Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Duong Xuan Lam
 -- 1328 2022-04-02 07:46:21 |
2 format correct
Nora Tang
 Meta information modification 1328 2022-04-02 08:07:31 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Lam, D.X.; , .; Liaw, S. Online Interpersonal Relationships and Data Ownership Awareness. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21305 (accessed on 06 July 2024).
Lam DX,  , Liaw S. Online Interpersonal Relationships and Data Ownership Awareness. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21305. Accessed July 06, 2024.
Lam, Duong Xuan, , Shu-Yi Liaw. "Online Interpersonal Relationships and Data Ownership Awareness" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21305 (accessed July 06, 2024).
Lam, D.X., , ., & Liaw, S. (2022, April 02). Online Interpersonal Relationships and Data Ownership Awareness. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21305
Lam, Duong Xuan, et al. "Online Interpersonal Relationships and Data Ownership Awareness." Encyclopedia. Web. 02 April, 2022.
Online Interpersonal Relationships and Data Ownership Awareness
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/su14063439

The availability of online shopping and the convenience of having purchases accomplished without face-to-face interaction facilitates the migration of problematic conventional shopping habits to the online environment and results in the development and maintenance of problematic internet shopping. There has been a wide variety of terms introduced to characterize problematic buying–shopping, including compulsive buying, buying–shopping disorder, pathological buying, and shopping addiction, to name a few. Compulsive buying has been used to portray an individual’s inability to control their excessive purchases or refers to chronic, repetitive, and problematic behavior in which individuals fail to regulate their impulsive buying habits. While clinical psychology and psychiatry literature refers to compulsive buying as a behavioral addiction or a disorder of impulse control, it is, however, considered to be an “irrational way of purchasing” from the perspective of consumer behavior and marketing literature. Likewise, disorders emerging from internet shopping have been proposed, including online shopping addiction, online compulsive buying, or pathological buying online.

problematic internet shopping data ownership online interpersonal relationship

1. Theoretical Background

The stimulus–organism–response (S-O-R) model explains the impact of an environmental stimulus and emotional response on individuals’ behavior. Prior research has employed the S-O-R model to examine individuals’ impulsive consumption behavior. Accordingly, various online environmental stimuli influence customers’ cognitive and affective organism processes, consequently formulating the user’s behavioral responses [1]. In an online shopping context, the stimulus corresponds to triggers or cues in the online setting that influences consumers’ affective experiences (e.g., the appearance of the e-retail stores). Organism represents the inward state of customers’ emotions and cognition when interacting with the stimuli, whereas response manifests customers’ impulsive shopping behavior as reactions toward the stimulus and their internal evaluation, such as purchase intentions [2]. Impulsive buying is defined as unintentional and abrupt purchase behavior, often triggered by the shopping environment. According to Kyrios et al. [3], impulsive buying is a less pronounced manifestation of compulsive buying wherein the former represents the initial stage and the latter represents the extreme boundary of the same behavior [4]. 

2. Perceived Benefits of Online Shopping

Perceived benefits in the online shopping context represent the combination of advantages that meet a user’s expectation [5] or a consumer’s belief about the extent to which they will become affluent from purchasing online with a particular website [6]. Previous studies by Forsythe et al. [7] highlighted that convenience, product selection, ease of shopping, and enjoyment are essential perceived benefits customers obtain from online shopping [7][8]. In addition, big data analytics has enabled customers to acquire relevant information about the products of interest and quickly purchase them through the support of improved search engines and recommendation systems without any constraints [9]. Online shopping provides unending possibilities for efficient goal-directed information search, price comparisons, and convenient purchasing of a wide variety of products [10]. Moreover, e-commerce websites integrate features designed to enhance consumer-to-consumer and customers-to-brand communication and provide timely support and information resources concerning products of interest. Those advantages result in instant gratification or relief from negative feelings, which, in turn, significantly affect consumers’ attitudes toward online shopping [11] and online shopping behavior [12][13]. Likewise, some anecdotal evidence indicates e-commerce incorporates features that have heightened online compulsive buying [14][15][16].

