This research model includes three independent and seven dependent variables. The discussed hypotheses of H1.1 – H1.4 are highlighted in the above research model. The remaining hypotheses are presented in the next sections in this chapter. Abbreviations: SP= Social Presence; U= Usability; UC= User Control; PIN= Perceived Involvement; PE= Perceived Engagement; PI= Perceived Interactivity; SRB= Search Behaviour, QEDB= Quality and Effectiveness of Decision Behaviour; IB= Intention to Buy; PB= Perceived Benefit.
3.1.2 Perceived engagement
Despite the effective role that engagement plays in online shopping, it has rarely been studied. Due to its emotive nature, engagement has a strong influence on bringing customers back to the website. If a user is so connected with a resource that it captivates their intellect, emotions and behaviour, either within repeated interactions or a one-time interaction, such connection is known as ‘user engagement’ (O’Brien & Toms, 2008). User engagement is not just a phenomenon that happens in a single instance of interaction, it is, rather, a relationship users build with a technological resource.
Engagement is thought to originate from ‘flow’ and that it is “flow in a more passive state,” “a subset of flow,” and “flow without user control” (Webster & Ahuja, 2006, p.665). Here, flow refers to a condition, as described by Csikszentmihalyi (1990) “in which people are so involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter; the experience itself is so enjoyable that people will do it even at great cost, for the sheer sake of doing it” (as quoted in O’Brien & Toms, 2008, p. 4). Flow is a specific state of mind referring to the complete absorption of the user in the act being performed. Flow and engagement are identically positive experiences that cause users to become immersed, pay absolute attention and lose track of time during the interaction (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Flow and engagement share some common features like control, feedback, focused attention and interactivity.
Similarly user engagement may have some parallels with user satisfaction (Quesenbery, 2003), but user satisfaction doesn’t explain everything about user engagement and forms only a part of it (O’Brien & Toms, 2008), as suggested by the intellectual, emotional and behavioural aspects involved. The inclusion of these broader aspects in the definition of ‘user engagement’ stresses the bigger picture it represents and warrants the exploration of aspects that have not been explored or measured yet. User engagement should be taken as a qualitative experience denoting a fruitful interaction between the users and the computer (Attfield, Kazai, Lalmas, & Piwowarski, 2011). Informational and aesthetic elements of a system interface can initiate the process of engagement. They captivate users’ attention and can push them toward engagement with the interface (O’Brien & Toms , 2008). Other elements instrumental in initiating engagement include motivation, the perception of an interaction as real, and a time limit related to using the application. Experienced sociality in interaction and group affiliation can enhance user engagement. According to a study performed by Rozendaal, Braat, & Wensveen (2010), experienced group affiliation is an important factor of user engagement and they describe as “the extent to which an individual feels a member of a social group” (p. 194).
After the point of engagement has occurred, the interest and appeal that users feel should be sustained by keeping the application appealing and interesting to users. It should make them feel attached to the interaction (O’Brien & Toms , 2008). It can be
accomplished by providing appropriate feedback, i.e. how the system is responding to their actions and making them feel connected to other people (social awareness) or to the technology (interactivity) and that they are controlling the proceedings. Therefore, the richness of social interaction and increased social awareness (social presence) becomes a source of creating positive emotions in users which can then result in higher user engagement:
Hypothesis:
• H2.1: Increased level of social presence will result in greater users’
engagement with the shopping channel
Disengagement occurs when users terminate the use of a system, or just cease the engagement and sign off. There are several reasons for disengagement, such as distractions in the environment, while the interactivity of the application and the challenges posed by the application may be the driving forces behind disengagement. Challenge addresses the degree of effort that users think they are putting into the activity (O’Brien & Toms, 2008). The less challenge users experience, the higher the sense of engagement they feel with the shopping channel.
Disengagement can produce positive or negative emotions, determined by the outcome of the interaction. If the user feels successful because their requirements are met, disengagement has produced positive emotions. On the other hand, if users lose motivation or there is not sufficient appeal to keep using the application, disengagement produces negative feelings of uncertainty, irritation and passivity (O’Brien & Toms, 2008).
One of the challenges posed by the shopping channel, which causes disengagement could be usability issue. For example, issues with navigating the e-vendor website can result in poor user experience, low engagement with the channel and the perception of reduced control by users (O’Brien & Toms, 2008). Usability was found as a required element related to the quality of a website (Ranganathan & Ganapathy, 2002). It plays a key role in all web-based services (Flavian, Guinaliu, & Gurrea, 2006). Usefulness in regards to online shopping is defined by Dash and Saji (2008) as “the degree to which a
consumer believes that using a system from a website would provide access to useful information, comparison, and faster online shopping” (p. 36).
Extensive concept of usability concerns “the satisfaction user feels with the system along with effectiveness and user friendliness of the equipment” (Chapanis, 1991). Likewise, Gnisci, Papa, and Spedaletti (1999) considered characteristics like satisfaction and efficiency when it comes to define usability. These characteristics essentially define the inherent usability of a system (Kurosu & Kashimura, 1995) and are related with a system’s perceived benefit. Nielsen (1994) stipulates that usability relates to how easily users learn to use main features on a site and avoid errors. It is also related to how users are able to achieve their goals efficiently, effectively and to their satisfaction. According to more recent proposals, a website’s usability depends of how easy people find the interface to manage, this feature being considered one of the qualities of a site (Nielsen, 2012).
Convenience and ease of use are characteristics of a usable e-vendor who offers a seamless experience to online users. Customers appreciate the characteristics of an online shop which positively influence their sense of success. In addition, O'Brien and Toms (2008) found that perceived user control is one of the primary components of user engagement. “The page doesn’t change unless I want it to, so I’m controlling what items I’m looking at—to a certain degree. I am aware of the fact that [the online store] is desperately trying to influence those decisions, but still they are mine . . . I get to make those choices. And sometimes I won’t [purchase]” (O'Brien & Toms, 2008, p. 944). This interaction spells out the users’ need for control. Users need to perceive that they are capable and skilled enough to meet the challenges posed by specific environments.
Chapman (1997) also identified control and feedback as variables, in addition to attention, motivation, interest and aesthetic, which affect the point of engagement. Auditory, visual or tangible information about actions or their corresponding results communicated back to users is called feedback. For example, feedback from text chat, which enables remote users to interact, can be about audibility of the speaker and questions posed by people. Immediacy and mode of feedback are important elements affecting users’ engagement with the shopping channel.
Among all the factors discussed above the effect of social presence, usability and user control on experienced engagement with a shopping channel is further investigated in this study. It is tested if social interaction, perceived usability and user control has an effect on user engagement and overall shopping experiences. It is hypothesised that increased usability and user control is positively related to user engagement. Also higher user engagement results in higher purchase intention and users’ satisfaction (perceived benefit) – (see Figure 3-2):
Hypotheses:
• H2.2: Increased level of user control and usability associated with the shopping
channel will result in higher users’ engagement
• H2.3: Increased level of engagement with the shopping channel positively
relates to customers’ behaviour including search and purchase decision behaviour
• H2.4: Increased level of engagement with the shopping channel will result in
increased future intentions and perceived benefit