.43 0.32 0.31 0.38 0.86
TP3 0.26 0.32 0.34 0.33 0.18 0.37 0.25 0.16 0.39 0.86
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 12 of 19

Table 5. Correlations between latent variables.

AR IKC KQ PE PI PU SKE SRS TK TP

AR 0.93
IKC 0.37 0.85
KQ 0.50 0.53 0.82
PE 0.49 0.44 0.56 0.88
PI 0.35 0.49 0.41 0.40 0.94
PU 0.40 0.57 0.58 0.52 0.48 0.94
SKE 0.45 0.50 0.44 0.55 0.37 0.39 0.90
SRS 0.34 0.44 0.28 0.41 0.36 0.34 0.49 0.91
TK 0.52 0.60 0.62 0.57 0.57 0.58 0.56 0.36 0.92
TP 0.31 0.43 0.42 0.38 0.25 0.47 0.35 0.28 0.45 0.87
Notes: Diagonal elements (in bold) are the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE).

We also calculated the variance inflation factor (VIF) values for all the constructs to assess the
degree of multicollinearity. We used SPSS 22.0 and conducted a regression analysis by modeling
purchase intention as the dependent variable and the other nine variables as the independent variables.
Our results show that the VIF did not exceed 2.37, which is well below the suggested threshold of
3–5 [77]. Thus, multicollinearity is not a significant concern.

5.3. Structural Model

The theoretical model and hypothesized relationships were estimated using the SmartPLS 3.0
bootstrap approach with a sample size of 1000 to generate t-values and standard errors for determining
the significance of paths in the structural model. The results for the structural model are shown in
Table 6 and Figure 2. For the hypotheses, eight are supported, and three are rejected. The coefficient of
determination (R2 ) indicates that the predictor variables (the external variables) explained 58.148% of
TK (trust in OPK)’s variance. TK, IKC (identification with the knowledge contributor), and TP (trust in
the platform) explained 36.45% of PI (purchase intention). For the control variables, age, education
status, and experience with knowledge platforms were all found to have no significant influence on
purchase intention. Sex had a significant influence on purchase intention. We discuss the results in the
next section.

Table 6. Hypotheses testing results.

Hypothesis Relationship Path Coefficients t-Value p-Value Testing

between Variables (β) Results
H1 TK → PI 0.45 7.99 0.00 *** Supported
H2 TP → PI −0.06 1.34 0.18 Rejected
H3 TP → TK 0.07 1.33 0.19 Rejected
H4 IKC → PI 0.24 4.79 0.00 *** Supported
H5 IKC → TK 0.21 2.48 0.01 * Supported
H6 KQ → TK 0.19 2.00 0.05 * Supported
H7 PU → TK 0.13 2.17 0.03 * Supported
H8 PE → TK 0.13 2.25 0.03 * Supported
H9 AR → TK 0.14 3.29 0.00 ** Supported
H10 SKE → TK 0.18 2.35 0.02 * Supported
H11 SRS → TK −0.04 0.60 0.55 Rejected
Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Sustainability 11, 5420
2019,2019,
Sustainability 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 19
13 of 19