3. Online Interpersonal Relationships

According to the APA Dictionary of Psychology, the notion of interpersonal relationships “encompasses social interactions, connections, or affiliations, especially ones that are socially and emotionally significant, between two or more people”. The capability to attach to and constitute ongoing intimate relationships with other people is a distinctive attribute of the human experience. However, whether Internet use enhances or wears down interpersonal relationships has been the subject of considerable controversies. Proponents of the Internet contended its possibilities for making new friends, maintaining interpersonal relations [17][18][19], and gaining social capital [20][21], while the skeptics oppose this optimistic viewpoint [22][23]. These inconclusive findings may partly stem from examining the Internet as a single facet [24][25], the changes to the Internet, and how people use the Internet [26][27]. Internet shopping provides an essential social support system for the relatively introverted or those who have few friends [18]. Such concealed social support enables users to satisfy their needs through purchasing [28]. According to attachment theory, a deficit of interpersonal relationships may jeopardize an individual’s sense of security, triggering problematic behaviors [29]. More specifically, inferior interpersonal relationships were a detrimental consequence of compulsive buying [30], whereas heightened interpersonal conflict was more relevant to abnormal spending behavior and a preoccupation that denotes compulsive buying [31].

4. Data Ownership Awareness

To date, there is still no agreed-upon definition of the term that entirely covers the issue of data ownership. The uncertainty and absence of clear regulations relating to data ownership [32] mean that the question of data ownership (i.e., who should own the data) remains without a conclusive answer. Data ownership is considered to be “the possession of complete control over the data and its rights including, but not limited to access, creation, generation, modification, analysis, use, sell, or deletion of the data, in addition to the right to grant rights over the data to others” [33]. Companies have leveraged the ability to collect, store, disseminate, and manipulate massive amounts of consumer information to remain competitive in a progressively knowledge-based society [34]. The rising amount of data is undoubtedly provoking the issue of data ownership. However, there has been very little academic inquiry into consumer data ownership and management issues relating to the data that companies routinely collect for marketing-related purposes. The dearth of transparency regarding data collection introduces more complexity when trying to figure out what happens to consumers’ data—i.e., how it is stored, processed, or disseminated to other parties. This increasing tendency underscores the necessity to obtain control over the manipulation and accessibility of these data. Existing literature from a juridical perspective suggested that data ownership is predominantly associated with the privacy of the individual [35]. According to Jagadish et al. [36], privacy is one aspect of data ownership wherein the former, within the firm–consumers relationship reflects “the extent to which a consumer is aware of and can control the collection, storage, and use of personal information by a firm” [37]. More specifically, the involvement of different entities who have authorized access to such data, often without prior consent from the data subject [38], accrues more complexity to the concept of data ownership [39].
According to Rogers’ theory of the adoption of innovation [40], awareness is the first step in a five-step procedure for decision making, which includes awareness, interest, evaluation, trial, and adoption. In the first step, an individual is exposed to an idea or innovation but lacks information about that idea/innovation and is less likely to seek more information about the idea/innovation. People must first be aware of the ideas and determine whether they are worth adopting before proceeding further. 

5. Problematic Internet Shopping

Problematic internet shopping refers to “…a tendency of excessive, compulsive, and problematic shopping behavior via the Internet that results in consequences associated with economic, social, and emotional problems” [41]. The growth of the e-commerce market and excessive buying/shopping may place an individual at an increased susceptibility of perpetual behaviors crossing some thresholds and becoming problematic. According to Koufaris [42], greater anonymity, unhindered access to the international marketplace, and a pronounced likelihood of hiding purchases from their tight-knit connections can stimulate a buyer to make purchases repeatedly, resulting in unplanned shopping. Furthermore, enticing sales, attractive in-store arrangements, and convenient payment methods could constitute a key trigger for problematic internet shopping [14][16][43]. In a similar vein, over-exposure to online advertisements and embedded marketing strategies have been reported to elevate the risk of problematic internet shopping [44]. Therefore, it is intuitively convincing to speculate that traditional problematic shopping can migrate into the online environment and result in problematic internet shopping, which might eventually deteriorate affected an individual’s social life and economic and psychological condition [45][41]. From the sociological perspective, the subject of addiction is not the material good but the interaction between an affected individual and their context-specific addiction subject [46]. Therefore, seamless access to all goods and services online without constraints manifests a fertile ground for developing problematic internet shopping [47][14].

