Marketing Letters 14:3, 185–202, 2003 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands.

The Effect of Interpersonal Trust, Need forCognition, and Social Loneliness on Shopping,Information Seeking and Surfing on the Web

SAMAR DAS ∗, RAJ ECHAMBADI and MICHAEL McCARDLE Samar.Das@bus.ucf.eduDepartment of Marketing, University of Central Florida, USA

MICHAEL LUCKETTUniversity of South Florida, USA

Abstract

This study contends that certain personality traits of e-consumers have an affect on their shopping, surfing andinformation seeking behaviors on the Web. Specifically, it is proposed that e-consumers who are low on inter-personal trust are less likely to shop on the Web due to their heightened concerns with Web security. Similarly,an argument is made that e-consumers who enjoy cognitively demanding processing tasks are more likely to usethe Web for information search. Finally, it is posited that social loners will be selectively drawn to Web surfing.Findings from an empirical study are presented which support these assertions. Implications of this study formarketers and future researchers are discussed.

Keywords: consumer behavior, Internet marketing, personality traits, interpersonal trust, need-for-cognition,social loneliness

1. Introduction

The Web heralds a new opportunity in consumer marketing. Unlimited information, in-stantaneous price comparisons and 24/7 service are conveniences not easily matched inconventional marketing channels. While these advantages initially led industry observersto believe that it was only a matter of time before the Web became a way of life for mostconsumers, the initial optimism has now been tempered by the reality of online business.For example, over 225 business-to-consumer (B2C) Web companies went out of businessin 2001 (Webmergers.com, 2002) and B2C sales forecasts have been revised significantlydownwards (Jupiter Media Metrix, 2002).

One possible reason why the web has failed to meet initial expectations could be thedemands the Web places on individual consumers. The e-consumer has to learn complexand evolving Web technologies, adapt to different commercial practices of online vendors,and feel comfortable with novel characteristics of the medium. Information research onthe Web, for example, may require sophisticated knowledge of search engines and search

∗ Address for correspondence: Department of Marketing, College of Business Administration, University ofCentral Florida, Orlando, FL 32816-1400, USA.

186 DAS ET AL.

bots. Similarly, shopping on the Web necessitates trusting unknown and unseen vendors inan unstructured Web environment. Finally, the interactivity of the Web, which can enriche-consumers by stimulating emotional experiences (Hoffman and Novak, 1996), may alsofoster psychological dependency (Young and Rodgers, 1998). It is thus evident that theWeb is an intricate medium that has varying psychological implications for e-consumers.

These implications placed on e-consumers cannot be fully comprehended without con-sidering the multidimensional uses of the Web such as surfing for entertainment, searchingfor information, and online shopping. These activities on the Web are distinctive and differ-ent, both intrinsically as well as in their end goals. Although most e-consumers reportedlyexplore and use the Web for multiple activities (GVU, 1998), it is highly unlikely thatthey would all be equally enthusiastic and adept in using the different dimensions of theWeb. Not everyone, for example, may enjoy the task of diligently searching for infor-mation on the Web. Similarly, only individuals who are socially inhibited may find theanonymity of the Web particularly attractive to socialize on the Web. The Web evidentlyis not “one” entity but a combination of diverse, distinct usage dimensions each of whichcould engage different e-consumer traits and aptitudes (Hamburger and Ben-Artzi, 2000;Korgaonkar and Wolin, 1999; Wolfradt and Doll, 2001).

Our objective of this paper is to explore how certain personality traits of e-consumerssuch as interpersonal trust, need for cognition, and social loneliness, affect their attitudesand behaviors towards purchasing, information seeking, and surfing for entertainment onthe Web, respectively. Specifically, we propose that individuals who are low on interper-sonal trust, a personality trait that maps an individual’s innate trust of people and situations(Rotter, 1971), are more likely to have heightened security concerns about the Web, lead-ing to lower likelihood of purchases on the Web. We also suggest that complexities ofsearching for information on the Web will selectively appeal to e-consumers who enjoyeffortful thinking, a trait described as “need for cognition” (Cacioppo and Petty, 1982).Finally, we propose that socially lonely individuals are more likely to use the Web for ran-dom surfing as a form of entertainment and social escapism. Although, there are severalpersonality traits worth examining, we isolated these three personality characteristics basedon an inductive exploratory technique (Vyas and Woodside, 1984) and as a starting pointto investigate the relationship of salient personality traits with Web usage. In Section 3, weoutline the conceptual foundations of our research.

2. Personality Traits and Web Usage

Personality psychologists generally describe personality in terms of traits, which refer tobroad behavioral consistencies in the conduct of people (Pervin, 1996) and form the struc-tural basis of individual differences. Allport (1937) refers to these traits as the “having”side of personality. In recent years, however, considerable attention has been paid to thecognitive units of personality or the “doing” side of personality (Cantor, 1990). This cog-nitive approach to personality focuses on understanding the specific ways in which peopleconstrue situations, tasks, or problems, and the response strategies they adopt. Accord-ing to Cantor (1990), individuals learn from their social contexts and develop organized

THE EFFECT OF INTERPERSONAL TRUST, NFC, AND SOCIAL LONELINESS 187

structures of knowledge about particular domains of life. Such organized knowledge, orschemas, serve as unique cognitive “filters” that determine the way an event, new infor-mation or a situation is interpreted and remembered. Depending on their unique interpre-tations, individuals may adopt different strategies to respond to a particular event. Thus,for example, a person who has a highly developed “I am a shy person” schema may behypersensitive to any cue that suggests social ineptitude. Over time such a person mayadopt risk-averse social goals as a strategy to avoid social interactions (Langston and Can-tor, 1989). Such a “shyness” schema might also underlie a predisposition to general socialanxiety (Cheek et al., 1986).