FigureFigure 2. Testing
2. Testing results.
results. DottedDotted arrows
arrows indicate
indicate not not significant
significant paths.
paths. * p* <p 0.05,
< 0.05,****p p<<0.01,
0.01,***
*** pp <
< 0.001.
0.001.
6. Discussion and Implications
6. Discussion and Implications
6.1. Discussion
6.1. Discussion
In this study, we focused on the antecedents of consumers’ purchase intention for OPK, including
In this study, we focused on the antecedents of consumers’ purchase intention for OPK,
functional value, emotional value, social value, trust, and identification.
including functional value, emotional value, social value, trust, and identification.
6.1.1. Affective Elements
6.1.1. Affective Elements
Our Our
results show
results that
show trust
that trustininOPK
OPKand andidentification withthe
identification with theknowledge
knowledge contributor
contributor werewere
the the
key antecedents of purchase intention, whereas trust in the platform was not
key antecedents of purchase intention, whereas trust in the platform was not important. Consumers important. Consumers
are concerned
are concerned about what
about whattheythey paypayfor.
for.They
They are
are willing
willing totobuy
buyOPKOPK from
from which
which theythey
couldcould benefit
benefit
and toandensure thatthat
to ensure the the
invested
invested time
timeandandeffort
effortis
is not wasted.
wasted.As AsOPK
OPK is subjective
is subjective as a as a digital
digital product,
product,
trust trust
in OPKin OPK
is anisimportant
an important factor
factor affectingpurchase
affecting purchase intention.
intention.
Identification with the knowledge
Identification with the knowledge contributor positivelycontributor positively affected
affected consumers’
consumers’ purchasepurchase
intention.
This finding is consistent with those reported in previous works [36,50]. Our findings findings
intention. This finding is consistent with those reported in previous works [36,50]. Our suggest that
suggest that if a consumer has formed an identification with the knowledge contributor, the
if a consumer has formed an identification with the knowledge contributor, the consumer is more
consumer is more likely to be attracted to and trust the OPK from the provider. Identification will
likely to be attracted to and trust the OPK from the provider. Identification will directly influence the
directly influence the purchase intention.
purchase Trust
intention.
in the platform had no effect on consumer purchase intention, and this result is contrary
Trust in the e-commerce
to previous platform had no effect
research thaton consumer
showed trust purchase intention,
in the website and this
significantly result
affects is contrary
purchase
to previous
intentione-commerce
[41–43]. As OPKresearch
delivers that showed
methods, trust in the
experience, and website significantly
unique insights from theaffects purchase
knowledge
intention [41–43].toAs
contributors OPK delivers
consumers, methods,
the knowledge experience,
content relies on and
theunique
knowledge insights from the
contributors knowledge
instead of
platforms. This may explain that trust in the platform is being unimportant.
contributors to consumers, the knowledge content relies on the knowledge contributors instead of Consumers’ trust in the
platform
platforms. neither
This mayinfluenced
explain that consumers’
trust in trust in OPK nor
the platform is purchase intention, which
being unimportant. is in line with
Consumers’ thein the
trust
situation
platform neitherfor many OPK platforms.
influenced consumers’ trust in OPK nor purchase intention, which is in line with the
situation for many OPK platforms.
6.1.2. Customer Value Elements
Customer
6.1.2. Customer value
Value influenced consumers’ trust in OPK. The results showed that one aspect of
Elements
functional value, knowledge quality, significantly influenced consumers’ trust in OPK, which is
Customer value
consistent with theinfluenced consumers’
findings reported trust
by Shen et al.in[13].
OPK. The results
Another showed
aspect of that
functional one price
value, aspect of
functional value, knowledge quality, significantly influenced consumers’ trust in OPK, which is
consistent with the findings reported by Shen et al. [13]. Another aspect of functional value, price
utility, significant influenced trust in OPK as well, in alignment with previous work [56]. People see
functional value as being important when they evaluate the credibility of OPK.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 14 of 19