References

  1. Xu, J.; Benbasat, I.; Cenfetelli, R.T. The nature and consequences of trade-off transparency in the context of recommendation agents. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2014, 38, 379–406.
  2. Chan, T.K.H.; Cheung, C.M.K.; Lee, Z.W.Y. The state of online impulse-buying research: A literature analysis. Inf. Manag. 2017, 54, 204–217.
  3. Kyrios, M.; Fassnacht, D.B.; Ali, K.; Maclean, B.; Moulding, R. Predicting the severity of excessive buying using the Excessive Buying Rating Scale and Compulsive Buying Scale. J. Obs.-Compuls. Relat. Disord. 2020, 25, 100509.
  4. Pacheco, D.C.; Moniz, A.I.D.D.S.A.; Caldeira, S.N.; Silva, O.D.L. “Cannot Stop Buying”—Integrative Review on Compulsive Buying. In Perspectives and Trends in Education and Technology; Springer: Singapore, 2022; pp. 551–560.
  5. Wu, S.I. The relationship between consumer characteristics and attitude toward online shopping. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2003, 21, 37–44.
  6. Kim, D.J.; Ferrin, D.L.; Rao, H.R. A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decis. Support Syst. 2008, 44, 544–564.
  7. Forsythe, S.; Liu, C.; Shannon, D.; Gardner, L.C. Development of a scale to measure the perceived benefits and risks of online shopping. J. Interact. Mark. 2006, 20, 55–75.
  8. Rowley, J. Retailing and shopping on the Internet. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 1996, 24, 26–37.
  9. Le, T.M.; Liaw, S.-Y. Effects of Pros and Cons of Applying Big Data Analytics to Consumers’ Responses in an E-Commerce Context. Sustainability 2017, 9, 798.
  10. Holmes, A.; Byrne, A.; Rowley, J. Mobile shopping behaviour: Insights into attitudes, shopping process involvement and location. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 2014, 42, 25–39.
  11. Al-Debei, M.M.; Akroush, M.N.; Ashouri, M.I. Consumer attitudes towards online shopping. Internet Res. 2015, 25, 707–733.
  12. Arora, N.; Aggarwal, A. The role of perceived benefits in formation of online shopping attitude among women shoppers in India. South Asian J. Bus. Stud. 2018, 7, 91–110.
  13. Bhatti, A.; Ur Rehman, S. Perceived Benefits and Perceived Risks Effect on Online Shopping Behavior with the Mediating Role of Consumer Purchase Intention in Pakistan. Int. J. Manag. Stud. 2020, 26, 33–54.
  14. Duroy, D.; Gorse, P.; Lejoyeux, M. Characteristics of online compulsive buying in Parisian students. Addict. Behav. 2014, 39, 1827–1830.
  15. Eastin, M.S. Diffusion of e-commerce: An analysis of the adoption of four e-commerce activities. Telemat. Inform. 2002, 19, 251–267.
  16. Kukar-Kinney, M.; Ridgway, N.M.; Monroe, K.B. The Relationship Between Consumers’ Tendencies to Buy Compulsively and Their Motivations to Shop and Buy on the Internet. J. Retail. 2009, 85, 298–307.
  17. Lee, Y.-C.; Sun, Y.C. Using instant messaging to enhance the interpersonal relationships of Taiwanese adolescents: Evidence from quantile regression analysis. Adolescence 2009, 44, 199–208.
  18. Milani, L.; Osualdella, D.; Di Blasio, P. Quality of Interpersonal Relationships and Problematic Internet Use in Adolescence. CyberPsychol. Behav. 2009, 12, 681–684.
  19. Wellman, B.; Hasse, A.Q.; Witte, J.; Hamptom, K. Does the Internet Increase, Decrease, or Supplement Social Capital? Social Networks, Participation, and Community Commitment. Am. Behav. Sci. 2001, 45, 436–455.
  20. Ellison, N.B.; Steinfield, C.; Lampe, C. Connection strategies: Social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices. New Media Soc. 2011, 13, 873–892.
  21. Becchetti, L.; Manfredonia, S.; Pisani, F. Social Capital and Loan Cost: The Role of Interpersonal Trust. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1238.
  22. Liu, Q.-X.; Fang, X.-Y.; Yan, N.; Zhou, Z.-K.; Yuan, X.-J.; Lan, J.; Liu, C.-Y. Multi-family group therapy for adolescent Internet addiction: Exploring the underlying mechanisms. Addict. Behav. 2015, 42, 1–8.
  23. Yang, X.; Zhu, L.; Chen, Q.; Song, P.; Wang, Z. Parent marital conflict and Internet addiction among Chinese college students: The mediating role of father-child, mother-child, and peer attachment. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 59, 221–229.
