Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 835–845

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Decision Support Systems

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/dss

Re-examining the influence of trust on online repeat purchase intention:

The moderating role of habit and its antecedents
Chao-Min Chiu a,⁎, Meng-Hsiang Hsu b, Hsiangchu Lai a, Chun-Ming Chang c
a
Department of Information Management, National Sun Yat-sen University, No. 70, Lienhai Rd., Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan, ROC
b
Department of Information Management, National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology, No.2, Jhuoyue Rd., Nanzih District, Kaohsiung City, 811, Taiwan, ROC
c
Department of Tourism Information, Aletheia University, No.32, Chen-Li St., Tamsui, Taipei County, 251, Taiwan, ROC

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Available online 23 May 2012 Customer loyalty or repeat purchasing is critical for the survival and success of any store. By focusing on online
stores, this study investigates the moderating role of habit on the relationship between trust and repeat purchase
Keywords: intention. Prior research on online behavior continuance models perceives usefulness, trust, satisfaction, and
Habit perceived value as the major determinants of continued usage or loyalty, overlooking the important role of
Online shopping habit. We define habit in the context of online shopping as the extent to which buyers tend to shop online auto-
Repeat purchase intention
matically without thinking. Building on recent research on the continued usage of IS and repeat purchasing, we
Satisfaction
Trust
develop a model suggesting that habit acts as a moderator between trust and repeat purchase intention, while
Value familiarity, value and satisfaction are the three antecedents of habit. Data collected from 454 customers of the
Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall provide strong support for the research model. The results indicate that a higher
level of habit reduces the effect of trust on repeat purchase intention. The data also show that value, satisfaction,
and familiarity are important to habit formation and thus relevant within the context of online repeat purchasing.
The implications for theory and practice and suggestions for future research are also discussed.
© 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Online retailing has been an important channel or business model for
many firms. In the increasingly competitive online retailing market, the
main concern for online sellers has shifted from inducing consumers to
adopt their online channels to motivating consumers to make repeat pur-
chases through these channels. Repeat customers are five times more
profitable than new customers, but more than 50% of repeat customers
seldom complete a third purchase [37]. Thus, it is important for online
sellers to understand why buyers are willing to make repeat purchases
from these online stores.
Trust in sellers is a vital key to maintaining continuity in the buyer–
seller relationship [6]. Many researchers suggest that trust is particular-
ly important within the context of online shopping because there is a
spatial and temporal distance between buyers and online sellers
[63,64]. Prior research [43,49,64,81] suggests that trust is characterized
by uncertainty, conscious attention, and gradual development over
time. However, an individual level of trust may increase gradually
based on positive outcomes from repeated behavior, although its im-
portance in determining repeat purchase intention may decrease over
time. Gefen et al. [24] argued that the impact of trust decreases with
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: + 886 7 5252000x4733; fax: + 886 7 5354799.
E-mail addresses: cmchiu@mis.nsysu.edu.tw (C-M. Chiu),
mhhsu@ccms.nkfust.edu.tw (M-H. Hsu), hclai@mis.nsysu.edu.tw (H. Lai),
cmchang@au.mail.edu.tw (C-M. Chang).
online shopping experience. Further, Van der Heijden et al. [71] posited
that, once a certain evaluation level of trust has been reached, trust no
longer contributes to people's attitudes towards online purchase inten-
tion. However, little research has been done to examine the contingency
under which the relationship between trust and repeat purchase inten-
tion will be reduced.
Trust can serve as a mechanism for reducing uncertainty or mitigat-
ing the sources of uncertainty [60]. It implies that the importance of
trust will decrease when the conscious consideration of uncertainty
becomes silent. Through the satisfactory repetition of online shopping,
people may learn that there is an association between such online shop-
ping behavior and satisfactory results [74]. For example, if buying com-
puter, communication and consumer electronic (3C) products from an
online seller would save money, consumers may buy these from that
online seller spontaneously whenever they need 3C products. Such
spontaneous shopping behavior, resulting from the automatic retrieval
of the learned association, implies that habit formation is involved here
and that the impact of trust decreases due to the non-necessity for the
conscious consideration of uncertainty. In fact, Verplanken and Aarts
[73] defined habit as “learned sequences of acts that have become auto-
matic responses to specific cues, and are functional in obtaining certain
goals or end states” (p. 104). In the online shopping context, a repetitive
satisfactory shopping experience may not only increase trust but also
develop habit and reduce the impact of trust gradually.
Habit has been used to predict behavioral intention in the traditional
retail context [30,34]. However, the relationship between trust, intention