Two aspects of emotional value, perceived enjoyment and anxiety relief, significantly influenced
trust in OPK. Learning with enjoyment makes the consumer feel the OPK is beneficial and worth
the investment of time and effort, strengthening the consumer’s trust beliefs in OPK. We also added
anxiety relief as a new type of emotional value. In line with Chen et al. [59], acquiring useful goods
may help consumers solve problems and reduce anxiety. People obtaining OPK can improve skills and
solve problems, which may reduce their anxiety about success, fierce competition, time pressure, and
limited energy. Whereas previous studies about customer value focused on generating or improving
positive feelings (e.g., enjoyment), we also examined how OPK helps relieve negative feelings, i.e.,
anxiety. To summarize, the enjoyable process of using OPK increases consumers’ trust, which further
increases purchase intention. Moreover, anxiety relief influences consumers’ behaviors and increases
customer assessment of value.
The findings further revealed that one aspect of social value, social knowledge-image expression,
significantly influenced consumers’ trust in OPK, which is consistent with previous work [62].
People who used knowledge communities preferred to develop a positive self-concept of being
knowledgeable [63] and maintain their professional reputations [5]. OPK can help consumers to solve
problems, improve skills, and know more than others, which will make a consumer feel knowledgeable
and be regarded as knowledgeable by others. Unexpectedly, another aspect of social value, social
relational support, had no significant effect on trust in OPK, and this result is contrary to that reported
by Habibi et al. [62]. One explanation could be that people see knowledge-image expression as being
more important than social relationship support when they decide to purchase OPK. When consumers
evaluate OPK, they pay more attention to its performance: Better quality and better self-image.

6.2. Implications for Research

The findings provide four theoretical contributions. First, this study is one of the pioneering studies
focusing on consumers’ purchase of OPK, and we first integrated elements relevant to consumers,
knowledge contributors, and platforms into one model. Whereas prior studies paid more attention to
user behavior (e.g., knowledge seeking) in a free knowledge context, we focused on purchase behavior
in a paid context.
Second, this study is the first to apply customer value theory to the OPK context to understand
consumers’ OPK purchase intention. Previous studies used social exchange theory [4,14], social
support theory [10], expectation confirmation theory [78], information adoption model [10,13], social
capital theory [5,79], motivation theory [5,7], and self-discrepancy theory [63] from a personality traits
perspective [80] to investigate why users use knowledge platforms. In terms of paid knowledge,
little research examined knowledge as a commodity, and the reasons why consumers purchase OPK
remain unclear. We applied customer value theory to focus on what value attracts consumers. The
findings verified that functional value (represented by knowledge quality and price utility), emotional
value (represented by perceived enjoyment and anxiety relief), and social value (represented by social
knowledge-image expression) are important factors influencing consumer behaviors.
Third, we added anxiety relief as a new aspect of emotional value, which extends the customer
value theory to the OKP context. We suggest that the unique value of paid knowledge, anxiety relief, is
a particular aspect of emotional value influencing consumer behavior, thereby extending customer
value theory and expanding studies on OPK. Previous studies of customer value focused on driving
positive feelings (e.g., enjoyment) [16,22], but overlooked the role of reducing negative feelings (e.g.,
anxiety). According to previous studies, negative emotions (e.g., anxiety) would increase people’s
engagement in problem-solving and the willingness to obtain utilitarian products [59], and tension
release significantly influences consumer behavior [58]. Our results verified that anxiety relief is an
important value influencing consumers’ trust in OPK.
Fourth, the findings suggest trust in OPK is an important antecedent of purchase intention for
OPK, and two types of trust have different impacts. As OPK delivers the knowledge contributor’s
personally successful methods, experience, and unique insights, consumers’ purchases are determined
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 15 of 19

by knowledge contributors’ characteristics, which may explain that trust in the platform is being
unimportant. Therefore, different types of trust have different underlying mechanisms influencing
purchase intention. This finding should be considered in future studies, suggesting that we should pay
more attention to OPK and knowledge contributors rather than platforms. We investigated trust in
OPK from a customer value perspective based on knowledge characteristics.