  24. Lai, C.-H.; Lin, C.-Y.; Chen, C.-H.; Gwung, H.-L.; Li, C.-H. Can Internet Usage Positively or Negatively Affect Interpersonal Relationship? Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 373–382.
  25. Simone, M.; Geiser, C.; Lockhart, G. Development and Validation of the Multicontextual Interpersonal Relations Scale (MIRS). Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 2020, 36, 84–95.
  26. Baym, N.K.; Zhang, Y.B.; Kunkel, A.; Ledbetter, A.; Lin, M.-C. Relational quality and media use in interpersonal relationships. New Media Soc. 2007, 9, 735–752.
  27. Lee, S.J. Online Communication and Adolescent Social Ties: Who benefits more from Internet use? J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun. 2009, 14, 509–531.
  28. Zhang, J.H.; Bai, Z.Q.; Wei, J.X.; Yang, M.L.; Fu, G.F. The Status Quo of College Students’ Online Shopping Addiction and Its Coping Strategies. Int. J. Psychol. Stud. 2019, 11, 88–93.
  29. Bowlby, J. Attachment and Loss, Attachment; Random House: New York, NY, USA, 1969; Volume 1.
  30. Boland, W.A.; Martin, I.M.; Mason, M.J. In search of well-being: Factors influencing the movement toward and away from maladaptive consumption. J. Consum. Aff. 2020, 54, 1178–1194.
  31. Harnish, R.J.; Roche, M.J.; Bridges, K.R. Predicting compulsive buying from pathological personality traits, stressors, and purchasing behavior. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2021, 177, 110821.
  32. Tjong Tjin Tai, E. Data ownership and consumer protection. J. Eur. Consum. Mark. Law 2018, 7, 136–140.
  33. Asswad, J.; Marx Gómez, J. Data Ownership: A Survey. Information 2021, 12, 465.
  34. McColl, J.; Ritch, E.L. The Evolution of Big Data in Marketing: Trust, Security and Data Ownership. In New Perspectives on Critical Marketing and Consumer Society; Emerald Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2021.
  35. Fadler, M.; Legner, C. Data ownership revisited: Clarifying data accountabilities in times of big data and analytics. J. Bus. Anal. 2021, 1–17.
  36. Jagadish, H.V.; Gehrke, J.; Labrinidis, A.; Papakonstantinou, Y.; Patel, J.M.; Ramakrishnan, R.; Shahabi, C. Big data and its technical challenges. Commun. ACM 2014, 57, 86–94.
  37. Beke, F.T.; Eggers, F.; Verhoef, P.C. Consumer Informational Privacy: Current Knowledge and Research Directions; Now: Norwell, MA, USA, 2018; Volume 11, pp. 1–71.
  38. Mendelson, D.; Mendelson, D. Legal protections for personal health information in the age of Big Data—A proposal for regulatory framework. Ethics Med. Public Health 2017, 3, 37–55.
  39. Galvin, H.K.; DeMuro, P.R. Developments in Privacy and Data Ownership in Mobile Health Technologies, 2016–2019. Yearb. Med. Inf. 2020, 29, 032–043.
  40. Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed.; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 2003.
  41. Zhao, H.; Tian, W.; Xin, T. The Development and Validation of the Online Shopping Addiction Scale. Front. Psychol. 2017, 8, 735.
  42. Koufaris, M. Applying the Technology Acceptance Model and Flow Theory to Online Consumer Behavior. Inf. Syst. Res. 2002, 13, 205–223.
  43. Sharma, P.; Sivakumaran, B.; Marshall, R. Impulse buying and variety seeking: A trait-correlates perspective. J. Bus. Res. 2010, 63, 276–283.
  44. Lam, L.T.; Lam, M.K. The association between financial literacy and Problematic Internet Shopping in a multinational sample. Addict. Behav. Rep. 2017, 6, 123–127.
  45. Rose, S.; Dhandayudham, A. Towards an understanding of Internet-based problem shopping behaviour: The concept of online shopping addiction and its proposed predictors. J. Behav. Addict. 2014, 3, 83–89.
  46. Shaffer, H.J. Understanding the means and objects of addiction: Technology, the internet, and gambling. J. Gambl. Stud. 1996, 12, 461–469.
  47. Adamczyk, G. Compulsive and compensative buying among online shoppers: An empirical study. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0252563.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Others
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Duong Xuan Lam
,
,
Shu-Yi Liaw
View Times: 494
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 02 Apr 2022
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback