PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
Purpose
The purposes of this study were to investigate eating behavior of university students through social commerce and to analyze factors affecting university students' attitude regarding social commerce. Methods: Questionnaires were distributed to 445 university students in Changwon, Korea from March 28 to April 28, 2013. A total of 339 questionnaires were used for the final analysis, which excluded improperly-completed questionnaires. Results: The major factor considered for eating behavior through social commerce was price (37.2%). Purchasing experiences of foodservice products according to types of foodservice were 64.9% for coffee shop, 59.3% for fast food restaurant, 53.4% for family restaurant, 46.0% for specialty restaurant, 35.7% for pizza restaurant, 35.4% for buffet, and 31.9% for bakery. Factors affecting satisfaction with social commerce for purchasing foodservice products were ‘service quality of foodservice company', ‘communication of social commerce', and ‘discount rate of social commerce'. Factors affecting repurchasing intention of foodservice products through social commerce were ‘service quality of foodservice company', ‘site design of social commerce', and ‘discount rate of social commerce'. Conclusion: In order to increase satisfaction with social commerce, ‘service quality of foodservice company', ‘communication of social commerce', and ‘discount rate of social commerce' should be increased. And, to increase repurchasing intention of social commerce, ‘service quality of foodservice company', ‘site design of social commerce', and ‘discount rate of social commerce' should be increased. In addition, two factors ‘service quality of foodservice' and ‘discount rate of social commerce' were found to have an effect on satisfaction and repurchasing intention of social commerce. For development of social commerce and foodservice industry, cooperative relationship between social commerce and foodservice industry is needed, and a reasonable price strategy should be established. The university students considered price as a major factor of eating behaviors and did not consider menu and taste as a major factor. From a longer perspective, such an eating behavior would have an effect on university students' dietary life and it would cause nutrition and health problems for university students. Thus, it implied that further studies from the perspectives of nutrition and health regarding eating behavior through social commerce service should be conducted.
References
1. Suh Y, Kim HR, Hyun J. A study on social commerce consumer characteristics and categories. J Commod Sci Technol. 2011; 29(4):149–160.
2. Han EK, Song SJ, Lim HN. The motives for using social commerce and satisfaction, repurchase intention based on the uses and gratification theory. Korean J Advert Public Relat. 2011; 13(3):298–325.
3. Jin GS, Lee JH. Service quality factors affecting satisfaction and repurchase intention of social commerce. J Korea Contents Assoc. 2012; 12(3):311–321.
4. Zhou YJ, Ryu MH, Lee SS. Complaining behavior and repurchase intention on social commerce for south Korean and Chinese consumers. J Consum Stud. 2012; 23(2):225–248.
5. Lee M. e-SERVQUAL: a scale for measuring consumer evaluations of internet service quality. Korean Mark Rev. 2002; 17(1):73–95.
6. Wang YS. Liao YW. The conceptualization and measurement of m-commerce user satisfaction. Comput Human Behav. 2007; 23(1):381–398.
7. Kim S, Park H. Effects of various characteristics of social commerce (s-commerce) on consumers' trust and trust performance. Int J Inf Manage. 2013; 33(2):318–332.
8. Corbitt BJ, Thanasankit T, Yi H. Trust and e-commerce: a study of consumer perceptions. Electron Commer Res Appl. 2003; 2(3):
9. Kim J, Jin B, Swinney JL. The role of etail quality, e-satisfaction and e-trust in online loyalty development process. J Retail Consum Serv. 2009; 16(4):239–247.
10. Lee YC, Choi YJ. An exploratory research on college students' usages of mobile commerce. J Commun Sci. 2012; 12(4):382–418.
11. Shin SY, Cha SM. Motive on social networking service usage of restaurant customers. Korean J Culinary Res. 2013; 19(1):121–138.
12. Lee KO. A study on the satisfaction and repurchase intention on social commerce of university students. Korean J Hum Ecol. 2012; 21(6):1111–1128.
13. Lee HS, Namkung Y. The effect of perceived quality of smartphone-based SNS on user satisfaction, intention to use of SNS, and intention to purchase in the foodservice industry. Korean J Hosp Adm. 2014; 23(1):145–163.
14. Kim YG, Chung JY. Effects of service convenience and perceived value on satisfaction with eating out in social commerce service. J Tourism Sci. 2013; 37(3):83–102.
15. Jo MN, Heo JH. The effects of the social commerce characteristics on shopping value and satisfaction: focused on foodservice products. J Tourism Sci. 2014; 38(3):33–56.
16. Choi S. A study on the factors that affect customers' intention to repurchase in social commerce [MS thesis]. Seoul: Hanyang University;2012.