0167-9236/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.05.021
836 C-M. Chiu et al. / Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 835–845
and habit has not been explored by researchers to date. In addition,
consumption behavior in physical stores usually involves face to face
interaction which has a relatively low risk and uncertainty. Habit forma-
tion is more complex in the online shopping context, which involves
higher risk and uncertainty [52]. There are also several researches on
habit in the online context [36,45,52]. Researchers have found that habit
moderates the relationship between satisfaction and online repurchase
intention [36]. Unfortunately, none of them have investigated the moder-
ating effect of habit on the relationship between trust and repeat purchase
intention.
In addition to the online shopping context, we can also find research
on habit in organizational information systems (IS) usage [38,41,46,47].
However, the organizational setting is very different from the online
shopping context. The former involves social norms, the top man-
agement's beliefs and the organizational culture, and thus mandated
usage is very common for employees [78], especially with regard to leg-
acy systems. Even in the voluntary usage context, employees' IS usage
only involves whether they use it or not, and usually does not involve
the issue of switching to a competing system. Unlike in the organiza-
tional setting, habit formation is especially important in the online
shopping context because consumers can easily switch to other com-
peting online sellers [36]. It is critical to understand how to make con-
sumers' shopping behavior habitual, so online sellers should design
lock-in mechanisms to motivate repeat purchase. This study aims to
fill the knowledge gap here.
Therefore, the objective of this paper is to address the following
research questions: (1) Does habit reduce the impact of trust on re-
peat purchase intention? (2) What are the antecedents of habitual
online shopping? Hopefully, this study will help us to gain a better
understanding of the relationship between habit, trust and the repeat
purchase intention of online buyers.
This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses the back-
ground theory about this research and develops a series of hypotheses.
We describe our research design and analysis results in Section 3. Then,
Section 4 interprets our main findings, and Section 5 provides the
conclusion.
2. Theoretical background and hypotheses
Fig. 1 presents the proposed model for the study. The dependent
variable is repeat purchase intention, referring to the subjective prob-
ability that an individual will continue to purchase products from the
online seller or store in the future. We argue that the effect of trust on
repeat purchase intention will decrease when online shopping behav-
ior becomes more of a habit, based on the assertions of Limayem et al.
[47] and Van der Heijden et al. [71]. In other words, we propose that
habit will have a moderating effect on the relationship between trust
and repeat purchase intention, which is the main focus of this study.
In addition, based on studies by Lankton et al. [41] and Limayem et al.
[47], we also argue that perceived value, satisfaction and familiarity
are the three critical factors in fostering a habit. Furthermore, we pro-
pose that satisfaction will influence the formation of trust, following
the studies of Li et al. [44] and Wang and Head [79]. The remainder
Second-order
Familiarity
H2
Utilitarian
Value
H3
Value Habit
Hedonic
H4
Value H5
H1
Repeat Purchase
Satisfaction Trust
H6
Intention
Fig. 1. Research model.
of this section will define the constructs and develop the hypotheses
presented in the model.
2.1. Moderating effect of habit on the relationship between trust and
repeat purchase intention
Trust is defined as a general belief that another party can be trusted,
based on the assumption that the other party in the social exchange will
not act opportunistically but will behave in an ethical and socially ap-
propriate manner [25,31]. Trust is also viewed as a set of specific beliefs
dealing primarily with the benevolence, competence, and integrity of
another party [18,20]. Benevolence is the belief that the trustee will
not act opportunistically against the trustor, even if given the opportu-
nity. Competence is the belief in the trustee's ability to fulfill his/her ob-
ligations as expected by the trustor. Integrity is the belief that the
trustee will be honest and honor his/her commitments.
Trust in the seller is a vital key to maintaining continuity in the
buyer–seller relationship in the traditional retail setting [6]. Many re-
searchers suggest that trust is an important mechanism governing
many social exchange relationships in contexts that are characterized
by uncertainty, especially in the e-commerce setting [63,64]. In the
context of online shopping, some of the signals presented face to
face may be unavailable, and some information could even be dis-
torted [64]. This may prevent buyers from being assured of the trust-
worthiness and credentials of the seller and thus make the former
reluctant to purchase online [60]. Trust has been regarded as the re-
sult of individual judgments about past behavior in which the derived
values of such future behavior are cognitively assessed [81]. In addi-
tion, individuals develop trust gradually over time based on positive
outcomes from repeated behavior [43,49].
The concept of habit was introduced in the early days of psychol-
ogy [32] and has been studied in various disciplines, such as social
psychology, consumer behavior, organizational behavior and infor-
mation systems [47]. In fact, habit has been used to predict consump-
tion behavior in the traditional retail context and online context as
well. In the traditional retail context, Honkanena et al. [30] found
that, when a strong habit is present, the expression of an intention
might be guided by the salience of past behavior rather than by atti-
tudes. Further, Ji and Wood [34] found that consumers repeat habitu-
al behavior even if they report an intention to do otherwise. There are
also several researches regarding habit in the online context. For ex-
ample, Liao et al. [45] showed that consumers' intention to continue
using a B2C web site are determined by its perceived usefulness,
trust, and habit. The concept of habit has also been applied to organi-
zational information systems (IS) usage. For example, Limayem and
Hirt [46] highlighted the importance of habit as a factor in addition
to intention to use in explaining usage behavior.
Habit has been defined by researchers from different perspectives.
For instance, Trindis [70] defined it as “situation-behavior sequences
that are or have become automatic…the individual is usually not con-
scious of these sequences” (p. 204), while Verplanken and Aarts [73]
defined it as “learned sequences of acts that have become automatic
responses to specific cues, and are functional in obtaining certain
goals or end states” (p. 104). In general, these definitions reveal that
habit is not the same as behavior [47]. Additionally, the definitions
show that habits are learned acts and goal-directed. Habits are grad-
ually laid down in the procedural memory through repeated perfor-
mance. The development of a habit requires a certain amount of
repetition or practice [3]. Overall, the online shopping habit can be
viewed as an automatic behavioral response that is triggered by a sit-
uational stimulus without a cognitive analysis process due to the
learned association between the shopping behavior and satisfactory
results [3,72,82,83].
Prior research has examined the moderating role of habit. For in-
stance, Limayem et al. [47] applied the concept to continued IS
usage, arguing that habit plays a moderating role in the relationship
 C-M. Chiu et al. / Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 835–845
between intention and IS continuance behavior. Khalifa and Liu [36]
examined the moderating role that habit plays between satisfaction
and online repeat purchase intention. They suggested that satisfac-
tion may not necessarily lead to an intention to return to an online
store in the absence of habit. The effect of the determinants of online
repeat purchase intention may be contingent upon the development
of the habit of using the online channel.
Morrison and Firmstone [52] argued that the main function of
trust is to reduce uncertainty, which refers to an individual's per-
ceived inability to predict something accurately [51]. The role of
trust may vary depending on the level of uncertainty presented with-
in the context in which an event occurs (i.e., structural strength) [33].
When uncertainty or ambiguity is high (weak structural strength),
people have no clear guidance or useful cues to enable them to inter-
pret others' behavior, and thus trust exerts a strong influence in such
situations. In situations involving little uncertainty or ambiguity
(strong structural strength), trust plays little role in helping people
to understand or judge others' behavior [33]. Ouellette and Wood
[56] noted that, once a behavior has become a habit, it becomes auto-
matic and is carried out without conscious decision. Habit is an effec-
tive manager of risk through removing the conscious awareness of
uncertainty and thus habit is trust working at its most effective [52].
This implies that the ability of trust to reduce uncertainty decreases
once a behavior has become a habit. Therefore, the present study the-
orizes that habit may make the conscious consideration of uncertain-
ty unnecessary (or, in a way, “silence” it), and thus the importance of
trust will decrease. In other words, habit negatively moderates the re-
lationship between trust and repeat purchase intention.
H1. The habit of shopping from an online seller reduces the influence
of trust on repeat purchase intention.
2.2. Antecedents of habit
To appreciate fully the role of habit in the context of online shop-
ping, we now turn to a discussion of its antecedents, with a focus on
the conditions under which online shopping habits are more likely to
form. Limayem et al. [47] modeled frequency of prior behavior, satisfac-
tion, and comprehensiveness of usage as the antecedents of habit,
whereas Lankton et al. [41] modeled prior IT use, satisfaction, impor-
tance, and task complexity as the antecedents of habit. However, we
identified familiarity, perceived value and satisfaction as the three ante-
cedents of online shopping habit from an online seller. Table 1 outlines
the reasons for adopting these three constructs.
2.2.1. Familiarity and habit
In this study, familiarity refers to a buyer's degree of understand-
ing and knowledge about the website interface, online shopping pro-
cedures, and the online seller. An important characteristic of habit
formation is the learned association between the behavior and a sat-
isfactory result or the experienced consequence [74]. Familiarity with
the website interface and transaction procedures contributes to a
successful online transaction. As the buyer gains adequate practice in
using the website interface and transaction procedures, an association
between online shopping behavior and a successful transaction will be
learnt. Increments of habit strength are accomplished by repetitions of
reinforcements [75]. In addition, familiarity with the website interface
and transaction procedures will cause buyers to feel that they are shop-
ping in a stable context, which will facilitate their propensity to perform
repeated behavior with minimal cognitive monitoring [83]. Further,
according to Murray and Häubl [52], skill-based habit will be acquired
after the buyer becomes familiar with the website interface and trans-