6.3. Implications for Practice

The findings have practical implications for both knowledge contributors and platforms. For
knowledge contributors, they could focus on the important values that benefit consumers and express
their social identities. First, knowledge contributors may provide accurate, professional, and unique
OPK at a rational price, and emphasize the specific skills or problems they may provide or help address.
Second, knowledge contributors may make the use of OPK enjoyable since an enjoyable process
improves consumer trust in OPK, so they are more willing to and sure about investing time and effort
in learning. Knowledge contributors can focus on conveying utilitarian knowledge and emphasizing
that this knowledge can help consumers relieve anxiety, such as by improving competition with others,
reducing career pressure, and efficiently using limited time and limited energy. Third, they may
emphasize that the OPK can help consumers establish a positive knowledge image, meaning that
consumers view themselves better or are viewed better by others by using OPK. Fourth, knowledge
contributors should express a distinct social identity and use each characteristic to attract consumers
and gain consumers’ trust. Several methods can be used to express their social identities, such as
listing jobs to attract consumers with similar jobs, expressing their values and knowledge pursuits to
attract like-minded consumers, and describing their professional reputation in relevant fields.
For platforms, they could focus on the important values that benefit consumers, inviting knowledge
contributors with distinct images and known reputations in relevant fields, helping knowledge
contributors express their social identities, and retaining existing knowledge contributors. First,
regarding knowledge content generation, platforms could provide management to ensure knowledge
quality and reasonable price, and introduce stimulus measures to encourage knowledge contributors
to provide high-value knowledge. Platforms may cooperate with knowledge contributors to offer high
quality and high price utility OPK. Second, platforms may provide more specific product introduction
forms to help knowledge contributors emphasize the OPK’s specific value and recommend knowledge
to quickly meet consumers’ needs. Templates introducing functional, emotional, and social values
mentioned above in the introduction should be provided and price brackets and categories could
be used to quickly match the different needs of the customers, such as high-quality information,
cost-effective, most enjoyable, anxiety-relieving information, and better knowledge-image. Third,
platforms could pay more attention to inviting and retaining good knowledge contributors with
distinct images and known reputations in the relevant fields, like society celebrities and experts, and
help knowledge contributors better express their social identity characteristics to attract consumers.
Fourth, platforms could present their OPK to consumers through personalized matching based on
consumers’ social identities. They may display different categories and different OPK in different
orders for each consumer according to their identity characteristics, such as career, followed users, and
followed knowledge area. Each consumer could have a unique OPK page.

7. Limitations and Future Research

This study has three limitations. First, although studying purchase intention is appropriate in the
focal context, a need remains to explore actual purchase behavior on OPK. Future research can use
transaction data to confirm actual purchase behavior. Second, the sample was limited to university
students. Although the university students are the majority of online knowledge platforms users, they
may not precisely reflect the whole population. Conducting a study to cover larger populations is an
option for future research. Third, the sample was limited to OPK platform users in China; therefore, the
generalizability of the findings to other countries may be limited. There might be culture differences,
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 16 of 19

for example, in customer value. Future research can examine if users in different countries have
different costumer values.
Future research should search for additional antecedents and moderators that influence consumers’
purchase intention for OPK, such as personality traits (e.g., innovativeness [80]), habit [19,20], and
epistemic curiosity [8]. Future research could examine other customer values and explore how
personality traits affect purchase intention.

8. Conclusions
OPK is an emerging avenue for consumers to obtain knowledge and a new revenue source for
knowledge platforms and providers. Figuring out why consumers purchase OPK is important for the
success of knowledge platforms and providers. In this study, we integrated customer value theory and
the cognitive–affective–conative framework to examine consumers’ purchase intention. The results
showed that customer value, trust, and identification are important antecedents affecting consumers’
OPK purchase intention. Online consumers’ purchase intentions are influenced by their trust in
OPK and identification with the knowledge contributor, and consumers’ trust in OPK is influenced
by customer value and identification. Unexpectedly, the trust in the platform does not influence
consumers’ trust in OPK or purchase intention. Specifically, knowledge quality and price utility are
important functional values that influence consumers’ trust in OPK. Both enjoyment and anxiety relief
are important emotional values that positively influence consumers’ trust in OPK. Social relationship
support (an aspect of social value) also positively influences consumers’ trust in OPK. The findings
have several important theoretical and practical implications for consumers’ OPK purchase behaviors.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, methodology, investigation, formal analysis, writing—original draft

