SHOPPING PREFERENCES AMONG E-CONSUMER STUDENTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15290/oes.2025.04.122.17Słowa kluczowe:
e-consumers, education level, shopping behavior, online shopping, consumer preferencesAbstrakt
Purpose | The aim of the study was to examine the relationship between education level and e-consumers’ shopping preferences for different product categories. It also contributes to filling a research gap by investigating the role of education in shaping online shopping behavior.
Research method | The study is based on a sample of 277 valid survey responses collected electronically from university students. It analyses key factors influencing consumer choices, including product categories, shopping channels, and safety concerns.
Results | The findings indicate that education level has a limited effect on online shopping preferences, with significant relationships observed only in the categories of furniture and home furnishings (p = 0.035) and tobacco products (p = 0.037). Consumers with higher education are more likely to be early adopters of technology, demonstrating greater competence in evaluating online offers and in understanding security mechanisms. However, product-specific trends emerge:
• In the furniture category, individuals with a bachelor’s degree exhibited greater flexibility, using both online and traditional channels, whereas those with an engineering degree preferred traditional shops.
• In the tobacco category, consumers with a bachelor’s degree preferred traditional shopping or a mix of channels, while those with a master’s degree showed limited involvement in tobacco shopping.
Originality / value / implications / recommendations | This study contributes to the understanding of how education level influences online shopping behavior, particularly in specific product categories. Despite its insights, the study has limitations, including the small representation of certain educational groups and the absence of demographic controls such as income or place of residence. Future research should expand sample sizes, investigate age-related factors, and conduct cross-regional comparisons to enhance the understanding of the correlation between education and e-consumer behavior. The study was conducted exclusively among university students. As a result, the conclusions primarily concern young, educated consumers and cannot be generalised to the entire e-consumer population.
Bibliografia
Acquisti A., Brandimarte L., Loewenstein G., 2015, Privacy and Human Behavior in the Age of Information, ”Science”, no. 347(6221), pp. 509–514, DOI: 10.1126/science.aaa1465.
Brucks M., 1985, The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior, ”Journal of Consumer Research”, no. 12(1), pp. 1–16, DOI: 10.1086/209031.
Brynjolfsson E., Hu Y.J., Rahman M.S., 2013, Competing in the Age of Omnichannel Retailing, ”MIT Sloan Management Review”, no. 54(4), pp. 23–29.
Chaffey D., 2022, Digital Marketing: Strategy, Implementation and Practice, Pearson, London.
Citron D.K., 2014, Hate Crimes in Cyberspace, Harvard University Press, Maryland.
Davenport T., Guha A., Grewal D., Bressgott T., 2020, How Artificial Intelligence Will Change the Future of Marketing, ”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science”, no. 48(1), pp. 24–42, DOI: 10.1007/s11747-019-00696-0.
Falencikowski T., 2013, Spójność modeli biznesu. Koncepcja i pomiar, CeDeWu. Warszawa.
Gefen D., 2000, E-commerce: The Role of Familiarity and Trust, ”Omega”, no. 28(6), pp. 725–737, DOI: 10.1016/S0305-0483(00)00021-9.
Gefen D., Straub D.W., 2004, Consumer Trust in B2C E-commerce and the Importance of Social Presence, ”Omega”, no. 32(6), pp. 407–424, DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2004.01.006.
How Blockchain Technology Is Transforming E-commerce, 2023, Blockchain Council, http://www.blockchain-council.org [date of access: 24.02.2025].
Jaciow M., Wolny R., 2011, Polski e-konsument. Typologia, zachowania, Helion, Gliwice.
Kahneman D., 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.
Klopping I.M., McKinney E., 2004, Extending the Technology Acceptance Model and the Task-technology Fit Model to Consumer E-commerce, ”Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal”, no. 22(1), pp. 35–48.
Kotler P., Keller K.L., 2016, Marketing Management, Pearson Education, New York.
Kowalski R.M., Giumetti G.W., Schroeder A.N., Lattanner M.R., 2014, Bullying in the Digital Age: A Critical Review and Meta-analysis of Cyberbullying Research among Youth, ”Psychological Bulletin”, no. 140(4), pp. 1073–1137, DOI: 10.1037/a0035618.
Laudon K.C., Traver C.G., 2022, E-commerce 2021: Business, Technology, Society, Pearson Education, New York.
Melović B., Sehović D., Karadžić V., Dabić M., Ćirović D., 2021, Determinants of Millennials’ Behavior in Online Shopping – Implications on Consumers’ Satisfaction and E-business Development, ”Technology in Society”, no. 65, DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101561.
Mises L., 1998, Human Action. A Treatise on Economics, Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn (AL).
Mobile E-commerce Sales Share in the U.S., 2023, Statista, http://www.statista.com [date of access: 24.02.2025].
Nissenbaum H., 2010, Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Pavlou P.A., 2003, Consumer Acceptance of Electronic Commerce: Integrating Trust and Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model, ”International Journal of Electronic Commerce”, no. 7(3), pp. 101–134.
Porter M.E., 1985, Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, Free Press, New York.
Rogers D., 2021, The Digital Transformation Playbook: Rethink Your Business for the Digital Age, Columbia University Press, Columbia.
Rogers E.M., 2003, Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed., Free Press, New York.
Schaub F., Balebako R., Cranor L.F., 2017, Designing Effective Privacy Notices and Controls, ”ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI)”, no. 22(3), pp. 1–44.
Sheth J., 2021, New Areas of Research in Marketing Strategy, Consumer Behavior, and Public Policy: From Text Analytics to the Circular Economy, ”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science”, no. 49(1), pp. 9–21, DOI: 10.1080/10696679.2020.1860679.
Solomon M.R., 2019, Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having, and Being, 13th ed., Pearson, London.
Sustainability and the Future of E-commerce Logistics, 2022, McKinsey & Company, http://www.mckinsey.com [date of access: 24.03.2025].
Szlegr M., 2018, Consumer Behaviour While Online Shopping Analysis, ”MIND Journal”, no. 5, pp. 1–18.
The Digital Economy Outlook 2021, 2021, OECD, OECD Publishing.
The Rise of Sustainable E-commerce: Trends and Strategies for Green Retailing, 2023, Shopify, http://www.shopify.com [date of access: 24.02.2025].
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, 2021, Digital Economy Report 2021, UNCTAD.
Ünver S., Alkan Ö., 2021, Determinants of E-commerce Use at Different Educational Levels: Empirical Evidence from Turkey, ”International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications”, no. 12(3), pp. 40–49, DOI: 10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0120305.
White K., Habib R., Hardisty D.J., 2019, How to SHIFT Consumer Behaviors to Be More Sustainable: A Literature Review and Guiding Framework, ”Journal of Marketing”, no. 83(3), pp. 22–49, DOI: 10.1177/0022242919825649.
Yeh Y., Huang L., Yeh Y., 2011, Knowledge Management in Blended Learning: Effects on Professional Development in Creativity Instruction, ”Computers & Education”, no. 56(1), pp. 146–156, DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.011.
Zeithaml V.A., 1988, Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-end Model and Synthesis of Evidence, ”Journal of Marketing”, no. 52(3), pp. 2–22, DOI: 10.1177/002224298805200302.
Pobrania
Opublikowane
Numer
Dział
Licencja
Prawa autorskie (c) 2025 Optimum. Economic StudiesAutor zapoznał się i akceptuje warunki zawarte w umowie licencyjnej