action procedures, which contributes to the strength of habitual shop-
ping from an online seller.
837
Table 1
Reasons for including/excluding factors as the antecedents of habit.
Antecedent Included Reasons
Frequency of prior No According to Self-Report Habit Index [74], the
behavior frequency of past behavior is a characteristic of
habit. In addition, it is not necessary that there is a
linear relationship between the frequency of prior
behavior and habit since it implies that every
repetition, whether early on in the habit forma-
tion process or after a large number of repetitions,
would result in the same increase in automaticity
[40]. Another issue is the fact that the accuracy of
the self-reported frequency is questionable.
Satisfaction Yes An important characteristic of habit formation is
the learned association between a particular
behavior and a satisfactory result [74].
Comprehensiveness No This refers to the extent to which an individual
of usage makes use of the various applications offered
under the umbrella of a single IS system [47]. It
does not completely fit into the online shopping
context.
Familiarity Yes Online shopping involves understanding and
knowledge not only about the website interface
but also the online shopping procedures and
online seller. Considering the difference between
IS usage and online shopping, the present study
considers familiarity rather than the comprehen-
siveness of usage as the antecedents of the online
shopping habit.
Value Yes This is an element in the means-end chain (attri-
bute–consequence–value) hierarchy and involve
higher-level goals that motivate and direct con-
sumers' behavior and decision making [26].
Habits are goal-directed automatic behavior [1].
Based on the arguments, we believe that per-
ceived value could be an important antecedent,
driving people to purchase online repetitively and
facilitating the development of habit.
Prior IT use No This is a good antecedent for IT usage habit.
However, it is inappropriate in the online shop-
ping context. In addition, the reasons for exclud-
ing behavioral frequency can be applied here too.
Importance No Values refers to “what people consider important
and the goals they wish to pursue” [65]. We
exclude importance since it overlaps with value
to some extent.
Task complexity No When the buyer becomes familiar with the
website interface and transaction procedures, the
online shopping task will become easy, which is
the opposite of task complexity.
H2. Familiarity is positively related to the habit of shopping from an
online seller.
2.2.2. Perceived value and habit
Perceived value has been defined as individuals' overall evaluation
of the utility of an activity based on their perceptions of what is re-
ceived and what is given [17,84]. In this study, perceived value is de-
fined as the benefits received from a transaction with an online seller,
considering the money, time and effort spent. Prior research on shop-
ping motivation indicates that the value considerations motivating
people to engage in a specific behavior have both utilitarian and he-
donic dimensions [8]. Utilitarian value reflects the acquisition of
products in an efficient manner and can be viewed as reflecting a
more task-oriented, cognitive, and non-emotional outcome of shop-
ping [8,28]. Because these traditional utilitarian explanations, geared
to product acquisition, may not fully reflect the totality of the shop-
ping experience, researchers have increasingly perceived the impor-
tance of the hedonic value of shopping [8]. Hedonic value reflects
the value received from the multisensory, fantasy and emotive as-
pects of the shopping experience [28].
Schwartz Value Theory [67] defined values as “desirable trans-
situational goals, varying in importance, that serve as guiding principles
838 C-M. Chiu et al. / Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 835–845
in the life of a person or other social entity” (p. 21). Bridge and Florsheim
[12] identified utilitarian and hedonic values as the online shopping
goals and Aarts and Dijksterhuis [1] argued that habits are goal-
directed; the higher value an online shopper perceives, the more likely
it is that the habit will be reinforced. Accordingly, buyers are hypothe-
sized to enhance their habitual shopping from an online seller as long
as such relational or transactional exchanges provide superior values,
including utilitarian and hedonic values.
H3. Perceived value is positively related to the habit of shopping
from an online seller.
2.2.3. Satisfaction and habit
Oliver [53] concluded that satisfaction is a function of an initial
standard and some perceived discrepancy from the initial reference
point after reviewing many past studies. In this study, satisfaction re-
fers to a buyer's feelings of pleasure or disappointment resulting from
comparing the perceived performance (or outcomes) of online shop-
ping in relation to his or her expectations. If an online buyer evaluates
his or her shopping experience positively, say, because he/she accom-
plished the task of product acquisition in an efficient manner and
found the shopping process interesting, it is likely that his or her will-
ingness to shop online again will increase. Thorngate [69] noted that
“If a response generated in an interaction is judged to be satisfactory,
it will tend to be reproduced under subsequent, equivalent circum-
stances from habit rather than thought.” Satisfactory experiences
with a behavior are a key condition for habit development, as they in-
crease one's tendency to repeat the same course of action again under
similar circumstances [2]. Support for the role of satisfaction in habit
formation is also provided by Lankton et al. [41] and Limayem, et al.
[47]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed.
H4. Buyers' satisfaction is positively related to their habit of shopping
from an online seller.
2.2.4. Perceived value and satisfaction
Theoretically, perceived value can be considered a cognition-
based construct for capturing the benefit-cost discrepancy, whereas
satisfaction is primarily an affective evaluative response [55]. The
social science literature indicates that an affective response is trig-
gered by cognitive thought processes [80], suggesting that value
judgments affect people's perception of satisfaction. The theoretical
justification for the relationship between value and satisfaction can
also be attributed to Bagozzi's [9] framework of self-regulatory mecha-
nism: appraisal processes→ emotional response →coping response.
This indicates that a cognitively-oriented appraisal of perceived value
leads to emotionally satisfying judgments. Similarly, the “two-appraisal”
satisfaction model [54] posited that the cognitive judgment of quality
and disconfirmation and the affective experience of consumption are
the two determinants of satisfaction. In fact, the cognitive judgment of
quality (what the product/service gives me) and affect experience
(how the product makes me feel) could refer to utilitarian and hedonic
values separately. Further, previous studies have provided empirical
evidence to support the link between perceived value and satisfaction
[48,58]. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed.
H5. Perceived value is positively related to buyer satisfaction.
2.3. Satisfaction and trust
Generally, people who have had positive experiences of online pur-
chasing will tend to trust online sellers [77,79]. This is because satisfac-
tion with past outcomes increases customers' confidence that they are
not being taken advantage of and that online sellers are concerned
about their welfare during the transactions [41]. Flavia´n et al. [21]
pointed out that the degree of trust is a consequence of the capacity of
a business to satisfy the needs of its clients. Consumers' feeling of satis-
faction is associated with their perceptions of the fulfillment of the re-
quired level of honesty, benevolence and competence by the website
[21]. The prior literature has empirically shown that satisfaction plays
a vital role in the formation of trust [44,79]. Thus, the above discussion
leads to the following hypothesis.
H6. Buyers' satisfaction is positively related to their trust in the on-
line seller.
3. Research methodology
3.1. Measurement development
Measurement items were adapted from the literature wherever
possible. A small-scale pretest of the questionnaire was conducted
with 10 Ph.D. students with online shopping experience to assess its
logical consistency, ease of understanding, and contextual relevance.
Then, a large-scale pretest with 162 customers of the target online
shopping mall was conducted to confirm the measurement properties
of the final items. The results indicate that the measurement model
fulfills the criteria for reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant
validity, with composite reliability values ranging from 0.89 to 95,
AVE ranging from 0.61 to 87, and factor loadings ranging from 0.73
to 0.95.
Triandis [70] indicated that habits can be measured by the fre-
quency of the occurrence of certain behavior. Some studies have mea-
sured habit by assessing the frequency of past behavior [4,68].
Because a history of repetition forms the basis of a habit, using the
self-reported frequency of a past behavior as a measure of habit
appears reasonable at first sight. However, there are a number of
problems related to this [76]. First, although habit implies repeated
behavior, repeated behavior need not necessarily involve habituation.
Second, it is unlikely that there is always a linear relationship be-
tween behavioral frequency and habit, since it implies that every rep-
etition, whether early on in the habit formation process or after a
large number of repetitions, would result in the same increase in au-
tomaticity [40]. The third problem is that self-reported frequency
measures might be unreliable, especially if the subjects are requested
to recall instances of their behavior. Therefore, two alternative mea-
sures of habit strength have been proposed: the Response Frequency
(RF) measure, and the Self-Reported Habit Index (SRHI).
The RF measure [75] assesses generalized habits across different situ-
ations (e.g. car use when traveling to different locations). The RF measure
has two limitations. First, because it requires the participants to respond
as quickly as possible and thus needs a controlled environment, it is dif-
ficult to employ in self-administered questionnaires. Another limitation
is that the RF measure requires piloting and pretesting for every new
habit or habit context [76]. Based on the above discussion, we adopted
SRHI [74] in order to measure habit. The SRHI is a 12-item instrument
for assessing a respondent's subjective experience of several features of
a habit. Those features include the history of repetition, automaticity
(unintentionality, uncontrollability, lack of awareness, and efficiency)
and the expression of self-identity. The SRHI has been shown to have ex-
cellent internal reliability, high test–retest reliability and good conver-
gent validity, to correlate well with the RF measure and past behavior
measures, and to differentiate between behaviors that are performed
with different frequencies [74].
The items used to measure repeat purchase intention were adapted
from [57,59], while the items for measuring trust were based on [25].
The items for measuring familiarity were adapted from Gefen [23] and
those for measuring satisfaction were adapted from Oliver [53] and
Oliver and Swan [55]. Further, items for measuring utilitarian and he-
donic values were adapted from Arnold and Reynolds [7] to fit the
online shopping context. For all of the measures, a seven-point Likert
 C-M. Chiu et al. / Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 835–845 839