preparation, L.S.; Conceptualization, writing—review and editing, Y.L.; Supervision, funding acquisition, W.L.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71431002, 71874022,
and 71421001) and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China (DUT18RW129).
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the editor and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive
comments and suggestions.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Iresearch. 2018 China’s Online Paid Knowledge Market Report. 2018. Available online: https://Www.
Iresearchchina.Com/Content/Details8_42838.Html (accessed on 31 July 2018).
2. Cathy. Zhihu.Com, Bridging The Gap of Growing Knowledge Sharing Demand in China. 2017. Available
online: https://Digit.Hbs.Org/Submission/Zhihu-Com-Bridging-the-Gap-of-Growing-Knowledge-Sharing-
Demand-In-China/ (accessed on 31 July 2019).
3. Feng, E. Chinese Tech Apps Trade Knowledge for Cash. 2017. Available online: https://Www.Ft.Com/
Content/Add21080-0ace-11e7-97d1-5e720a26771b#Comments-Anchor (accessed on 6 May 2019).
4. Guo, S.; Guo, X.; Fang, Y.; Vogel, D. How doctors gain social and economic returns in online health-care
communities: A professional capital perspective. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2017, 34, 487–519. [CrossRef]
5. Wasko, M.L.; Faraj, S. Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic
networks of practice. MIS Q. 2005, 29, 35–57. [CrossRef]
6. Yuan, L. Chinese willing to pay for trustworthy web content. Wall Street Journal, 4 January 2017.
7. Lai, H.-M.; Chen, T.T. Knowledge sharing in interest online communities: A comparison of posters and
lurkers. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 35, 295–306. [CrossRef]
8. Koo, D.-M.; Choi, Y.-Y. Knowledge search and people with high epistemic curiosity. Comput. Hum. Behav.
2010, 26, 12–22. [CrossRef]
9. Alsabawy, A.Y.; Cater-Steel, A.; Soar, J. Determinants of perceived usefulness of e-learning systems. Comput.
Hum. Behav. 2016, 64, 843–858. [CrossRef]
10. Jin, J.; Yan, X.; Li, Y.; Li, Y. How users adopt healthcare information: An empirical study of online q&a
community. Int. J. Med. Inf. 2015, 86, 91–103.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 17 of 19

