Understanding consumer online shopping behaviour from the perspective of transaction costs

Table 5.12 Preliminary Data Analysis- Customer Satisfaction (CSAT) 
Step One - Exploratory 
Wording EFA 
 
Loadings 
CSAT1 CSAT2 CSAT3 
My choice was a wise one 
.92 
CSAT1 
1.00 
Satisfied with the online store 
.94 
CSAT2 
.818 
1.00 
I did the right thing 
.91 
CSAT3 
.740 
.776 
1.00 
Reliability 
0.91 
KMO 
.749 
Variance Explained 
85.40 
Bartlett’s 
.000 
Step Two – Confirmatory 
Indicators CFA 
 
Stand. Loadings 
Stand. 
Error 
Critical 
Ratio
AVE CR 
CSAT1 .88 
021 
45.04
*
.78 
.916 
CSAT2 .93 
-- 
-- 
CSAT3 .85 
021 
45.04
*
Model Fit 
Statistic 
Model Fit 
Statistic 
χ
2
.622 
TLI 
.983 
df
1 
CFI 
.977 
P .430 
RMSEA 
.004 
GFI .974 
RMR 
.028 
* 
p 
< .001
5.5.12 Preliminary Analysis – Customer Loyalty 
Five items (LOY1 to LOY5) were used to measure customer loyalty
.
These items were 
subjected to the two-step preliminary data analysis process shown in Figure 5.1, the results of 
which appear in Table 5.13. Evaluation of the correlation matrix through the KMO and 
Bartlett’s Test results in a high KMO statistic (.867) and a significant probability level 
(p< .001) for the Bartlett’s test. These results indicate that sufficient correlations were found 
within the correlation matrix for factor analysis to proceed. In addition, bivariate correlations 
were inspected and all coefficients fell within the acceptable range for factor analysis of .30 
and .90. EFA was then conducted which produced a single factor structure with strong item 
loading ranging from .84 to .91 and the variance explained was 78.63%. Cronbach’s alpha 
of .93 was computed indicating good reliability of the scale. At this point, as all the items met 
the criteria of Step One, they were retained for CFA analysis in Step Two. 

---

240
In Step Two (refer Figure 5.1), CFA was conducted on the five items retained from Step One 
which resulted in all computed statistics indicating a good fit for the measurement model. For 
example, 
χ
2
/df (4.227) was less than 5, GFI
(.997
), TLI (.992) and CFI (.998) were above .90, 
RMSEA (.058) was less than .08 and RMR (.019) was less than .05. Moreover, as shown in 
Table 5.13, the standardized factor loadings of the five items ranged from .70 to .94, all 
reaching the preferable level of .70 (Hair
 et al.
2006). The AVE for this construct was .70, 
exceeding the recommended cutoff of .50 (Hair
 et al.
2006). The CR was .920, exceeding the 
recommended benchmark of .70 (Nunnally 1978). Thus, items LOY1 to LOY5 were 
considered to constitute a reliable and valid measurement scale for customer loyalty, and all 
five items were retained for the overall measurement model.