17. Lee JW. Effect of social commerce on online marketing of food service [MS thesis]. Suwon: Kyonggi University;2011.
18. Lee HS, Lim JH. SPSS 14.0 manual. 2nd edition.Paju: Bobmunsa;2008.
19. Chung CY, Choi EK. Statistic analysis using SPSS WIN 10.0. 4th edition.Seoul: Muyok Pub.;2006.
20. Nunnally JC. Psychometric theory. 2nd edition.New York (NY): McGraw-Hill;1978.
21. Jo MN, Heo JH. Use of social commerce restaurant products by college students according to demographic characteristics and eating out behavior. Korean J Food Cookery Sci. 2014; 30(3):291–306.
Table 1.
General characteristics of subject (n = 339)
Table 2.
University students' eating behavior through social commerce according to gender Unit: N(%)
| Personal characteristic | Total | Gender | χ2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | ||||
| Social commerce site used for purchasing foodservice product | G | 16 (4.7) | 4 (4.0) | 12 (5.0) | 9.593 |
| D | 3 (0.9) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (1.2) | ||
| M | 2 (0.6) | 2 (2.0) | 0 (0.0) | ||
| B | 7 (2.1) | 2 (2.0) | 5 (2.1) | ||
| W | 13 (3.8) | 3 (3.0) | 10 (4.2) | ||
| CP | 196 (57.8) | 61 (61.6) | 135 (56.2) | ||
| T | 99 (29.2) | 25 (25.3) | 74 (30.8) | ||
| CC | 3 (0.9) | 2 (2.0) | 1 (0.4) | ||
| Average expense for purchasing foodservice product (won/person) | < 5,000 | 30 (8.8) | 15 (15.2) | 15 (6.2) | 20.082∗∗∗ |
| 5,000 ≤ and <10,000 | 75 (22.1) | 15 (15.2) | 60 (25.0) | ||
| 10,000≤ and < 20,000 | 139 (41.0) | 31 (31.3) | 108 (45.0) | ||
| 20,000≤ and < 30,000 | 72 (21.2) | 26 (26.3) | 46 (19.2) | ||
| 30,000 = | 23 (6.8) | 12 (12.1) | 11 (4.6) | ||
| Factors considered for purchasing foodservice product through social | Price | 126 (37.2) | 37 (37.4) | 89 (37.1) | 3.883 |
| Reputation of foodservice company commerce | 27 (8.0) | 7 (7.1) | 20 (8.3) | ||
| Menu | 43 (12.7) | 8 (8.1) | 35 (14.6) | ||
| Taste | 63 (18.6) | 21 (21.2) | 42 (17.5) | ||
| Location | 45 (13.3) | 16 (16.2) | 29 (12.1) | ||
| Review of customer | 35 (10.3) | 10 (10.1) | 25 (10.4) | ||
| Purchasing experience of foodservice product through social commerce according to types of foodservice | Family restaurant | 181 (53.4) | 62 (62.6) | 119 (49.6) | 4.791∗ |
| Fast food restaurant | 201 (59.3) | 63 (63.6) | 138 (57.5) | 1.093 | |
| Pizza restaurant | 121 (35.7) | 48 (48.5) | 73 (30.4) | .004 | |
| Coffee shop | 220 (64.9) | 64 (64.6) | 156 (65.0) | 9.969∗∗ | |
| Bakery | 108 (31.9) | 35 (35.4) | 73 (30.4) | .787 | |
| Specialty restaurant | 1564 (6.0) | 54 (54.5) | 102 (42.5) | 4.094 | |
| Buffet | 120 (35.4) | 45 (45.5) | 75 (31.2) | 6.184∗ | |
| 339 (100.0) | 99 (100.0) | 240 (100.0) | |||
Table 3.
Reliability analysis of measurement tool (n = 339)
Table 4.
Multiple regression analysis for factors affecting customer satisfaction on social commerce
| Independent variable | Unstandardized coefficients | Standardized coefficients | t | Sig T | Multi-collinearity | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ß | Std error | Beta | Tolerance | VIF | |||
| Constant | .244 | .285 | .856 | .392 | |||
| Service quality of foodservice company | .484 | .051 | .448 | 9.495 | .000 | .730 | 1.370 |
| Information | .075 | .062 | .068 | 1.207 | .228 | .519 | 1.927 |
| Transaction | .047 | .064 | .041 | .743 | .458 | .546 | 1.832 |
| Service Site design | .101 | .060 | .092 | 1.688 | .092 | .549 | 1.822 |
| quality of Communication | .099 | .047 | .108 | 2.122 | .035 | .629 | 1.591 |
| social Perceived security | .002 | .050 | .002 | .045 | .964 | .615 | 1.627 |
| commerce Discount rate | .157 | .053 | .136 | 2.959 | .003 | .772 | 1.296 |
| Restriction | .055 | .042 | .058 | 1.310 | .191 | .842 | 1.188 |
| Discrimination | –.073 | .038 | –.084 | –1.917 | .056 | .837 | 1.194 |
| R2 = .465 Adjusted R2 = .450 F-value = 31.772∗∗∗ | |||||||
Table 5.
Multiple regression analysis for factors affecting repurchasing intention of social commerce
XML Download