Such a cognitive-process oriented approach to personality makes it possible to map ab-stract trait dispositions to specific behavioral outcomes. The Web provides an appropriatesetting to draw out the “doing” side of personality since it is an active medium whereconsumers control how the medium is used (Ariely, 2000). Past literature has suggestedthat it is difficult to trace the effects of global personality traits directly on specific us-age dimensions of the Web (Wolfradt and Doll, 2001), however, we contend that certainmiddle level constructs mediate the relationship between personality traits and specific be-havioral propensities (Briggs, 1989). For example, it might be difficult to find a directeffect of a global trait such as “openness to experience” on a subject’s propensity to eatout in restaurants. However, “openness to experience” might lead to a positive attitudetowards trying different cuisines, which in turn might explain the higher propensity to eatout in restaurants. In this example, “attitude towards different cuisines” acts as a middlelevel psychological construct that mediates an abstract disposition such as “openness toexperience” with a specific behavioral outcome i.e., propensity to eat out in restaurants. Ina similar way we use middle level constructs in this study to link the global personalitytraits to specific Web related behavioral outcomes.

2.1. Interpersonal Distrust and Its Effect on Web Purchasing

The literatures on Web commerce frequently cite consumer concerns about net securityand privacy as serious barriers to the growth of B2C commerce (Clarke, 1999; Hoffmanet al., 1999). Such security concerns undermine consumer trust and affect Web purchases.Recognizing the vulnerabilities of the Web medium, the industry has undertaken efforts toenhance Web security and protect privacy with technology safeguards such as Platform forPrivacy Preference standard, anonymity and encryption technology, trust framework, andlocal control and filtering (cf. Wang et al., 1998). Consumer businesses on the Web canincorporate third party seals of approval, guarantee consumer privacy, and create consumercommunities that serve to enhance customer trust (Urban et al., 2000). Such actions canfoster buyer–seller trust, defined as a willingness to rely on a specific exchange partner(Moorman et al., 1993; Schurr and Ozanne, 1985).

Willingness of e-consumers to trust an online merchant may in large part be related tooverall trust or lack of trust of the online medium itself. E-consumers lack of trust withthe medium could arise from lack of familiarity with the medium, from an innate fear oftechnology, or from some personality-based antecedents. While time and experience with

188 DAS ET AL.

the medium may alleviate concerns pertaining to the lack of familiarity with the technol-ogy/system, lack of trust owing to personality-based factors may be difficult to overcome.The Web represents a “complex blend of human actors and technological systems” and,therefore, it is difficult to ascertain with whom or what e-consumers can build trustingrelationships (Friedman et al., 2000, p. 34). The anonymity on the Web, inability to ob-serve the other party physically, and frequent incidents of malicious acts on the Web couldbe threatening to any individual. We contend that such threats could specifically inhibitindividuals who have low levels of interpersonal trust which is defined as an expectancythat “the word, promise, verbal or written statement of another individual or group can berelied on” (Rotter, 1971). However, such expectancies are learned and generalized fromprior experiences and become an enduring personality characteristic predisposing individ-uals to react in particular ways. Generalized expectancy differs from a specific expectancy,which is a function of an individual’s experience in a particular situation, such as a spe-cific buyer–seller relationship. A generalized expectancy is more likely to be triggered ina situation that is novel, ambiguous, or unstructured. In the novel and unstructured onlineenvironment, it may be difficult for consumers to attribute perceptions of vulnerability orunease to a specific source, thus transferring their security anxieties to the Web mediumitself. We therefore propose that e-consumers who are low on interpersonal trust will feelgreater concerns with Web security, and are thus less likely to buy on the Web. In otherwords, concern with Web security should mediate the effect of interpersonal trust on Webpurchasing behavior. Therefore, we posit the following:

H1: For e-consumers:

(a) the lower the interpersonal trust, the greater the concern with Web security;(b) the greater the concern with Web security, the lower the likelihood of purchase on the

Web; and(c) concern with Web security will mediate the relationship between interpersonal trust

and Web purchases.

2.2. The Need for Cognition and Information Seeking on the Web

Information processing in any medium depends on the motivation and ability of the indi-vidual. “Motivation” to process information could be situational or task-directed such aswork related research or finding information for schoolwork. “Ability” could depend onfactors such as education, general intelligence, level of knowledge and familiarity with themedium. In addition to such factors, information processing could also depend on an indi-vidual’s intrinsic personality based dispositions such as willingness to engage in effortfulthinking and cognitive styles of information processing.

The trait “need for cognition” (NFC), seeks to identify differences among individualsin their tendency to engage in and enjoy thinking (Cacioppo and Petty, 1982). Individualsmay also differ in the way they cognitively process information such as analytical versusglobal processing (Witkin et al., 1962), or visual versus textual processing (Heckler et al.,1993). However, we surmise that cognitive processing factors are more relevant for study-ing information presentation and organization on the Web, rather than information seeking

THE EFFECT OF INTERPERSONAL TRUST, NFC, AND SOCIAL LONELINESS 189

on the Web. Hence, we focus only on NFC as a trait that might influence information-seeking behavior on the Web.

Cohen et al. (1955) described NFC as “a need to structure relevant situations in mean-ingful, integrated ways.” If this need is unmet, it can result in feelings of tension anddeprivation that can lead to “active efforts to structure the situation and increase under-standing” (p. 291). Cohen (1957) found that high NFC individuals were more likely toorganize, elaborate on, and evaluate presented information. In a recent research, Bailey(1997) found that high NFC individuals engage in more thorough decision-making strate-gies than low NFC individuals leading to better search outcomes.