11. Joo, Y.J.; Joung, S.; Son, H.S. Structural relationships among effective factors on e-learners’ motivation for
skill transfer. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 32, 335–342. [CrossRef]
12. Mohammadi, H. Investigating users’ perspectives on e-learning: An integration of tam and is success model.
Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 45, 359–374. [CrossRef]
13. Shen, X.L.; Cheung, C.M.K.; Lee, M.K.O. What leads students to adopt information from wikipedia? An
empirical investigation into the role of trust and information usefulness. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2013, 44,
502–517. [CrossRef]
14. Yan, B.; Jian, L. Beyond Reciprocity: The bystander effect of knowledge response in online knowledge
communities. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 76, 9–18. [CrossRef]
15. Hsiao, K.-L.; Chen, C.-C. Value-based adoption of e-book subscription services: The roles of environmental
concerns and reading habits. Telemat. Inform. 2017, 34, 434–448. [CrossRef]
16. Yeha, C.-H.; Wanga, Y.-S.; Yieh, K. Predicting smartphone brand loyalty: Consumer value and consumer-brand
identification perspectives. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2016, 36, 245–257. [CrossRef]
17. Lavidge, R.J.; Steiner, G.A. A model for predictive measurements of advertising effectiveness. J. Mark. 1961,
25, 59–62. [CrossRef]
18. Zeithaml, V.A. Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of
evidence. J. Mark. 1988, 52, 2–22. [CrossRef]
19. Chiu, C.-M.; Hsu, M.-H.; Lai, H.; Chang, C.-M. Re-examining the influence of trust on online repeat purchase
intention: The moderating role of habit and its antecedents. Decis. Support Syst. 2012, 53, 835–845. [CrossRef]
20. Hsu, M.-H.; Chang, C.-M.; Chuang, L.-W. Understanding the determinants of online repeat purchase
intention and moderating role of habit: The case of online group-buying in taiwan. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2015,
35, 45–56. [CrossRef]
21. Kim, H.-W.; Gupta, S.; Koh, J. Investigating the intention to purchase digital items in social networking
communities: A customer value perspective. Inf. Manag. 2011, 48, 228–234. [CrossRef]
22. Wang, Y.-S.; Yeh, C.-H.; Liao, Y.-W. What drives purchase intention in the context of online content services?
The moderating role of ethical self-efficacy for online piracy. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2013, 33, 199–208. [CrossRef]
23. Sweeney, J.C.; Soutar, G.N. Consumer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale. J. Retail.
2001, 77, 203–220. [CrossRef]
24. Wang, W.-T.; Wang, Y.-S.; Liu, E.-R. The stickiness intention of group-buying websites: The integration of the
commitment–trust theory and e-commerce success model. Inf. Manag. 2016, 53, 625–642. [CrossRef]
25. Abdullah, F.; Ward, R.; Ahmed, E. Investigating the influence of the most commonly used external variables
of tam on students’ perceived ease of use (peou) and perceived usefulness (pu) of e-portfolios. Comput. Hum.
Behav. 2016, 63, 75–90. [CrossRef]
26. Chang, C.-T.; Hajiyev, J.; Su, C.-R. Examining the students? behavioral intention to use e-learning in
azerbaijan? The general extended technology acceptance model for e-learning approach. Comput. Educ.
2017, 111, 128–143. [CrossRef]
27. Rouibah, K.; Lowry, P.B.; Hwang, Y. The effects of perceived enjoyment and perceived risks on trust formation
and intentions to use online payment systems: New perspectives from an Arab country. Electron. Commer.
Res. Appl. 2016, 19, 33–43. [CrossRef]
28. Hwang, Y.; Kim, D.J. Customer self-service systems: The effects of perceived web quality with service
contents on enjoyment, anxiety, and e-trust. Decis. Support Syst. 2007, 43, 746–760. [CrossRef]
29. Wakefield, R. The influence of user affect in online information disclosure. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2013, 22,
157–174. [CrossRef]
30. Oestreicher-Singer, G.; Zalmanson, L. Content or community? A digital business strategy for content
providers in the social age. MIS Q. 2013, 37, 591–616. [CrossRef]
31. Fang, J.; Shao, Y.; Wen, C. Transactional quality, relational quality, and consumer e-loyalty: Evidence from
sem and fsqca. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2016, 36, 1205–1217. [CrossRef]
32. Lee, D.; Moon, J.; Kim, Y.J.; Yi, M.Y. Antecedents and consequences of mobile phone usability: Linking
simplicity and interactivity to satisfaction, trust, and brand loyalty. Inf. Manag. 2015, 52, 295–304. [CrossRef]
33. Chul, W.Y.; Kim, Y.J.; Sanders, D.L. The impact of interactivity of electronic word of mouth systems and
e-quality on decision support in the context of the e-marketplace. Inf. Manag. 2015, 52, 496–505.
34. López-Miguens, M.J.; Vázquez, E.G. An integral model of e-loyalty from the consumer’s perspective. Comput.
Hum. Behav. 2017, 72, 397–411. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 18 of 19