scale was adopted with anchors ranging from strongly disagree (1) to interchangeable. Third, the utilitarian and hedonic values are theoreti-
strongly agree (7). cally independent. They are not highly correlated. The second order
construct (i.e. value) was approximated using the approach of repeated
3.2. Survey administration indicators suggested by Chin et al. because it is the easiest approach to
implement [16]. In this approach, a second order construct is directly
The research model was tested with data from the customers of the measured via observed variables for all of the first order constructs.
Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall. This mall was chosen because it is the most While this approach repeats the number of manifest variables used,
popular online shopping website in Taiwan. In 2001, Yahoo in Taiwan the model can be estimated using the standard PLS algorithm [16].
merged with Kimo, which was well known for its web portal and search The repeated indicators approach can be used with approximately
engine. Yahoo!Kimo is now the largest web portal and e-commerce equal numbers of indicators for each construct. Chin, under the FAQ
website in Taiwan. Yahoo!Kimo offers commerce-related services, heading of his PLS webpage,1 indicates that the approach of repeated in-
such as an auction, super mall, and shopping mall. The auction website dicators will cause the R-square for the formative second-order con-
allows individual sellers or small businesses to offer their items for auc- structs to end up as 1.0.
tion. The super mall is an electronic marketplace that allows small busi- The adequacy of the measurement model was evaluated based on
nesses to create and maintain online shops. The shopping mall is an the criteria of reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validi-
electronic marketplace operated by Yahoo!Kimo itself to sell products ty. Reliability was examined based on the composite reliability values.
to consumers. The shopping mall offers 13 categories of commodity, in- Table 3 shows that all of the values are above 0.7, satisfying the com-
cluding computers, electronics, fragrances, beauty products, clothing, monly acceptable level. The convergent validity of the scales was
luxury goods, watches, shoes, furniture/bedroom decoration, books, assessed by two criteria [22]: (1) all indicator loadings should be sig-
DVDs, etc. The shopping mall has over 2500 suppliers and provides nificant and exceed 0.7 and (2) the average variance extracted (AVE)
over 400,000 kinds of commodity. In order to target the online cus- by each construct should exceed the variance due to the measurement
tomers of the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall, a web-based survey was error for that construct (i.e., AVE should exceed 0.50). Table 4 shows
employed. A banner with a hyperlink to our web survey was published that all of the items exhibit a loading higher than 0.7 on their respec-
via a number of bulletin board systems (BBS), chat rooms and virtual tive constructs, and Table 3 shows that all of the AVEs range from 0.66
communities. In addition, individuals with online auction experience to 0.91, thus satisfying both criteria for convergent validity.
were cordially invited to support our survey. The respondents were Discriminant validity was examined using the following two tests.
instructed to answer all of the questions based on their shopping expe- First, the cross-factor loadings (Table 4) indicate good discriminant
rience with the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall. Three MP3 players were validity because the loading of each measurement item on its assigned
used as the incentive for participation. The web survey yielded a total latent variable is larger than its loading on any other construct [14]. Sec-
of 454 complete, valid responses for the data analysis. Table 2 lists the ond, the square root of the AVE from the construct is much larger than
demographic information about the respondents. the correlation shared between the construct and other constructs in
the model (Table 5) [22].
3.3. Data analysis Two tests were performed to examine the possibility of a common
method bias. First, the extent of this bias was assessed using Harman's
A two-step approach, recommended by Anderson and Gerbing [5], one-factor test, for which all of the principal constructs were entered
was adopted for the data analysis. The first step involves the analysis into a principal component analysis [62]. Evidence for common method
of the measurement model while the second step tests the structural bias exists when a general construct accounts for the majority of the co-
relationships among the latent constructs. The aim of the two-step variance among all of the constructs. The results show that the seven
approach is to establish the reliability and validity of the measures be- factors combined account for 77% of the total variance but that the
fore assessing the structural relationship of the model. SmartPLS 2.0 first (largest) factor accounts for only 25.28% of it. This indicates that
M3 was used because it allows latent constructs to be modeled as for- there is no general factor. Second, a latent method factor (common la-
mative or reflective indicators. PLS places minimal restrictions on the tent variable) was added to the structural model to assess the method
measurement scales, sample size, and residual distribution [15]. variance. Each indicator in the structural model is specified to be deter-
mined by its substantive (theoretical) construct, the method factor, and
3.3.1. Measurement model measurement error. However, SmartPLS does not accommodate ran-
The rationale for operationalizing value as a formative second-order dom errors and does not allow an indicator to be determined by more
construct is threefold [61]. First, according to the conceptual definition than one construct. To finesse this constraint, we converted each indica-
of perceived value, utilitarian and hedonic values should be regarded tor into a single-indicator construct, as suggested by Saraf et al. [66]. As
as forming value rather than the other way around. Second, utilitarian a result, all of the major constructs of interest and the method factor be-
and hedonic values are clearly unique, distinguishable, and not come second-order constructs, except for value (third-order construct).
We included in the SmartPLS model a common method factor which
Table 2 links to all the single-indicator constructs that were converted from
Demographic information about the respondents (N = 454). the observed indicators. For each single-indicator construct, we exam-
ined the coefficients of the two incoming paths from its substantive
Measure Items Freq. Percent Measure Items Freq. Percent
construct and the method factor. These two path coefficients are equiv-
Gender Male 207 45.6 Gender Female 247 54.4 alent to the observed indicator's loadings on its substantive construct
Age b20 28 6.2 Education High 52 11.5
and the method factor, and can be used to assess common method
school
20– 148 32.6 College 63 13.9 bias [66]. According to Saraf et al. [66], the squared values of the method
24 factor loadings were interpreted as the percentage of indicator variance
25– 126 27.7 University 277 61.0 caused by the method, whereas the squared loadings of the substantive
29
constructs were interpreted as the percentage of the indicator variance
30 ~ 152 33.5 Graduate 62 13.6
school caused by the substantive constructs. Common method bias is unlikely
Shopping 1–2 137 30.2 Internet b6 53 11.7 to be a serious concern if the following two criteria are fulfilled: (1) the
frequency 3–6 187 41.2 experience (in 6–8 94 20.7
(per year) 7–11 81 17.8 years) 9–10 193 42.5 1
Chin's PLS FAQ webpage—http://disc-nt.cba.uh.edu/chin/plsfaq/plsfaq.htm (last
12 ~ 49 10.8 11 ~ 114 25.1
accessed 6 February 2011).
840 C-M. Chiu et al. / Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 835–845

