IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/igg/jea000/v3y2011i4p1-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trust in E-Commerce: Social Networks vs. Institutional Credibility

Author

Listed:
  • Fahri Unsal

    (Ithaca College, USA)

  • Kurt Komaromi

    (Ithaca College, USA)

  • G. Scott Erickson

    (Ithaca College, USA)

Abstract

E-Commerce’s virtuality poses questions concerning trust between buyer and seller. Web 2.0 formats have provided new complications for these questions. Companies are creating more social networking sites, experimenting with ways to use such networks for marketing purposes. This paper explores the issue of trust in social networking site transactions vs. those at more established e-commerce sites. The authors apply the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to assess the level of trust in different types of e-commerce sites. TAM measures trust along several dimensions and includes potential explanatory factors, such as ease of use, perceived usefulness, search and research capabilities, security, value of product recommendations, and value of customer reviews. The authors directed the respondents to assess amazon.com, Facebook, and eBay—sites with different levels of institutional credibility and social networking affiliations. The data suggest definite differences exist between the sites, perhaps explained by institutional credibility and social networking.

Suggested Citation

  • Fahri Unsal & Kurt Komaromi & G. Scott Erickson, 2011. "Trust in E-Commerce: Social Networks vs. Institutional Credibility," International Journal of E-Adoption (IJEA), IGI Global, vol. 3(4), pages 1-12, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:igg:jea000:v:3:y:2011:i:4:p:1-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/jea.2011100101
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:igg:jea000:v:3:y:2011:i:4:p:1-12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journal Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.igi-global.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.