35. Ashforth, B.E.; Mael, F. Social identity theory and the organization. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1989, 14, 20–39.
[CrossRef]
36. Albert, N.; Merunka, D.; Valette-Florence, P. Brand passion: Antecedents and consequences. J. Bus. Res. 2013,
66, 904–909. [CrossRef]
37. Chen, X.; Huang, Q.; Davison, R.M.; Hua, Z. What drives trust transfer? The moderating roles of seller-specific
and general institutional mechanisms. Int. J. Electron. Comm. 2015, 20, 261–289. [CrossRef]
38. Gefen, D.; Karahanna, E.; Straub, D.W. Trust and tam in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Q. 2003,
27, 51–90. [CrossRef]
39. Kim, D.J.; Ferrin, D.L.; Rao, H.R. A Trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce:
The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decis. Support Syst. 2008, 44, 544–564. [CrossRef]
40. Mayer, R.C.; Davis, J.H.; Schoorman, F.D. An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Manag. Rev.
1995, 20, 709–734. [CrossRef]
41. Gefen, D. E-Commerce: The role of familiarity and trust. Omega 2000, 28, 725–737. [CrossRef]
42. Lu, Y.; Zhao, L.; Wang, B. From virtual community members to c2c e-commerce buyers: Trust in virtual
communities and its effect on consumers’ purchase intention. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2010, 9, 346–360.
[CrossRef]
43. Mcknight, D.H.; Choudhury, V.; Kacmar, C. The impact of initial consumer trust on intentions to transact
with a web site: A trust building model. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2002, 11, 297–323. [CrossRef]
44. Hajli, N.; Sims, J.; Zadeh, A.H.; Richard, M.-O. A social commerce investigation of the role of trust in a social
networking site on purchase intentions. J. Bus. Res. 2017, 71, 133–141. [CrossRef]
45. Hashim, K.F.; Tan, F.B. The mediating role of trust and commitment on members’ continuous knowledge
sharing intention: A commitment-trust theory perspective. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2015, 35, 145–151. [CrossRef]
46. Koufaris, M.; Hampton-Sosa, W. The development of initial trust in an online company by new customers.
Inf. Manag. 2004, 41, 377–397. [CrossRef]
47. Wu, T.-Y.; Lin, C.A. Predicting the effects of ewom and online brand messaging: Source trust, bandwagon
effect and innovation adoption factors. Telemat. Inform. 2017, 34, 470–480. [CrossRef]
48. Tajfel, H.; Turner, J.C. The Social Identity Theory of Inter-Group Behavior in Psychology of Intergroup Relations;
Nelson-Hall Publishers: Chicago, IL, USA, 1986; pp. 7–24.
49. Bhattacharya, C.B.; Sen, S. Consumer-company identification: A framework for understanding consumers’
relationships with companies. J. Mark. 2003, 67, 76–88. [CrossRef]
50. Keh, H.T.; Xie, Y. Corporate reputation and customer behavioral intentions: The roles of trust, identification
and commitment. Ind. Market. Manag. 2009, 38, 732–742. [CrossRef]
51. Popp, B.; Woratschek, H. Consumers’ relationships with brands and brand communities—The multifaceted
roles of identification and satisfaction. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 35, 46–56. [CrossRef]
52. He, H.; Li, Y.; Harris, L. Social identity perspective on brand loyalty. J. Bus. Res. 2012, 65, 648–657. [CrossRef]
53. Elbedweihy, A.M.; Jayawardhena, C.; Elsharnouby, M.H.; Elsharnouby, T.H. Customer relationship building:
The role of brand attractiveness and consumer—Brand identification. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 2901–2910.
[CrossRef]
54. Kim, M.-S.; Kim, H.-M. The effect of online fan community attributes on the loyalty and cooperation of
fan community members: The moderating role of connect hours. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 68, 232–243.
[CrossRef]
55. Dağhan, G.; Akkoyunlu, B. Modeling the continuance usage intention of online learning environments.
Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 60, 198–211. [CrossRef]
56. Anselmsson, J.; Burt, S.; Tunca, B. An integrated retailer image and brand equity framework: Re-examining,
extending, and restructuring retailer brand equity. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 38, 194–203. [CrossRef]
57. Spielberger, C.D. Theory and research on anxiety. In Anxiety and Behavior Newyork; Spileberger, C.D., Ed.;
Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1966; pp. 3–20.
58. Zolkepli, I.A.; Kamarulzaman, Y. Social media adoption: The role of media needs and innovation
characteristics. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 43, 189–209. [CrossRef]
59. Chen, C.Y.; Lee, L.; Yap, A.J. Control deprivation motivates acquisition of utilitarian products. J. Consum.
Res. 2016, 43, 1031–1047. [CrossRef]
60. Darrat, A.A.; Darrat, M.A.; Amyx, D. How impulse buying influences compulsive buying: The central role
of consumer anxiety and escapism. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2016, 31, 103–108. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2019, 11, 5420 19 of 19