As an information source, the Web provides a unique setting to engage high NFC in-dividuals. The sheer volume of information available on the Web can make information-seeking a cognitively challenging task. The task complexity only increases with the factthat individuals have control on the Web medium (Ariely, 2000). The e-consumer decideswhich information sites will be accessed, in what order, and to what level of detail. At eachstage of information search, the e-consumer must actively formulate a search strategy forthe next stage, following leads through hyperlinks or revising criteria to amplify or changethe direction of search. The information that is turned up can potentially be vast, requir-ing the e-consumer to sift through it, make sense of it, and organize it into meaningfulcategories. We contend that such challenges of information seeking on the Web shouldselectively appeal to high NFC individuals. In fact, a recent study reported finding positivecorrelation of NFC with Web usage for product information, current news, and learningand education (Tuten and Bosnjak, 2001).

Since high NFC individuals enjoy thinking (Cacioppo and Petty, 1982), and employbetter and more thorough search strategies leading to positive outcomes (Bailey, 1997),we propose that high NFC e-consumers, relative to low NFC consumers, are more likelyto have positive attitudes towards the Web as an information source, and hence are morelikely to use the Web for information seeking behaviors. “Attitude towards the Web asan information source” should mediate the relationship of NFC with information seekingbehavior. Thus:

H2: For e-consumers:

(a) the greater the “need for cognition” (NFC), the more positive will be the attitude to-wards the Web as an information source;

(b) the more positive the attitude toward the Web as an information source, the greater thelikelihood of using the Web for information seeking; and

(c) attitude toward the web as an information source will mediate the relationship betweenNFC and information seeking behavior.

2.3. The Socially Lonely E-Consumer and Web Surfing

Web surfers enjoy visiting different sites as a recreational way to spend time. Web surfingis a non-goal directed activity and surfing is its own reward. In that sense, random Websurfing is different from goal directed activities such as email, chat and instant messaging.

190 DAS ET AL.

These activities are primarily used to maintain close and frequent contact with an extendednetwork of known social contacts and in such cases, the Web medium supports the needfor social affiliation (Sproull and Faraj, 1995). On the other hand, the Web surfer engagesin a largely solitary activity either as a form of entertainment, relaxation, and escapism(Korgaonkar and Wolin, 1999; Wolfradt and Doll, 2001); or to pursue weak interpersonalinteractions anonymously without the immediate threat of intimacy and real human contact(McKenna and Bargh, 2000). Web surfing could therefore be a particularly attractive outletfor social loners.

Social loners are described as individuals who experience social and emotional deficitsin their lives either due to their lack of desire or failure to engage in successful socialinteractions (Russel et al., 1984). Past research strongly suggests that loneliness is relatedto two personality traits – introversion and neuroticism (Russel et al., 1980). An introvert isa person who is generally withdrawn and does not enjoy social events. A neurotic person,on the other hand, is defined as someone who tends to be overly anxious and emotional, andreacts strongly to all types of stimuli (Eyesenck and Eyesenck, 1975). An introvert is likelyto have a limited social network leading to feelings of loneliness (Stokes, 1985). A neuroticindividual, on the other hand, might suffer from negative feelings about himself and theworld leading to perceived loneliness (Watson and Clark, 1984). A Web surfer’s preferencefor solitary entertainment could indicate an introvert personality while the interactivityfeature of the Web could be especially attractive to individuals who are easily excited andneurotic. Hoffman and Novak (1996) describe how Web surfers can experience intenseemotional experiences on the Web resulting in a state of “flow” where “nothing else seemsto matter” and lose sense of time spent on the Web. It therefore appears that social lonersare more likely to be drawn to random web surfing.

Past research has attempted to find a relationship between social loneliness and Webusage, although results have been mixed. For example, Hamburger and Ben-Artzi (2003)found a positive correlation for women between loneliness and use of social services onthe Web such as chat and discussion groups, whereas no such effect was found for men.In another study, Korgaonkar and Wolin (1999) found that social loneliness scale itemsloaded along with Web-as-entertainment scale items on the same factor they described associal escapism. These items characterize the Web as pleasurable, fun, enjoyable; and assomething that enables the Web user to escape from reality and overcome loneliness. Asenvisaged in the Korgaonkar and Wolin (1999) study, we consider random Web surfingas an entertaining, highly engrossing, solitary activity that should appeal to individualswho are socially lonely. However, as before, since social loneliness is a broad personalitytrait, it may be difficult to observe its direct effect on Web surfing. We therefore map itseffect indirectly through a mediating variable such as “attitude towards Web surfing.” Suchpositive attitude towards Web surfing, in turn, should impact their actual surfing behavior.Thus:

H3: For e-consumers:

(a) the greater the social loneliness, the more positive the attitudes toward surfing the Webfor entertainment;

THE EFFECT OF INTERPERSONAL TRUST, NFC, AND SOCIAL LONELINESS 191

(b) the more positive the attitudes toward surfing the Web for entertainment, the greaterthe likelihood of using the Web for surfing for entertainment; and

(c) attitude towards Web surfing will mediate the relationship between social lonelinessand using the Web for surfing for entertainment.

3. Method

3.1. The Model

In the earlier discussions it was hypothesized that low interpersonal trust (TRUST),high need-for-cognition (NFC), and high social loneliness (LONER) of e-consumerswould affect actual purchase (PURCHASE), information-seeking (BEHINFO), and surf-ing (BEHSURF) behaviors on the Web respectively, through certain middle level con-structs acting as mediators. These relationships are outlined in Figure 1. Specifically, itwas posited that concerns with Web security (ATTSECURE), attitudes towards the Webas information source (ATTINFO) and attitudes towards Web surfing (ATTSURF) wouldmediate the relationship between personality traits and self-report behaviors.