Table 3 Table 5
Descriptive statistics for the constructs. Correlation among constructs and the square root of the AVE.

Constructs Items Composite reliability Mean (STD) AVE UV HV SA FA HA TR RI

Utilitarian Value (UV) 5 0.91 5.46 (1.15) 0.66 UV 0.81

Hedonic Value (HV) 5 0.91 4.72 (1.26) 0.67 HV 0.47 0.82
Satisfaction (SA) 3 0.94 5.14 (1.08) 0.84 SA 0.56 0.65 0.92
Familiarity (FA) 3 0.93 5.64 (1.00) 0.83 FA 0.55 0.44 0.58 0.91
Habit (HA) 11 0.97 4.73 (1.29) 0.75 HA 0.40 0.60 0.65 0.49 0.87
Trust (TR) 4 0.92 4.79 (1.13) 0.75 TR 0.44 0.49 0.68 0.48 0.58 0.87
Repeat Purchase Intention (RI) 3 0.97 5.31 (1.03) 0.91 RI 0.53 0.51 0.67 0.60 0.69 0.59 0.95

Note: Diagonal elements (in bold) are the square root of the average variance extracted
(AVE).
method factor loadings are insignificant and (2) the indicators' substan-
tive variances are substantially greater than their method variances. The
results show that 27 of the 34 method factor loadings are insignificant regression, in which we compare the results of two models (i.e., one
and that the indicators' substantive variances are substantially greater with and one without the interaction construct) [16]. Therefore, we
than their method variances. This indicates that common method bias first examined the main effect model without including habit as a mod-
is not a significant problem with regard to our data. erating variable. Fig. 2 indicated that all paths exhibit a P-value of less
In addition, two approaches were used to assess the degree of than 0.05. The significance of all paths was assessed via 500 bootstrap
multicollinearity: variance inflation factors (VIF) and condition numbers. runs. Overall, the model accounts for 53.4% of the variance of repeat
We conducted a regression analysis by modeling repeat purchase inten- purchase intention. The path coefficient between habit and repeat pur-
tion as the dependent variable and the other six variables as the indepen- chase intention is 0.522, while that between trust and repurchase inten-
dent variables. The VIF ranges from 1.678 to 2.962, which is well below tion is 0.291. Next, we examined the interaction effect model including
the suggested threshold of 3–5 [27]. The condition number equals the habit as a moderator. Fig. 3 indicated that all paths exhibit a P-value of
square root of the largest eigenvalue divided by the smallest eigenvalue. less than 0.05 and, overall, the model accounts for 55.8% of the variance
Belsley et al. [11] suggested that condition numbers less than 10 indicate of repeat purchase intention. The path coefficient between habit and
a weak multicollinearity problem. In our study, the condition number is repurchase intention is 0.519 and that between trust and repeat pur-
2.53 (√(8.60/1.34)), which is below the threshold. Therefore, no signifi- chase intention is 0.277, which is lower than that in the main effect
cant multicollinearity problem exists with regard to our data. model, without modeling habit as moderating variable.
After analyzing the main effect model and interaction effect
3.3.2. Structural model model, we compared the R 2 of both models in order to assess the in-
In formulating and testing for interaction effects using PLS, we need teraction effect [16]. The difference between the R-squares is used to
to follow a hierarchical process that is similar to that used in multiple assess the overall effect size f 2 for the interaction, where .02, 0.15, and
0.35 have been suggested to be small, moderate, and large effects, re-
Table 4 spectively [19]. It is important to understand that a small f 2 does not
PLS confirmatory factor analysis and cross-loadings. necessarily imply an unimportant effect [16].
Based on the hierarchical difference test, the interaction effect was
UV HV SA FA HA TR RI
found to have an effect size f 2 of 0.054, which lies between the small
UV1 0.81 0.35 0.48 0.46 0.34 0.35 0.44 and medium effect size. Fig. 3 shows that the inclusion of the interac-
UV2 0.80 0.30 0.42 0.49 0.23 0.28 0.41
UV3 0.84 0.43 0.46 0.46 0.35 0.43 0.43
tion effect with a strong beta of −0.156 increases R 2 for repeat pur-
UV4 0.80 0.46 0.47 0.40 0.36 0.40 0.41 chase intention to 0.558. As indicated in Table 6, the interaction
UV5 0.80 0.34 0.44 0.45 0.33 0.31 0.45 effect model possesses significantly higher explanatory power than
HV1 0.36 0.85 0.53 0.32 0.51 0.42 0.37 the main effect model. Therefore, habit has a significantly negative ef-
HV2 0.32 0.85 0.44 0.26 0.45 0.30 0.33
fect on the relationship between trust and repeat purchase intention.
HV3 0.36 0.84 0.52 0.37 0.48 0.40 0.43
HV4 0.32 0.76 0.48 0.31 0.44 0.39 0.34 Further, we also examined the effect of the respondents answering
HV5 0.53 0.81 0.67 0.52 0.58 0.50 0.60 11 habit questions on their answers about repeat purchases intention.
SA1 0.52 0.59 0.92 0.56 0.58 0.65 0.65 We conducted another analysis by remodeling habit with five indica-
SA2 0.49 0.60 0.90 0.50 0.63 0.62 0.62 tors with a higher factor loading. The path coefficient for the relation-
SA3 0.53 0.59 0.92 0.54 0.58 0.60 0.61
FA1 0.47 0.44 0.52 0.90 0.47 0.43 0.56
ship between habit and repeat purchase intention becomes 0.475,
FA2 0.52 0.39 0.56 0.92 0.44 0.46 0.56 whereas the path coefficient for the original model with habit having
FA3 0.51 0.37 0.51 0.90 0.42 0.42 0.53 11 indicators is 0.519. The path coefficient difference is 0.044, which is
HA1 0.36 0.50 0.56 0.40 0.86 0.48 0.62 insignificant (t= 0.77) based on the formula 2 proposed by Johnson et
HA2 0.37 0.51 0.56 0.44 0.88 0.49 0.63
al. [35]. Accordingly, the 11 habit questions do not cause significant
HA3 0.37 0.49 0.56 0.46 0.89 0.47 0.64
HA4 0.35 0.50 0.58 0.42 0.87 0.51 0.61 problems.
HA5 0.39 0.55 0.59 0.50 0.87 0.52 0.64 Finally, further data analysis was conducted to examine the correla-
HA6 0.34 0.53 0.56 0.41 0.90 0.50 0.58 tion between shopping frequency (the number of shop experiences
HA7 0.23 0.50 0.48 0.36 0.79 0.47 0.46 over the past 12 months) and the self-reported habit index, and the influ-
HA8 0.40 0.53 0.60 0.50 0.80 0.49 0.63
HA9 0.35 0.53 0.57 0.42 0.90 0.53 0.60
ence of shopping frequency on habit. The results show that the correlation
HA10 0.31 0.54 0.57 0.37 0.88 0.52 0.55 coefficient is 0.264 and the path coefficient is 0.168. Both of the coeffi-
HA11 0.28 0.57 0.55 0.36 0.85 0.52 0.54 cients are higher than those in Limayem et al.'s study [47], which are
TR1 0.42 0.43 0.61 0.44 0.49 0.85 0.52 0.193 (correlation coefficient) and 0.115 (path coefficient) respectively.
TR2 0.36 0.41 0.54 0.38 0.49 0.86 0.48
Although the correlation coefficient between shopping frequency and
TR3 0.32 0.41 0.56 0.39 0.53 0.89 0.49
TR4 0.41 0.46 0.64 0.45 0.49 0.87 0.56 habit is relatively low, this does not imply that our self-reported habit
RI1 0.49 0.49 0.65 0.56 0.68 0.59 0.95 index has a low validity, since shopping frequency is the history of
RI2 0.52 0.51 0.64 0.58 0.67 0.54 0.96
RI3 0.50 0.46 0.63 0.59 0.63 0.56 0.95 2
t = (ßi − ßj) / √[(var(ßi) + var(ßj) − 2cov(ßi, ßj)]; where ßi = path coefficient asso-
Note: Bold numbers indicate item loadings on the assigned constructs. ciated with path i; var(ßi) = variance of ßi; cov(ßi, ßj) = covariance between ßi and ßj.
 C-M. Chiu et al. / Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 835–845 841