61. Gallagher, C.E.; Watt, M.C.; Weaver, A.D.; Murphy, K.A. “I fear, therefore, i shop!” Exploring anxiety
sensitivity in relation to compulsive buying. Pers. Individ. Differ. 2017, 104, 37–42. [CrossRef]
62. Habibi, M.R.; Laroche, M.; Richard, M.-O. The roles of brand community and community engagement in
building brand trust on social media. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 37, 152–161. [CrossRef]
63. Packard, G.; Wooten, D.B. Compensatory knowledge signaling in consumer word-of-mouth. J. Consum.
Psychol. 2013, 23, 434–450. [CrossRef]
64. Stokburger-Sauer, N.; Ratneshwar, S.; Sen, S. drivers of consumer—Brand identification. Int. J. Res. Mark.
2012, 29, 406–418. [CrossRef]
65. Gefen, D.; Straub, D.W. Consumer Trust in b2c e-commerce and the importance of social presence: Experiments
in e-products and e-services. Omega 2004, 32, 407–424. [CrossRef]
66. Ringle, C.M.; Wende, S.; Becker, J.-M. Smartpls 3. 2015. Available online: www.smartpls.com (accessed on 12
December 2018).
67. Gefen, D.; Rigdon, E.E.; Straub, D. An update and extension to sem guidelines for administrative and social
science research. MIS Q. 2011, 35, A7. [CrossRef]
68. Pavlou, P.A.; Fygenson, M. Understanding and predicting electronic commerce adoption: An extension of
the theory of planned behavior. MIS Q. 2006, 30, 115–143. [CrossRef]
69. Lowry, P.B.; Gaskin, J. Partial least squares (pls) structural equation modeling (sem) for building and testing
behavioral causal theory: When to choose it and how to use it. IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun. 2014, 57, 123–146.
[CrossRef]
70. Straub, D.; Boudreau, M.-C.; Gefen, D. Validation guidelines for is positivist research. Commun. Assoc. Inf.
Syst. 2004, 13, 24. [CrossRef]
71. Chin, W.W. Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. MIS Q. 1998, 22, Vii–Xvi.
72. Henseler, J.; Hubona, G.; Ray, P.A.; Systems, D. Using pls path modeling in new technology research:
Updated guidelines. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2016, 116, 2–20. [CrossRef]
73. Hu, L.-T.; Bentler, P.M. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized
model misspecification. Psychol. Methods 1998, 3, 424–453. [CrossRef]
74. Hair, J.; Hollingsworth, C.L.; Randolph, A.B.; Chong, A.Y.L. An updated and expanded assessment of
pls-sem in information systems research. Ind. Manage. Data Syst. 2017, 117, 442–458. [CrossRef]
75. Gefen, D.; Straub, D.W.; Boudreau, M.-C. Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for
research practice. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2000, 4, 7. [CrossRef]
76. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement
error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [CrossRef]
77. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle
River, NJ, USA, 2009.
78. Jin, X.L.; Zhou, Z.; Lee, M.K.O.; Cheung, C.M.K. Why users keep answering questions in online question
answering communities: A theoretical and empirical investigation. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2013, 33, 93–104.
[CrossRef]
79. Chiu, C.M.; Hsu, M.H.; Wang, E.T.G. Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An
integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decis. Support Syst. 2006, 42, 1872–1888. [CrossRef]
80. Yuan, D.; Lin, Z.; Zhuo, R. What drives consumer knowledge sharing in online travel communities? Personal
attributes or e-service factors? Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 63, 68–74. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).