3.2. Dependent, Mediating and Independent Variables

The three dependent “behavioral” variables were “purchase made on the Web” (PUR-CHASE), information seeking behavior (BEHINFO), and surfing behavior (BEHSURF).The behavioral items, such as “I use the Web to purchase products/services online,” weremeasured based on responses that were categorized into 5 levels ranging from “never”to “quite regularly.” The list of all behavioral items appears in Table 1. In addition, thepurchase online (PURCHASE) variable was also measured by asking respondents to indi-cate how many times they had actually purchased goods/services on the Web in the past3 months. The responses were categorized into 5 levels with “not even once” and “morethan 5 times” as the anchor points. Since the behavior scales were categorical, 5 levelswere considered adequate to capture differences in reported behavior.

The mediating variables were concerns with Web security (ATTSECURE), attitudestowards the Web as information source (ATTINFO) and attitudes towards Web surfing(ATTSURF). These variables were measured using multiple, seven point Likert scale itemsanchored with “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.”

Finally, the personality traits – need-for-cognition (NFC), and social loneliness(LONER) – were measured using published scales. Interpersonal trust (TRUST) wasadapted from a published scale and included additional items generated from a pretest.

3.3. Development of Measures

The attitude and behavior measures used in the models – ATTSECURE, ATTINFO,ATTSURF, BEHINFO, BEHSURF, and PURCHASE – were developed for the study. An

192 DAS ET AL.

Fig

ure

1.R

esea

rch

Mod

el.

THE EFFECT OF INTERPERSONAL TRUST, NFC, AND SOCIAL LONELINESS 193

Table 1. Measurement Items and Loadings

Item Loading

Attitudes towards surfing (ATTSURF) ρc = 0.95a

Discovering new things on the Web is a great way to spend time 0.79I enjoy visiting different Websites just for fun 0.84I find surfing the Web very thrilling 0.88I find the Web exciting 0.81The Web helps me unwind 0.84Attitudes towards information seeking (ATTINFO) ρc = 0.95The Web is a very convenient source of information 0.87The Web provides all kind of useful information 0.89The Web is a very useful tool to research for information 0.91I would strongly recommend the Web as a research tool to find new information 0.78Concern towards Web security (ATTSECURE) ρc = 0.81One should never give out credit card numbers on the Web 0.82Security is a problem on the Web 0.78I do not trust most vendors on the Web 0.70Surfing behavior (BEHSURF) ρc = 0.89I use the Web for fun/play/excitement 0.68I use the Web to browse sites with no specific objective in mind 0.81I use the Web as a recreational way to spend time 0.90I use the Web as a way to relax 0.86Information-seeking behavior (BEHINFO) ρc = 0.85I use the Web to email friends and family 0.84I use the Web to search for information 0.74I use the Web to search for work/school related material 0.73I use the Web to read news, sports, financial and/or other current events information? 0.75Purchasing online (PURCHASE) ρc = 0.94I made a purchase online 0.91I use the Web to purchase products/services online 0.92

Social loneliness (LONER)b ρc = 0.92Most everyone around me seems like a stranger 0.52I do not get much satisfaction from the groups I participate in (R) 0.64There are good people around me who understand my views and beliefs (R) 0.52There is no one I have felt close to for a long time 0.73I have a romantic partner who gives me support and encouragement 0.52I belong to a network of friends (R) 0.51There are people I can count on for companionship (R) 0.70I do not have a special love relationship 0.60Interpersonal trust (TRUST)c ρc = 0.76It is safe to believe that in spite of what people say most people are primarily interestedin their own welfare (R)

0.73

In dealing with strangers one is better off to be cautious until they have provided evidencethat they are trustworthy (R)

0.75

Most repairmen will not overcharge even if they think you are ignorant of their specialty 0.55If you are not careful, others can easily manipulate you (R) 0.62

Need for cognition (NFC)d ρc = 0.96

a Composite reliability.b Published scale (Russel et al., 1984).c Some items adapted from Rotter (1971).d Published scale (Cacioppo and Petty, 1982). Details on the measurement model of NFC are available from the

authors.

194 DAS ET AL.

inventory of items mapping the constructs was generated from a review of extant literatureand three student focus groups. A pretest survey was administered to about 150 under-graduate business students at a large southeastern U.S. university. In an exploratory factoranalyses, items that loaded poorly on constructs (i.e. loadings less than 0.5) were removed.Also, as recommended by Bagozzi and Yi (1988), items with very high loadings (0.85or more) were deleted for reasons of “empirical redundancy.” The refined questionnairewas pretested with 277 adult respondents. A confirmatory analysis on the measured itemsrevealed fit statistics that were supportive of the internal consistency and dimensionalityof the items comprising the various constructs. Thus, with confidence established in themeasures, the final survey was administered. The survey was labeled “Consumer Attitudestowards the Web Survey,” and the respondents were told simply that we were interestedin their opinions concerning the Web. The respondents were recruited via a snowball sur-vey method in which the participants in a survey are collected via referrals. Each studentregistered in an undergraduate marketing class collected data from two adult, non-studentrespondents in consideration for extra credit. Interviewers were instructed to recruit onlythose individuals who were Internet users. The returned surveys were verified as meetingeligibility requirements by conducting random call-backs. Based upon call-backs, 12 sur-veys did not meet the above criteria, resulting in a total of 372 surveys being retained for thefinal analysis. The sample population was evenly split on gender, college educated (84%),predominantly Caucasian (74%), and with median income around $35,000. Roughly 78%of the respondents reported shopping online.