Familiarity * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

0.114*

Utilitarian 0.536*** (R2 = 0.468)

Value
0.234***
Value Habit

Hedonic
Value 0.630*** 0.421*** 0.522***
0.710*** (R2 = 0.466) (R2 = 0.534)

(R2 = 0.504) Satisfaction Trust Repeat Purchase

Intention
0.682*** 0.291***

Fig. 2. Main effect model: habit as a control variable.

repetition, which is only one of the features of SRHI and, therefore, not
necessarily strongly correlated to habit [76]. For example, a consumer
who purchases luxury goods once or twice a year via the Yahoo!Kimo
shopping mall can still be considered as a habitual buyer if he/she
shopped there whenever he/she wanted to buy luxury goods. In other
words, he/she shopped on Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall automatically
and without thinking but not necessarily at a high frequency. Shopping
frequency or experience is an important buyer-seller interaction variable
that reflects buyers' primary affiliations with online sellers [36]. To aug-
ment our understanding of the interrelationships between the relevant
variables in the research model, we further examined the path differences
between the low and high shopping frequency groups. Because shopping
frequency is not a categorical variable, the groups were divided into high
shopping frequency (N1 =212) and low shopping frequency (N2 =242)
groups using the median [10]. Based on the formula proposed by Johnson
et al. [35], all of the path differences are insignificant, with t valves ranging
from 0.305 to 1.620 (see Table 7).
4. Discussion and implications
4.1. Summary of the results
The purpose of this study is to examine thoroughly the complex rela-
tionships between habit, trust, and repeat purchase intention in the con-
text of online shopping. The major concerns are the moderating effect of
habit on the relationship between trust and repeat purchase intention
and what the antecedents of habit will be.
The results indicate that trust has a significant effect on repeat pur-
chase intention and habit exerts a negative moderating effect on the rela-
tionship between trust and repeat purchase intention. The interaction
between trust and habit in the prediction of repeat purchase intention
suggests that there is a tradeoff between trust and habit. In other words,
a stronger habit will reduce the influence of trust on repeat purchase in-
tention. On the other hand, when the habit is weak, trust will dominate
the influence on repeat purchase intention. Van der Heijden et al. [71]
stated that trust is a threshold variable in contributing to the favorable at-
titude toward online purchasing. This means that, once a certain evalua-
tion level is reached, the variable no longer contributes to the repeat
purchase intention. One of the possible conditions for trust reaching the
threshold level is that buyers perceive no or low uncertainty.
In addition, we identified the three antecedents of habit as satis-
faction, value and familiarity, whereas value has a positive effect on
satisfaction and satisfaction also has a significant impact on trust.
All of the antecedents are significant predictors of habit and the ex-
tent of the explained variance in habit suggests that these are possibly
among the most important antecedents of habit. Comparing the im-
portance of the three antecedents to habit development, satisfaction
plays a dominant role, followed by value, then familiarity. The find-
ings support the well-investigated attitudinal framework in which
cognition leads to affect by considering value as cognition and satis-
faction as affect [80]. Further data analysis based on Baron and
Kenny's [10] procedure indicates that satisfaction partially mediates
the impact of value on habit. There are two components of value, util-
itarian value and hedonic value, with the latter playing the more im-
portant role. In addition, it appears that the formation of an online
shopping habit is mainly driven by satisfactory experiences with the
shopping goals—pursing utilitarian and hedonic values.
4.2. Implications for theory
Based on the findings of this study, we would like to share several
points that are worthy of consideration for theory development. First,
many studies consider repeat purchase behavior as being guided by rea-
soning. Accordingly, much effort is devoted to trying to explain repeat
purchase intention from the perspectives of perceived usefulness, per-
ceived ease of use, perceived risk, trust, etc. However, as online shopping
becomes more popular and thus people shop at an online store without
much reasoning process, habit may play a role in repeat purchase inten-
tion. In the past, some studies on online repeat purchase report that
no significant relationship exists between trust and repeat purchase

Familiarity * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

0.114*

Utilitarian 0.536*** (R2 = 0.468)

Value
0.232***
Value Habit

Hedonic 0.519***
Value 0.630*** 0.710*** 0.421*** (R2 = 0.466) -0.156**

(R2 = 0.504) Trust Repeat Purchase

Satisfaction
Intention
0.682*** 0.277***
(R2 = 0.558)

Fig. 3. Interaction effect model: habit as a moderator.

