Article Sidebar

Download
Download PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 552 Download : 314

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

As the majority of Generation Z consumers shift toward making purchases on social media sites, many platforms have incorporated live shopping into their marketing strategies Furthermore, live streaming shopping on TikTok is still a new phenomenon in Indonesia, and there is little study to explain why. This study aims to determine the influence of Information Technology Affordance (Visibility, Metavoicing, Guidance Shopping) on customers purchase intention on TikTok live streaming shopping from the standpoint of the IT Affordances theory. Data collection of this study was through the dissemination of questionnaires and using quantitative data analysis. Sampling is carried out by the non-probability sampling method with the purposive sampling method. The sample used in this study was 313 respondents. The analysis method used in this study was a multiple regression analysis test and was processed using SPSS 26 software. Based on the results of research from descriptive analysis, it shows that Visibility affordance, Metavoicing affordance, and Guidance Shopping affordance are in the “Very good” category. The results of multiple linear regression analysis can be concluded that simultaneously Information Technology Affordance (Visibility, Metavoicing, Guidance Shopping) have a significant effect on the customer purchase intention specifically on TikTok live streaming shopping. Based on the coefficient of determination test, it shows the influence of Information Technology Affordance (Visibility, Metavoicing, Guidance Shopping) on customer Purchase Intention on TikTok live streaming shopping is 81.9%.

Keywords

Information Technology Affordance, Purhcase Intention, TikTok Live Streaming.

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Azhari, C. T. ., & Hasanah, Y. N. . (2023). The Influence of Information Technology Affordance on Purchase Intention: Case of TikTok Livestreaming Shopping. Economics and Digital Business Review, 4(2), 216–223. https://doi.org/10.37531/ecotal.v4i2.652
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Abdillah, W., & Hartono, J. (2015). Partial Least Square Alternatif Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) dalam Penelitian Bisnis. Yogyakarta: Andi.
  2. Anderson, E. W. (1998). Customer satisfaction and word of mouth. Journal of Service Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, 5-17.
  3. Arndt, J. (1967). Role of product-related conversations in the diffusion of a new product. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 4 No. 3, 291-295.
  4. Arora, D., & Sharma, B. K. (2018). Influence of Review Quality, Review Quantity and Review Credibility on Purchase Intention in the context of High Involvement Products Evaluated by a double-blind review system. European Journal of Applied Business and Management, Special Issue, 4(4), 25-40.
  5. Bae, S., & Lee, T. (2011). Gender Differences in Consumers' Perception of Online Consumer Views. Electronic Commerce Research Vol. 11, 201-214.
  6. Bataineh, A. Q. (2015). The Impact of Perceived eWOM on purchase intention: The Mediating Role of corporate image. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 7(1), 1-10.
  7. Bhattacherjee, A., & Sanford, C. (2006). Influence processes for information technology acceptance: An elaboration likelihood model. MIS Quarterly, 30 (4), 805-835.
  8. Buttle, F. (1998). Word of mouth: understanding and managing referral marketing. Journal of Strategic Marketing Vol. 6 No. 3, 241-254.
  9. Cheung, C. M., Lee, M. K., & Rabjohn, N. (2008). The impact of electronic word-of-mouth: the adoption of online opinions in online customer communities. Internet Research, Vol. 18, 229-247.
  10. Daowd, A., Hasan, R., Eldabi, T., Rafi-ul-Shan, P. M., Cao, D., & Kasemsarn, N. (2020). Factors affecting eWOM credibility, information adoption and purchase intention on Generation Y: a case from Thailand. Journal of Enterprise Information Management Vol. 34 No. 3, 2021, 840.
  11. Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28 No.2, 307-319.
  12. Eastin, M. S., Daugherty, T., & Burns, N. M. (2010). Handbook of Research on Digital Media and Advertising: User Generated Content Consumption. New York: IGI Global.
  13. Elseidi, R., & El-Baz, D. (2016). Electronic wordof mouth effects on consumers' brand attitudes, brand image and purchase intention : an empirical study in Egypt. The Business & Management Review, 268.
  14. Goyette, I., Ricard, L., Bergeron, J., & Marticotte, F. (2010). e-WOM Scale: Word-of-Mouth Measurement Scale for e-Services Context. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 5-23.
  15. Gujarati, D. N. (2006). Essentials of Econometrics (3rd Ed). Jakarta: Erlangga.
  16. Hanna, R., Rohm, A., & Crittenden, V. L. (2011). We’re all connected: the power of the social media ecosystem. Business Horizons Vol. 54 No. 3, 265-273.
  17. Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004). Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: what motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 1, 38-52.
  18. Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2021). Factors affecting eWOM credibility, information adoption and purchase intention on Generation Y: a case from Thailand. Journal of Enterprise Information Management Vol. 34 No. 3, 840.
  19. Hikmawati, F. (2017). Metodologi Penelitian. Depok: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
  20. Hosein, N. (2012). Measuring the Purchase Intention of Visitors to the Auto Show. Journal of Management & Marketing Research. 1-17.
  21. Hu, X., & Ha, L. (2015). Which form of word-of-mouth is more important to online shoppers? A comparative study of WOM use between general population and college students. Journal of Communication and Media Research, Vol. 7 No. 2, 15-35.
  22. Indrawati. (2017). Perilaku Konsumen Individu. Bandung: Refika Aditama.
  23. Indrawati, Yones, P. C., & Muthaiyah, S. (2022). eWOM via the TikTok application and its influence on the purchase intention of somethinc products. Asia Pacific Management Review.
  24. Novanto, A., & Pradana, M. (2021). Studi Bauran Pemasaran di Industri Coffee Shop: Sebuah Analisis Bibliometrik pada Database Scopus. SEIKO: Journal of Management & Business, 4(1), 489-495.
  25. Oktafani, F., Rubiyanti, R. N., & Saraswati, T. G. (2022). Analisis Retail Promotional Mix Dan Pengaruhnya Terhadap Impuls Buying Serta Peranan Gender Sebagai Moderator Pada Marketplace Di Indonesia. SEIKO: Journal of Management & Business, 4(3), 403-412.
  26. Priansa, D. J. (2017). Komunikasi Pemasaran Terpadu. Bandung: CV Pustaka Setia.
  27. Rahmadyani, A. D. (2022, Februari 21). Viral di TikTok, 5 Produk Skintific Asal Kanada Ini Bisa Mengatasi Skin Barrier sampai Jerawat!
  28. Wardhana, A., Khudori, A. N., Wijaya, A., Harto, B., Grace, E., Silitonga, H. P., ... & Kom, S. (2022). The Art of Digital Marketing: Strategi Pemasaran Generasi Milenial.
  29. Zaman, U., Florez-Perez, L., Farías, P., Abbasi, S., Khwaja, M. G., & Wijaksana, T. I. (2021). Shadow of your former self: exploring project leaders’ post-failure behaviors (resilience, self-esteem and self-efficacy) in high-tech startup projects. Sustainability, 13(22), 12868.