The final survey also employed certain covariates such as Perceived Time Pressure, Webrelated Technical Expertise, Time Tenure on the Web, and Fear of Technology. Itemsfor all of the constructs, except Fear of Technology, were adapted from published scales.A two-item scale was developed to measure “Fear of Technology.” Details of these scalesare available from the authors. In addition, demographic information such as gender, age,marital status, occupation, and income were collected.

3.4. Analytical Method

PLSGRAPH v.3.00 of Partial Least Squares (PLS) was used to estimate the causal mod-els. Although, Covariance Structure Modeling (exemplified by software such as LISREL)could have been used, Partial Least Squares (PLS) was selected for the following rea-sons. Unlike Covariance Structure Modeling (CSM) which focuses on testing a conceptualmodel by examining the discrepancy between theoretical and empirical covariance matri-ces, PLS estimates latent variables as exact linear combinations of manifest variables, andfocuses on maximizing variance between the exogenous and endogenous variables. As aresult, PLS is more appropriate when studying individual structural relationships withinthe model (Fornell and Bookstein, 1982) and better suited to analyze relationships amongvariables in exploratory models (Chin, 1998).

THE EFFECT OF INTERPERSONAL TRUST, NFC, AND SOCIAL LONELINESS 195

4. Results

4.1. Measurement Model

The procedure advocated by Hulland (1999) was followed in evaluating PLS models. Weassessed the adequacy of the measurement model through examining (a) individual itemreliabilities, (b) the convergent validity of the measures associated with each construct and(c) their discriminant validity. Individual item reliabilities were checked by examiningloadings of the measures on their respective constructs and these were deemed adequate.All constructs exhibit composite reliabilities of 0.7 or more, thus indicating that the relia-bilities of all the constructs are adequate (Hulland, 1999). Table 1 lists the items used inthe study with their loadings and measures of composite reliability.

Finally, we examined the convergent and discriminant validity of the constructs. Asshown in Table 2, the average variances extracted in all the constructs were all at least orover 0.50 (square of the diagonal values). All measures loaded higher on intended con-structs than on other constructs indicating adequate convergent validity. Also, the correla-tion between any two constructs was less than the correlations between the items and itsrespective construct indicating sufficient discriminant validity for most constructs. How-ever, the correlation between BEHSURF and ATTSURF (0.70) was a cause for concern.Discriminant validity between these two constructs was assessed by following the proce-dure recommended by Bagozzi and Warshaw (1990) who state that discriminant validitybetween two factors is achieved when their correlation is less than 1.0 by an amount greaterthan twice its standard error. This criterion was met indicating discriminant validity be-tween ATTSURF and BEHSURF. Overall, these statistics indicate that the psychometricproperties of the model are sufficiently strong to enable interpretation of structural esti-mates.

Table 2. Correlation of Constructs

Construct 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Attitudes towards surfing(ATTSURF)

0.89*

2. Attitudes towards informationseeking (ATTINFO)

0.31 0.91

3. Concerns towards Web security(ATTSECURE)

−0.08 −0.09 0.77

4. Surfing behavior (BEHSURF) 0.70 0.19 −0.11 0.82

5. Information seeking behavior(BEHINFO)

0.33 0.33 −0.24 0.45 0.77

6. Purchase online (PURCHASE) 0.21 0.16 −0.40 0.30 0.42 0.85

7. Interpersonal trust (TRUST) 0.02 0.13 −0.19 −0.06 −0.05 −0.08 0.66

8. Need for cognition (NFC) −0.04 0.18 −0.09 0.01 0.23 0.11 −0.07 0.88

9. Social loneliness (LONER) 0.19 −0.09 0.19 0.19 −0.03 0.06 −0.08 −0.24 0.76

* Diagonal elements in bold are square roots of average variance extracted (Hulland, 1999).

196 DAS ET AL.

4.2. Structural Relationships

PLS offers no statistical test to assess the significance of structural coefficients, so thebootstrapping method (Efron and Gong, 1983) was used to compute the standard errorsand thereby evaluate the significance of the structural coefficients. Standard errors of para-meters were computed on the basis of 300 bootstrapping runs. Tables 3(a) and 3(b) showthe results of the PLS estimation. Time pressure, Web Expertise, Fear of Technology,Tenure on the Web, and certain demographics (marital status and education) were used ascontrol variables to partial out variance from the endogenous variables.

Table 3(a). Effects of Personality Traits on Attitudes and Behaviors Standardized PLS Coefficients

Attitudes Behaviors

ATTSECURE ATTINFO ATTSURF PURCHASE BEHINFO BEHSURF

Personality traits

TRUST −0.14*

NFC 0.14*

LONER 0.17*

Attitudes

ATTSECURE −0.23*

ATTINFO 0.18*

ATTSURF 0.68*

Control variables

WEBEXPERTISE 0.38* 0.24* 0.12*

WEBTENURE 0.11* 0.34* 0.11*

TIMEPRESSURE −0.06 0.03 −0.03

FEARTECH −0.08 −0.01 0.08

R-squared 0.13 0.11 0.17 0.36 0.34 0.56

Other control variables: marital status, education, race.* Significant at p < 0.05.

Table 3(b). Direct, Indirect and Total Effects of Personality Traits on Behaviors Standardized PLS Coefficients

Personality trait on behavior Direct Indirect** Total*** R2 Finding

TRUST on PURCHASE 0.02ns 0.03* 0.03 0.36 Full mediation

NFC on BEHINFO 0.16* 0.03* 0.19 0.36 Partial mediation

LONER on BEHSURF 0.06ns 0.12* 0.12 0.56 Full mediation

* Significant at p < 0.05.** Refers to the indirect effect of the personality trait on behavior through the mediating construct.*** Total effect is the sum of significant direct and indirect effects.

THE EFFECT OF INTERPERSONAL TRUST, NFC, AND SOCIAL LONELINESS 197

4.3. Results of the Effect of Personality Traits on Middle Level Constructs

PLS results from Table 3(a) show that TRUST is negatively related to ATTSECURE (β =−0.14, p < 0.05) suggesting that lower the interpersonal trust, the greater are the securityconcerns regarding the Web thereby supporting H1a. NFC is found to be positively relatedto ATTINFO (β = 0.14, p < 0.05) supporting H2a. LONER is found to be a significantexplanatory variable of ATTSURF (β = 0.17, p < 0.05) thereby implying that peoplewho are social loners are also more likely to have positive attitudes towards Web surfing.This finding supports H3a.

4.4. Results of the Effect of Middle Level Constructs on Web Behaviors

Results from Table 3a show that ATTSECURE is negatively associated with PURCHASE(β = −0.23, p < 0.05) suggesting that greater the security concerns, lower the likelihoodto purchase online thereby supporting H1b. ATTINFO is found to be positively relatedto BEHINFO (β = 0.18, p < 0.05) implying that people with positive attitudes towardsinformation-seeking on the Web are more likely to search for information on the Webthereby supporting H2b. ATTSURF is also found to be positively related to BEHSURF(β = 0.68, p < 0.05) thereby implying that people with positive attitudes towards surfingare more likely to enjoy the surfing process. This finding supports H3a.

4.5. Results of the Mediating Effects

It was hypothesized that personality traits would affect Web-related behaviors through mid-dle level constructs. Based on the approach suggested by Baron and Kenny (1986), themediation hypotheses were tested by examining the size and significance of the indirecteffects.1 Results reveal that all three indirect effects, ranging from 0.03 to 0.12, weresignificant. Further analysis was conducted to ascertain the nature of the relationships.Table 3(b) displays the results of these mediating tests.

An examination of direct effects between personality traits and behaviors reveal thatonly NFC has a positive and significant direct relationship with BEHINFO. TRUST andLONER do not have significant direct effects with PURCHASE and BEHSURF, respec-tively. The presence of statistically significant indirect effects indicates the important roleof mediating constructs in explaining the relationship between personality traits and be-haviors. Specifically, the absence of direct effect between TRUST and PURCHASE andthe presence of an indirect effect of TRUST on PURCHASE through ATTSECURE im-plies that e-consumers concern with Web security completely mediates the relationshipbetween interpersonal trust held as a personality trait and actual purchasing behavior onthe Web. Similarly, ATTSURF completely mediates the relationship between LONER andBEHSURF. The presence of a significant direct effect between NFC and BEHINFO anda significant indirect effect through ATTINFO implies the role of ATTINFO as a partialmediator. Furthermore, from a theoretical standpoint, the presence of these indirect ef-fects suggests that omission of these variables from a theoretical model could lead to an

198 DAS ET AL.

underestimation of the total effect of personality traits on Web behaviors, underscoring theimportance of these mediator variables in explaining Web-related behaviors.

Additionally, although not hypothesized, the links between attitudes towards informa-tion seeking and surfing on purchase behavior were explored. Both ATTINFO (β = 0.03,p < 0.05) and ATTSURF (β = 0.001, p < 0.05) were not significantly related to PUR-CHASE. The links between information seeking behavior and surfing behavior on onlinepurchase were also investigated. While BEHSURF (β = 0.07, p > 0.05) is not signif-icantly related to PURCHASE, BEHINFO is significantly and positively related to PUR-CHASE (β = 0.14, p < 0.05) revealing that increases in information seeking behaviormay lead to greater likelihood of online purchasing behaviors.

4.6. Control Variables

None of the demographic control variables were significant. Of the other control variablesused to partial out variance in the endogenous constructs, Web expertise was significantlyrelated to BEHSURF (β = 0.12, p < 0.05), BEHINFO (β = 0.24, p < 0.05), andPURCHASE (β = 0.38, p < 0.05). The positive relationship of expertise on all Web-related behaviors was as expected. Similarly, tenure on the Web was significantly relatedto BEHSURF (β = 0.11, p < 0.05), BEHINFO (β = 0.34, p < 0.05), and PUR-CHASE (β = 0.11, p < 0.05). However, time pressure and fear of technology were notsignificantly related to any Web related behaviors. The non-significant effects of fear oftechnology and perceived time pressure on Web behaviors raise important future researchquestions.

5. General Discussions

The Web, in some senses, still remains an enigma. The active nature of the medium whereconsumers have control (Ariely, 2000), and the multidimensional usage dimensions of theWeb set it apart from conventional media such as TV, radio and print. In this research westarted with the premise that the multidimensional uses of the Web have distinctive and dif-ferent features and hence would engage e-consumers with different personality traits. Weargued, however, that it might be difficult to observe the direct effects of broad personalitytraits on specific Web behaviors. Instead, we suggested that broad personality tendenciesare likely to contribute to the formation of more specific tendencies or attitudes, which inturn should be good predictors of Web behavior. We examined this contention by hypoth-esizing middle level constructs mediating the effect of broad personality traits on specificWeb behaviors.

In this research, we investigated the effect of interpersonal trust, NFC, and social loner-ship on purchasing, information seeking, and surfing behaviors on the Web. We found thate-consumers with low interpersonal trust have heightened security concerns that translateinto lower likelihood to purchase on the Web. These results hold controlling for exper-tise, experience, fear of technology, and gender effects. This may be an important findingsince personality traits based reservations are likely to be enduring and hence difficult to

THE EFFECT OF INTERPERSONAL TRUST, NFC, AND SOCIAL LONELINESS 199

override. However, its effect can be attenuated by continuously enhancing the safety of theWeb medium with technological and legal safeguards.

Next, we investigated the effect of NFC on information seeking behavior. Among thethree traits in our study, NFC is the only trait that has strong direct effect on informationseeking behavior on the Web. We also found that information seeking on the Web leadsto purchases on the Web. Other studies have reported that consumers search the Web forproduct and price information that lead to purchases on the Web (Donthu and Garcia, 1999;Korgaonkar and Wolin, 1999). These finding have implication for Website design andpresentation of information on the Web, both for high NFC as well as low NFC individuals.A cursory look at most Web sites show a preponderance of text heavy and information richsites. Such sites are probably unappealing to low NFC e-consumers. It may be importantto find out new ways to present and organize information on the Web, using interactive andvisual tools, which do not overwhelm the low NFC e-consumers and at the same time haveenough depth of information to satisfy the high NFC e-consumers.

Finally, we found evidence that socially lonely individuals are more likely to engage inrandom Web surfing. Disconcertingly, however, surfing does not increase the likelihoodthat an e-consumer will become an e-shopper, refuting a common assumption made byWeb marketers. Clearly shopping is not an incidental or end goal of all e-consumers.However, since Web surfing is undertaken as an enjoyable and entertaining activity andmost surfers lose sense of time on the Web (Hoffman and Novak, 1996), this could be anideal segment for targeting “webmercials” (our term for commercials on the Web!). Unlikeconventional advertising that is usually meant for passive processing, webmercials couldbe designed for active processing with interactive and highly engrossing features, similarto video games.

Some preliminary ideas can be explored as directions for future research, such as config-uring all the individual personality traits together in order to describe the total e-consumerand e-shopper, following the work of Donthu and Garcia (1999), and Korgaonkar andWolin (1999). For example, further research may be needed to determine if high NFCe-consumers are also more individualistic and socially isolated. Similarly, low interper-sonal trust may be a trait shared in common with social lonership. We also need to exploreother personality traits that could be potential candidates for research as well as look atfactors such as gender differences in the use of Web. An in-depth understanding of thee-consumer, his or her personality traits and behavioral dispositions, may be critical tounderstand the Web to rejuvenate it as an ideal medium for commerce.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of two anonymous reviewers and theeditor to this research. We benefited immensely from their suggestions and a number oftheir ideas have been incorporated in this paper.

200 DAS ET AL.

Note

1. Indirect effects that include three variables (X1 → X2 → X3) can be tested as follows. a and b are the pathcoefficients for the direct effects of X1 → X2 and X2 → X3, respectively. SEa and SEb are the standarderrors. The product ab represents the indirect effect of X1 on X3. The standard error for the indirect effect isgiven as follows:

SEab = sqrt(b2SE2

a + a2SE2b + SE2

a · SE2b

).

References

Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. New York: Holt.Ariely, Dan. (2000). “Controlling the Information Flow: Effects on Consumers’ Decision Making and Prefer-

ences,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27(September).Bagozzi, Richard P., Youjae Yi, and Lynn Phillips. (1991). “Assessing Construct Validity in Organizational Re-

search,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 421–459.Bagozzi, Richard P. and Paul R. Warshaw. (1990). “Trying to Consume,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2),

127–140.Bailey, James R. (1997). “Need for Cognition and Response Mode in the Active Construction of an Information

Domain,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 18, 69–85.Baron, R. M. and D. A. Kenny. (1986). “The Moderator-Mediator Distinction in Social Psychological Research:

Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

Briggs, S. R. (1989). “The Optimal Level of Measurement for Personality Constructs.” In D. M. Buss andN. Cantor (eds.), Personality Psychology: Recent Trends and Emerging Directions. New York: Spring, 246–260.

Cacioppo, John T. and Richard E. Petty. (1982). “The Need for Cognition,” Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 42(January), 116–131.

Cantor, Nancy. (1990). “From Though to Behavior: “Having” and “Doing” in the Study of Personality andCognition,” American Psychologist, 45(6), 735–750.

Cheek, J. M., L. A. Melchior, and A. M. Carpentieri. (1986). “Shyness and self-concept.” In L. M. Hartmanand K. R. Blankstein (eds.), Perception of Self in Emotional Disorder and Psychotherapy. New York: PlenumPress, 113–131.

Chin, Wynne W. (1998). “The Partial Least Square Approach to Structural Equation Modeling.” In G. A. Mar-coulides (ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Clarke, Roger. (1999). “Internet Privacy Concerns Confirm the Case for Intervention,” Communications of theACM, 42(2), 60–67.

Cohen, Arthur R. (1957). “Need for Cognition and Order of Communication as Determinants of OpinionChange.” In C. I. Hovland (ed.), The Order of Presentation in Persuasion. New Heaven, CT: Yale Univer-sity Press.

Cohen, Arthur R., Ezra Stotland, and Donald M. Wolfe. (1955). “An Experimental Investigation of Need forCognition,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 291–294.