842 C-M. Chiu et al. / Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 835–845
Table 6
Effect size of the competing models.
Model R2
1. Main effects model (with habit as a control variable) 0.534
2. Interaction effect model (with habit as a moderator) 0.558
a 2
f = [R2(Interaction Effect Model) − R2(Main effect Model)] / [1 − R2(Interaction
Effect Model)].
intention [13]. Apparently, such reports contradict the mainstream view
that has been established in the field. It is here that the theoretical rele-
vance of detecting the moderating effect of habit on the relationship be-
tween trust and repeat purchase intention becomes evident. We
therefore hope that the present study will contribute to the further de-
velopment of the concept of the online shopping habit.
Second, habit and trust represent two different promoters of repeat
purchase intention. Often, trust-based behavior results from a mixture
of cognitive and emotional trust [64], whereas habit is an automatic
behavioral response triggered by a situational stimulus without being
preceded by a cognitive analysis process. Therefore, when online shop-
ping behavior is repeatedly executed in a stable context and becomes
habitual, the need to engage in the cognitive evaluation of the online
seller's trustworthiness will be suppressed. However, the emotion-
driven form of trust may still exert its influence on repeat purchase in-
tention. Therefore, it is important to examine the interaction of these
two variables rather than assuming that they both operate similarly.
Further, it is also important to search for moderating variables that
turn simple, main effects into more insightful conditional relationships.
Third, our findings show that the link between trust and repeat pur-
chase intention is rather complex. Adding habit as a moderator is a first
step toward establishing a better understanding of this relationship. Fu-
ture research should continue to explore the complex relationship be-
tween habit, trust, and repeat purchase intention. For example, what
would be the threshold level of trust, at which the influence of trust on
repeat purchase intention will decrease and the role of habit will become
influential? It would also be interesting to know whether, in an extreme
case, the effect of trust will be nullified by the effect of habit. In other
words, at what level of trust will the online shopping habit become the
main driver of repeat purchase intention?
Fourth, the antecedents of habit include satisfaction, value and famil-
iarity. They are ranked in importance as follows: satisfaction, value and
familiarity. Among them, value also has a high impact on satisfaction. It
implies that value, including utilitarian and hedonic value, is the most
important driver of habit formation. In fact, utilitarian and hedonic
values are viewed as shopping goals [12]. No matter whether consumers
care more about utilitarian or hedonic value, the fundamental issue is if a
web store can fulfill their shopping goals or not. The results indicate that
both perceived value and satisfaction have strong effects on habit devel-
opment, which supports Aarts and Dijksterhuis' [1] notion that habits are
a form of goal-directed automatic behavior that are activated on the in-
stigation of a goal. People automatically visit an online shopping website
and purchase products only if there is a reason to do so. Once the goals
have been mostly achieved, consumers feel satisfied. Our findings
Table 7
Path differences between the low and high shopping frequency groups.
Path Low frequency-β High frequency-β
H1: Habit as a moderator − 0.143⁎ − 0.187⁎
H2: Familiarity → Habit 0.040 0.142
H3: Value → Habit 0.308⁎⁎⁎ 0.210⁎
H4: Satisfaction → Habit 0.383⁎⁎⁎ 0.427⁎⁎⁎
H5: Value → Satisfaction 0.663⁎⁎⁎ 0.749⁎⁎⁎
H6: Satisfaction → Trust 0.647⁎⁎⁎ 0.712⁎⁎⁎
⁎ p b .05.
⁎⁎ p b .01.
⁎⁎⁎ p b .001.
suggest that satisfactory experiences enhance the tendency to engage
in repeat purchase because utilitarian and hedonic values are strongly
f2a associated with the goals of online buyers.
Fifth, compulsive or addictive online buying is a form of unregulated
0.054
consumer behavior [42]. LaRose and Easti [42] found that addiction is a
powerful predictor of online shopping activity. Habit formation and
habit persistence as the foundations of addiction have been popular
topics in economic studies on consumer behavior [50]. Accordingly, an
interesting area for future research is to investigate the relationship be-
tween habit and addiction and see whether addiction has a stronger
suppressive effect than habit on the relationship between trust and re-
peat purchase intention.
Finally, although habit cannot be determined by simply looking at the
frequency of past behavior [74], shopping frequency is still a necessary
condition for the online shopping habit to develop. Product types are cor-
related with online shopping frequency. For example, an individual may
purchase clothes every season but only purchase luxury goods once a
year. Therefore, an interesting area for future research is to examine
the relationship between product type and online shopping habit.
4.3. Implications for practice
Many studies have demonstrated that, especially for online shopping
websites, gaining consumer trust is the first step towards inducing cus-
tomers' purchase intentions and repeat purchase intentions as well
[25,29,39]. Our findings further indicate that habit exerts a significant
moderating effect on the relationship between trust and repeat purchase
intention. As Van der Heijden et al. [71] suggested, trust is a threshold
variable. This implies that trust is still the primary factor in stimulating
consumers' repeat purchase intentions but that habit will have moderat-
ing effect on this relationship once trust has reached a certain level. So,
how to build customers' trust is still a goal with a higher priority. A
buyer may or may not purchase products from a trustworthy seller, but
he/she will definitely not purchase products from an untrustworthy
one. Without winning customer trust first, there is no point in instigating
customers' habits. Gaining consumer trust is largely under the control of
online sellers. For example, providing fair transactions by keeping prom-
ises and fulfilling obligations in terms of product and service qualities
throughout the whole transaction process and even after sales service
is one of the fundamental goals of building trust.
However, once trust building reaches a sufficient level, the online
sellers should try to develop customers' habits of shopping at their
web stores. In other words, sellers should try to encourage customers
to visit their web stores automatically whenever they need to buy
something provided by them since, at this moment, habit has a more
significant impact than trust on repeat purchase intention.
The next challenge for online shopping websites becomes how to
develop customers' habit of shopping with them. Based on our find-
ings, satisfaction, value and familiarity are the three significant ante-
cedents of habit formation. Among these, satisfaction is the most
significant factor and value will have a positive impact on satisfaction.
This means that, if online shopping websites can provide greater
value for customers, it will increase the customers' satisfaction and
thus have a positive impact on developing the customers' habits.
Among the three antecedents of habit, let us discuss how online
shopping websites can provide greater values for their customers first.
Our research indicates that there are two kinds of value. One is utilitar-
t-statistics ian value and the other is hedonic value. Regarding utilitarian value, on-
0.373 line shopping websites should provide the correct, wide selection of
1.056 products for their target customers. They also have to provide an effi-
0.628
cient and effective search function and critical product information in
0.305
1.620 order to help customers to find the desired products efficiently and ef-
1.197 fectively. In addition, online shopping websites should provide a safe
payment mechanism and quick delivery service. Regarding hedonic
value, online shopping websites should try to enable the customers
enjoy the whole transaction process. It could be the colorful design of
 C-M. Chiu et al. / Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 835–845 843

the user interface, having fun during the transaction process, such as relationship between trust and repeat purchase intention and what the
pop-up discount offers during the search and purchase process, surpris- antecedents of habit will be. As verified by our data, there is an interaction
ing marketing strategies, warm greeting cards to increase customer sat- effect between trust and habit in the prediction of repeat purchase inten-
isfaction, etc. To attract buyers who are motivated by different hedonic tion. Although online repeat purchase intention is influenced by the ratio-
reasons, online sellers may need to focus on the experiential aspect of nal analysis of trust in the online seller, habit is an even more important
the website, positioning the shopping experience as an adventure or a driving force. Further, the three antecedents of habit are satisfaction,
chance to release stress or alleviate a negative mood [9]. value and familiarity, ranked in descending importance. In conclusion,
An extremely interesting example of hedonic value is the feature our study highlights the importance of the role of the online shopping
provided by WOOT! (www.woot.com). It focuses on selling cool, habit and its antecedents in the achievement of online customer reten-
cheap stuff and encouraging unfiltered community discussion about tion. A more refined knowledge about the proposed variables and rela-
it. It sells one item only per day. That is, it offers a new item every sin- tionships may ultimately benefit online sellers and buyers alike in their
gle day. It is very common for its product descriptions to mock the attempts to cope successfully with the challenges posed by the ever
product, the customer, or Woot itself. Its marketing depends heavily more exciting and versatile e-commerce applications.
on discussions among customers. The customers can experience the
hedonic value by enjoying the surprise of having a new item every
day, the acknowledgment of their posts and the woot-style product
Appendix A. Questionnaire items
descriptions. Finally, even our findings indicate that the weight of he-
donic value is relatively greater than that of utilitarian value, so online
shopping websites should provide adequate utilitarian value while
Utilitarian Value (UV)
attempting to provide hedonic value.
UV1 Using the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall is a convenient way to shop.
Since our research finds that value has a significant impact on satis- UV2 I can use the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall to shop anywhere and anytime.
faction, all of the above-mentioned methods will reinforce customer UV3 I thought that the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall provided detailed
satisfaction too. In addition to these methods, satisfaction could be im- information about the products featured.
proved by making sure that both the product quality and service quality UV4 The product information provided by the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall is up-
to-date.
fulfill the customer's expectations. For service quality, it is very impor-
UV5 This web site provided a variety of product offerings.
tant to provide a good service not only through the whole transaction
process but also in terms of after-sales service. In addition to satisfaction Hedonic Value (HV)
and value, familiarity is another important antecedent of habit forma- HV1 I find shopping at the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall stimulating.
tion. Familiarity refers to knowledge and a friendly experience when HV2 To me, shopping at the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall is a way of relieving
stress.
using online shopping websites. Definitely, the more often a customer HV3 I enjoy shopping at the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall for my friends and
visits an online website, the more familiar with the website he/she family.
will become. However, online shopping websites can proactively help HV4 I enjoy socializing with others when I shop at the Yahoo!Kimo shopping
customers to become more familiar with websites by providing a very mall.
HV5 I think that purchasing products from the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall is
user-friendly interface, website map, introduction to new users, FAQ,
interesting.
intelligent pop-up help windows, customer call center, etc.
Satisfaction (SA)
4.4. Limitations SA1 I feel good regarding my decision to purchase products from the Yahoo!
Kimo shopping mall.
SA2 I think that purchasing products from the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall is a
Even though we tried our best to design and implement this re- good idea.
search, there are still some limitations. The results should be inter- SA3 Overall, I am satisfied with the experience of purchasing products from the
preted carefully in the light of these limitations. First, our sample Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall.
comprised only active online consumers. The results may have been
Familiarity (FA)
influenced by self-selection bias. Consumers who had already ceased
FA1 I am familiar with the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall.
to purchase products from the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall might FA2 I am familiar with the processes of purchasing products from the Yahoo!
have different perceptions about the provided value, satisfaction, fa- Kimo shopping mall.
miliarity, trust, and habit. Therefore, the results should be interpreted FA3 I am familiar with searching for products at the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall.
as only explaining the repeat purchase intentions of current online
Trust (TR)
shopping customers. Establishing whether the results can be general- TR1 Based on my experience with the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall in the past, I
ized to non-customers or disaffected customers will require additional know it is trustworthy.
research. Second, as the data are cross-sectional, all of the statistically TR2 Based on my experience with the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall in the past, I
supported relationships can only be viewed as tentative. Third, the know that it cares about its customers.
TR3 Based on my experience with the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall in the past, I
data came from only one online store (Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall),
know that it is not opportunistic.
even though the Yahoo-Kimo shopping mall is the largest online store TR4 Based on my experience with the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall in the past, I
in Taiwan. However, the advantage is that the Yahoo-Kimo shopping know that it keeps its promises to its customers.
mall sells numerous varieties of product and, therefore, the results are Habit (HA)
not limited to the intention of purchasing a particular type of product. Shopping at the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall is something…
HA1 I do frequently.
HA2 I do automatically.
5. Conclusion HA3 I do without having to consciously remember.
HA4 that makes me feel weird if I do not do it.
Since repeat customers are five times more profitable than new cus- HA5 that would require effort not to do it.
HA6 I do without thinking.
tomers, it is important for online sellers to understand why buyers are
HA7 that has become a routine for me.
willing to engage in repeat purchases through some online stores. In the HA8 I have been doing for a long time.
past, trust has been regarded as a critical factor in governing online shop- HA9 I would find hard not to do.
ping behavior [64]. In addition, it was found that the impact of trust may HA10 I have no need to think about doing.
decrease as the online shopping experience increases [24,71]. The major HA11 that's typically “me”.

