Understanding consumer online shopping behaviour from the perspective of transaction costs

Table 4.10 Reputation of online store Measurement Items 
REP1. This online store has excellent public image. 
REP2. This online store is extremely committed to customer satisfaction. 
REP3. This online store is known to be concerned about consumers. 
REP4. This online store has a good reputation compared to other rival online stores.
 
 
4.6.9 Perceived Convenience 
Convenience was measured via a six-item scale that assessed the extent to which online 
shopping allowed consumers to search for product information in least time and at any time.
It reflects the time and cognitive effort saving in terms of shopping at any time from 
anywhere. These six items were adopted from Chung (2001) and Reynolds (1974). The items 
were written as statements to which the respondents answer using a 7-point Likert scale 
(1=‘strongly disagree’ to 7= ‘strongly agree’). A high score was indicative of a high level of 
convenience perceived by the respondents. Table 4.11 contains the items for measuring 
perceived convenience. 
Table 4.11Perceived Convenience Measurement Items 
 
CONV1. I can save time by shopping on the Internet. 
CONV2. I shop online where I can reduce my efforts in travelling, walking, parking, and 
waiting as much as possible. 
CONV3. Online shopping is convenient to search product information. 
CONV4. I can shop on the Internet at home. 
CONV5. I can buy things on the Internet at any time when I want.
CONV6. I would assess the experience of online shopping as convenience.
 
 
4.6.10 Privacy and Security Concerns
Privacy and security concerns have been viewed by some researchers as two clearly distinct 
constructs (Belanger
 et al.
2002), whereas others do not necessarily agree that this distinction 
is meaningful in studies of online buying behaviour (Zhang and Von Dran 2000, Grewal
 et al.

---

186
2004, McCole
 et al.
2010). The researcher decided to treat privacy and security concerns as 
one construct in the context of this study for four main reasons.
Firstly, McCole et al. (2010) and Urban et al. (1999) suggested that privacy and security 
concerns are inextricably linked. The financial information is a part of consumers’ personal 
information. Secondly, Zhang and von Dran (2000) labelled privacy and security concerns as 
a hygiene factor associated with essential functionality in order for an online transaction to 
take place. Thirdly, in relation to Grabner-Krautner and Kaluscha's (2003) two types of 
uncertainty, the researcher believed that privacy and security concerns associated with online 
purchasing fit into both uncertainty camps in that privacy and security “mishaps” can result 
from both exogenous (e.g., hackers) and endogenous (e.g., misuse of data in-house) actions. 
Fourthly, online shoppers are seldom able to differentiate between the two. They are often 
viewed as one and the same in that to facilitate a secure payment it is assumed that a private 
infrastructure must be in place and vice-versa. Privacy and security may be viewed as 
theoretically separate constructs, but in the context of the average person's conception of the 
online channel, they blend into one because the technical details are beyond the 
comprehension of most users. It is for these reasons that the researcher decided not to 
decouple the construct for the purposes of the current study.
 
To tap this construct, a five-item scale derived from Korgaonkar and Wolin (1999), Pavlou 
and Chellappa (2001) was incorporated. These items capture the extent of the respondents’ 
concerns about privacy and financial security issues when shopping online, with endpoints 1 
=‘strongly disagree’ and 7=‘strongly agree’. A high score was indicative of a high level of 
privacy and security concern. Table 4.12 lists the items for measuring privacy and security 
concerns. 

---

187