Donthu, N. and A. Garcia. (1999). “The Internet Shopper,” Journal of Advertising Research, 39(3), 52–58.Efron, B. and G. Gong. (1983). “A Leisurely Look at the Bootstrap, the Jackknife, and Cross-Validation,” The

American Statistician, 37(1), 36–48.Eyesenck, H. J. and S. E. G. Eyesenck. (1975). Manual: Eyesenck Personality Inventory. San Diego: Educational

and Industrial Testing Service.Fornell, Claes and Fred L. Bookstein. (1982). “Two Structural Equation Models: LISREL and PLS Applied to

Consumer Exit-Voice Theory,” Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 440–452.

THE EFFECT OF INTERPERSONAL TRUST, NFC, AND SOCIAL LONELINESS 201

Friedman, Batya, Peter H. Kahn, Jr., and Daniel C. Howe. (2000). “Trust Can Be Cultivated to Enhance OurPersonal and Social Lives and Increase Our Social Capital: Trust Online,” Communications of the ACM, 43(12),34–40.

Georgia Tech Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center. (1998). “GVU’s Tenth WWW User Survey,” http://www.gvu.gatech.edu/gvu/user_surveys/.

Hamburger, Y. A. and E. Ben-Artzi. (2000). “The Relationship between Extraversion and Neuroticism and theDifferent Uses of the Internet,” Computers in Human Behavior, 16, 441–449.

Hamburger, Y. A. and E. Ben-Artzi. (2003). “Loneliness and Internet Use,” Computers in Human Behavior, 19(1),71–80.

Heckler, Susan E., Terry L. Childers, and Michael J. Houston. (1993). “On the Construct Validity of the SOPScale,” Journal of Mental Imagery, 17(3–4), 119–132.

Hoffman, Donna L. and Thomas P. Novak. (1996). “Marketing in Hypermedia Computer-Mediated Environ-ments: Conceptual Foundations,” Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 50–68.

Hoffman, Donna L., Thomas P. Novak, and Marcos Peralta. (1999). “Building Consumer Trust Online,” Commu-nications of the ACM, 42(4), 80–85.

Hulland, John (1999). “Use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) in Strategic Management Research: A Review of FourRecent Studies,” Strategic Management Journal, 20, 195–204.

Jupiter Media Metrix. (2002). “Industry Projections: US Online Retail Revenues 1999–2006,” http://www.jmm.com/xp/jmm/press/industryProjections.xml.

Korgaonkar, Pradeep K. and Lori D. Wolin. (1999). “A Multivariate Analysis of Web Usage,” Journal of Adver-tising Research, 39(2), 53–68.

Langston, C. A. and N. Cantor. (1989). “Social Anxiety and Social Constraint when “Making Friends” is Hard,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 649–661.

McKenna, Katelyn Y. A. and John A. Bargh. (2000). “Plan 9 From Cyberspace: The Implications of the Internetfor Personality and Social Psychology,” Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(1), 57–75.

Moorman, Christine, Rohit Deshpande, and Gerald Zaltman. (1993). “Factors Affecting Trust in Market ResearchRelationships,” Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 81–101.

Pervin, Lawrence A. (1996). The Science of Personality. New York: Wiley.Rotter, Julian B. (1971). “Generalized Expectancies for Interpersonal Trust,” American Psychologist, 26, 443–

452.Russel, D., C. E. Cutrona, J. Rose, and K. Yurko. (1984). “Social and Emotional Loneliness: An Examination of

Weiss’s Typology of Loneliness,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1313–1321.Russel, D., L. A. Peplau, and C. E. Cutrona. (1980). “The Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and

Discriminant Validity Evidence,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 472–480.Schurr, Paul H. and Julie L. Ozanne. (1985). “Influences on Exchange Processes: Buyers’ Preconceptions

of a Seller’s Trustworthiness and Bargaining Toughness,” Journal of Consumer Research, 11(March), 939–953.

Sproull, Lee and Samer Faraj. (1995), “Atheism, Sex, and Databases: The Net as a Social Technology.” InB. Kahin and J. Keller (eds.), Public Access to the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Stokes, Joseph P. (1985), “The Relation of Social Network and Individual Difference Variables to Loneliness,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(4), 981–990.

Tuten, Tracy L. and Michael Bosnjak. (2001). “Understanding Differences in Web Usage: The Role of Need forCognition and the Five Factor Model of Personality,” Social Behavior and Personality, 29(4), 391–398.

Urban, Glen L., Fareena Sultan, and William J. Qualls. (2000). “Placing Trust at the Center of Your InternetStrategy,” Sloan Management Review, (Fall), 39–48.

Vyas, Niren and Arch G. Woodside. (1984), “An Inductive Model of Supplier Choice Processes,” Journal ofMarketing, 48(Winter), 30–45.

Wang, Huaiqing, Matthew K. O. Lee, and Chen Wang. (1998), “Consumer Privacy Concerns about InternetMarketing,” Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 41(3), 63–69.

Watson, David and Lee A. Clark. (1984). “Negative Affectivity: The Disposition to Experience Aversive Emo-tional States,” Psychological Bulletin, 96(3), 465–490.

Webmergers.com (2002). “Q1 Shutdowns and Bankruptcies Down Two-Thirds from Q1 of Last Year,” April.

202 DAS ET AL.

Witkin, H. A., R. B. Dyk, H. F. Faterson, D. R. Goodenough, and S. A. Karp. (1962). Psychological Differentia-tion: Studies of Development. New York: Wiley.

Wolfradt, Uwe and Jorg Doll. (2001). “Motives of Adolescents to Use the Internet as a Function of PersonalityTraits, Personal and Social Factors,” Journal of Educational Computing Research, 24(1), 13–27.

Young, Kimberly S. and Robert C. Rodgers. (1998). “Internet Addiction: Personality Traits Associated with itsDevelopment,” www.netaddiction.com.