concerns of this research are the moderating effect of habit on the (continued on next page)
844 C-M. Chiu et al. / Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 835–845
Appendix A (continued)
Repeat Purchase Intention (RI)
RI1 If I could, I would like to continue using the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall to
purchase products.
RI2 I plan to continue using the Yahoo!Kimo shopping mall to purchase
products in the future.
RI3 It is likely that I will continue purchasing products from the Yahoo!Kimo
shopping mall in the future.
References
[1] H. Aarts, A. Dijksterhuis, Habits as knowledge structures: automaticity in goal-directed
behavior, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (2000) 53–63.
[2] H. Aarts, T. Paulussen, H. Schaalma, Physical exercise habit: on the conceptualization
formation of habitual health behaviours, Health Education Research 12 (1997)
363–374.
[3] H. Aarts, B. Verplanken, A. van Knippenberg, Predicting behavior from actions in
the past: repeated decision making or a matter of habit? Journal of Applied Social
Psychology 28 (1998) 1355–1374.
[4] I. Ajzen, Residual effects of past on later behavior: habituation and reasoned action
perspectives, Personality of Social Psychology Review 6 (2002) 107–122.
[5] J.C. Anderson, D.W. Gerbing, Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and
recommended two-step approach, Psychological Bulletin 103 (1988) 411–423.
[6] E. Anderson, B. Weitz, Determinants of continuity in conventional industrial
channel dyads, Marketing Science 8 (1989) 310–323.
[7] M.J. Arnold, K.E. Reynolds, Hedonic shopping motivations, Journal of Retailing 79
(2003) 77–95.
[8] B.J. Babin, W.R. Darden, M. Griffin, Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian
shopping value, Journal of Consumer Research 20 (1994) 644–656.
[9] R.P. Bagozzi, The self regulation of attitudes, intentions, and behavior, Social
Psychology Quarterly 55 (2) (1992) 178–204.
[10] R.M. Baron, D.A. Kenny, The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Jour-
nal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (1986) 1173–1182.
[11] D.A. Belsley, E. Kuh, R.E. Welsch, Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential
Data and Sources of Collinearity, John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 2004.
[12] E. Bridges, R. Florsheim, Hedonic and utilitarian shopping goals: the online experience,
Journal of Business Research 61 (2008) 309–314.
[13] I. Brown, R. Jayakody, B2C e-commerce success: a test and validation of a revised con-
ceptual model, Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation 11 (2008)
167–184.
[14] W.W. Chin, Issues and opinions on structural equation modeling, MIS Quarterly
22 (1998) 7–16.
[15] W.W. Chin, P.R. Newsted, Structural equation modeling analysis with small
samples using partial least squares, in: R.H. Hoyle (Ed.), Statistical Strategies for
Small Sample Research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1999, pp. 307–341.
[16] W.W. Chin, B.L. Marcolin, P.R. Newsted, A partial least squares latent variable
modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: results from a Monte Carlo
simulation study and voice mail emotion/adoption study, Information Systems
Research 14 (2) (2003) 189–217.
[17] A.M. Chircu, V. Mahajan, Managing electronic commerce transaction costs for
customer value, Decision Support Systems 42 (2006) 898–914.
[18] C.M. Chiu, M.H. Hsu, T.G. Wang, Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual
communities: an integration of social capital and social cognitive theories, Decision
Support Systems 42 (2006) 1872–1888.
[19] J. Cohen, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Erlbaum,
Hillsdale, NJ, 1988.
[20] P.M. Doney, J.P. Cannon, An examination of the nature of trust in buyer–seller
relationships, Journal of Marketing 61 (1997) 35–51.
[21] C. Flavia´n, M. Guinalı´u, R. Gurrea, The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction
and consumer trust on website loyalty, Information Management 43 (2006) 1–14.
[22] C. Fornell, D.F. Larcker, Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research 18 (1981) 39–50.
[23] D. Gefen, E-commerce: the role of familiarity and trust, Omega 28 (2000) 725–738.
[24] D. Gefen, E. Karahanna, D.W. Straub, Inexperience and experience with online
stores: the importance of TAM and trust, IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management 50 (2003) 307–321.
[25] D. Gefen, E. Karahanna, D.W. Straub, Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated
model, MIS Quarterly 27 (2003) 51–90.
[26] J. Gutman, Means-end chains as goal hierarchies, Psychology and Marketing 14
(1997) 545–560.
[27] J.F. Hair, W.C. Black, B.J. Babin, R.E. Anderson, Multivariate Data Analysis, Upper
Saddle River, Prentice Hall, NJ, 2009.
[28] E. Hirschman, M.B. Holbrook, Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts,
methods and propositions, Journal of Marketing 46 (1982) 92–101.
[29] D.L. Hoffman, T.P. Novak, M. Perlta, Building consumer trust online, Communications
of the ACM 42 (1999) 80–85.
[30] P. Honkanena, S.O. Olsenb, B. Verplanken, Intention to consume seafood—the
importance of habit, Appetite 45 (2005) 161–168.
[31] Y. Hwang, D.J. Kim, Customer self-service systems: the effects of perceived web
quality with service contents on enjoyment, anxiety, and e-trust, Decision
Support Systems 43 (2007) 746–760.
[32] W. James, The Principles of Psychology, Henry Holt & Co., New York, NY, 1890.
[33] S.L. Jarvenpaa, T.R. Shaw, D.S. Staples, Toward contextualized theories of trust:
the role of trust in global virtual teams, Information Systems Research 15 (3)
(2004) 250–267.
[34] M.F. Ji, W. Wood, Purchase and consumption habits: not necessarily what you
intend, Journal of Consumer Psychology 17 (4) (2007) 261–276.
[35] A.C. Johnson, M.B. Johnson, R.C. Buse, Econometrics: Basic and Applied, MacMillan,
New York, NY, USA, 1987.
[36] M. Khalifa, V. Liu, Online consumer retention: contingent effects of online
shopping habit and online shopping experience, European Journal of Information
Systems 16 (2007) 780–792.
[37] H.W. Kim, S. Gupta, A comparison of purchase decision calculus between potential
and repeat customers of an online store, Decision Support Systems 47 (4) (2009)
477–487.
[38] S.S. Kim, N.K. Malhotra, S. Narasimham, Two competing perspectives on automatic
use: a theoretical and empirical comparison, Information Systems Research 16 (4)
(2005) 418–432.
[39] D.J. Kim, D.L. Ferrin, H.R. Rao, A trust-based consumer decision-making model in
electronic commerce: the role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents,
Decision Support Systems 44 (2) (2008) 544–564.
[40] P. Lally, C.H.M. van Jaarsveld, H.W.W. Potts, J. Wardle, How are habits formed:
modeling habit formation in the real world, European Journal of Social Psychology
40 (6) (2010) 998–1009.
[41] N.K. Lankton, E.V. Wilson, E. Mao, Antecedents and determinants of information
technology habit, Information Management 47 (2010) 300–307.
[42] R. LaRose, M.S. Eastin, Is on-line buying out of control? Electronic commerce and
consumer self-regulation, Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 45 (4)
(2002) 549–564.
[43] R.J. Lewicki, B.B. Bunker, Trust in relationships: a model of trust development and
decline, in: B.B. Bunker, J.Z. Rubin (Eds.), Conflicts, Cooperation, and Justice,
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1995, pp. 133–173.
[44] D. Li, G.J. Browne, J.C. Wetherbe, Why do Internet users stick with a specific web
site? A relationship perspective, International Journal of Electronic Commerce 10
(2006) 105–141.
[45] C. Liao, P. Palvia, H.-N. Lin, The roles of habit and web site quality in e-commerce,
International Journal of Information Management 26 (6) (2006) 469–483.
[46] M. Limayem, S.G. Hirt, Force of habit and information systems usage: theory and
initial validation, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 4 (1) (2003)
65–97.
[47] M. Limayem, S. Hirt, C. Cheung, How habit limits the predictive power of intentions:
the case of IS continuance, MIS Quarterly 31 (2007) 705–737.
[48] H.H. Lin, Y.S. Wang, An examination of the determinants of customer loyalty in
mobile commerce contexts, Information Management 43 (2006) 271–282.
[49] R.C. Mayer, J.H. Davis, F.D. Schoorman, An integrative model of organizational
trust, Academy of Management Review 20 (3) (1995) 709–734.
[50] G. Messinis, Habit formation and the theory of addiction, Journal of Economic
Surveys 13 (1999) 417–442.
[51] F.J. Milliken, Three types of perceived uncertainty about the environment: state, ef-
fect, and response uncertainty, Academy of Management Review 12 (1987) 133–143.
[52] D.E. Morrison, J. Firmstone, The social function of trust and implications for
e-commerce, International Journal of Advertising 19 (5) (2000) 599–623.
[53] R.L. Oliver, A cognitive model for the antecedents and consequences of satisfac-
tion, Journal of Marketing Research 17 (1980) 460–469.
[54] R.L. Oliver, Processing of the satisfaction response in consumption: a suggested
framework and research directions, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfac-
tion, and Complaining Behavior 2 (1989) 1–16.
[55] R.L. Oliver, J.E. Swan, Consumer perceptions of interpersonal equity and satisfaction
in transactions: a field survey approach, Journal of Marketing 53 (1989) 21–35.
[56] J.A. Ouellette, W. Wood, Habit and intention in everyday life: the multiple pro-
cesses by which past behavior predicts future behavior, Psychological Bulletin
124 (1) (1998) 54–74.
[57] A. Parasuraman, V.A. Zeithaml, A. Malholtra, E-S-QUAL: a multiple-item scale for
assessing electronic service quality, Journal of Service Research 7 (2005)
213–235.
[58] P.G. Patterson, R.A. Spreng, Modeling the relationship between perceived value,
satisfaction and repurchase intentions in a business-to-business, services context:
an empirical examination, International Journal of Service Industry Management
8 (1997) 414–434.
[59] P.A. Pavlou, M. Fygenson, Understanding and predicting electronic commerce
adoption: an extension of the theory of planned behavior, MIS Quarterly 30
(2006) 115–143.
[60] P.A. Pavlou, H. Liang, Y. Xue, Understanding and mitigating uncertainty in online
exchange relationships: a principal-agent perspective, MIS Quarterly 31 (2007)
105–136.
[61] S. Petter, D. Straub, A. Rai, Specifying formative constructs in IS research, MIS
Quarterly 31 (4) (2007) 623–656.
[62] P.M. Podsakoff, D.W. Organ, Self-reports in organizational research: problems and
prospects, Journal of Management 12 (1986) 69–82.
[63] P. Ratnasingam, Trust in interorganizational exchanges: a case study in business
to business electronic commerce, Decision Support Systems 39 (2005) 525–544.
[64] J. Riegelsberger, M.A. Sasse, J.D. McCarthy, The mechanics of trust: a framework
for research and design, International Journal of Human Computer Studies 62
(2005) 759–781.
[65] S. Roccas, L. Sagiv, S.H. Schwartz, A. Knafo, The big five personality factors and
personality values, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28 (2002)
789–801.
 C-M. Chiu et al. / Decision Support Systems 53 (2012) 835–845
[66] N. Saraf, C.S. Langdon, S. Gosain, IS application capabilities and relational value in
interfirm partnerships, Information Systems Research 18 (3) (2007) 320–339.
[67] S.H. Schwartz, Are there universal aspects in the content and structure of values?
Journal of Social Issues 50 (1994) 19–45.
[68] P. Sheeran, Intention-behavior relations: a conceptual and empirical review, in:
W. Stroebe, M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology, Wiley,
New York, NY, 2002, pp. 1–30.
[69] W. Thorngate, Must we always think before we act? Personality of Social Psychol-
ogy Bulletin 2 (1976) 31–35.
[70] H.C. Triandis, Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior, in: H.E. Howe Jr., M.M.
Page (Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1979: Beliefs, Attitudes, and
Values, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE, 1980, pp. 195–259.
[71] H. Van der Heijden, T. Verhagen, M. Creemers, Understanding online purchase in-
tentions: contributions from technology and trust perspectives, European Journal
of Information Systems 12 (2003) 41–48.
[72] V. Verplanken, Beyond frequency: habit as mental construct, British Journal of So-
cial Psychology 45 (2006) 639–656.
[73] B. Verplanken, H. Aarts, Habit, attitude, and planned behaviour: is habit an empty
construct or an interesting case of goal-directed automaticity? European Review
of Social Psychology 10 (1999) 101–134.
[74] B. Verplanken, S. Orbell, Reflections on past behavior: a self-report index of habit
strength, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 33 (2003) 1313–1330.
[75] B. Verplanken, H. Aarts, A. van Knippenberg, C. van Knippenberg, Attitude versus
general habit: antecedents of travel mode choice, Journal of Applied Social Psy-
chology 24 (1994) 285–300.
[76] B. Verplanken, V. Myrbakk, E. Rudi, The measurement of habit, in: T. Betsch, S.
Haberstroh (Eds.), The routines of decision making, Erlbaum, London, 2005,
pp. 231–247.
[77] R. Walczuch, H. Lundgren, Psychological antecedents of institution-based con-
sumer trust in e-retailing, Information Management 42 (2004) 159–177.
[78] W. Wang, J.E. Butler, Effects of adoption determinants in voluntary contexts on IS
mandated usage, Journal of Information Science and Technology 3 (3) (2007) 5–23.
[79] F. Wang, M. Head, How can the Web help build customer relationships? An em-
pirical study on e-tailing, Information & Management 44 (2007) 115–129.
[80] B. Weiner, An attributional theory of motivation and emotion, Springer-Verlag,
New York, NY, 1986.
[81] J.M. Wilson, S.G. Straus, B. McEvily, All in due time: the development of trust in
computer-mediated and face-to-face teams, Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes 99 (1) (2006) 16–33.
[82] W. Wood, D.T. Neal, A new look at habits and the interface between habits and
goals, Psychological Review 114 (2007) 843–863.
[83] W. Wood, J.M. Quinn, D.A. Kashy, Habits in everyday life: thought, emotion, and
action, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83 (2002) 1281–1297.
[84] V.A. Zeithaml, Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end
model and synthesis of evidence, Journal of Marketing 51 (3) (1988) 2–22.
Chao-Min Chiu is a Professor in the Department of Informa-
tion Management at the National Sun Yat-sen University, Tai-
wan. He holds a PhD in Management from the Rutgers
University. His research interests include electronic commerce,
virtual communities, and knowledge management. His re-
search has appeared in Decision Support Systems, Information
& Management, Information Systems Journal, International Jour-
nal of Human-Computer Studies, Computers & Education, Com-
puters in Human Behavior, Electronic Commerce Research and
Applications, Behaviour & Information Technology, and others.
845
Meng-Hsiang Hsu holds a Ph.D. degree from National
Sun-Yat-Sen University, Taiwan. He is currently a Professor at
the Department of Information Management, National
Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology. His re-
search interests include knowledge management, information
ethics, and electronic commerce. He has published articles in
Decision Support Systems, Journal of Business Ethics, Behaviour
and Information Technology, International Journal of Human–
Computer Studies, and others.
Hsiangchu Lai is a Professor of Information Management
in the College of Management, National Sun Yat-sen Uni-
versity in Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Her graduated degrees are
from National Taiwan University (BA), National
Cheng-Chih University (MBA), and Purdue University
(PHD). She had been a visiting scholar at the University of
Texas at Austin and a visiting professor at Concordia Univer-
sity. Her research interests include e-negotiation, online
group-buying, e-marketing, and other IS topics. Her research
articles have appeared in numerous international journals,
including the Journal of Management Information Systems,
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Decision Sup-
port Systems, Group Decision and Negotiation, International
Journal of Electronic Commerce, the European Journal of Operational Research, Information
Technology and Management, the Journal of Computer Information Systems, IEEE Computer,
and as well as Chinese language research journals.
Chun-Ming Chang is currently an assistant professor at the
Department of Tourism Information, Aletheia University,
Taiwan. He holds a Ph.D. degree in Management from Na-
tional Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology,
Taiwan. His current research interests include electronic
commerce and knowledge management. He has published
articles in International Journal of Human–Computer Studies
and Behaviour and Information Technology.