Vol. 13 No. 1 (2024)
Original Research Article

Enriching product exposure in e-commerce through a hedonistic and utilitarian cue

PDF
  • Andrzej Szymkowiak,
  • Urszula Garczarek-Bąk,
  • Armand Faganel
Andrzej Szymkowiak
Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcka 129, 165 00 Praha-Suchdol
Urszula Garczarek-Bąk
Department of Commerce and Marketing, Poznan University of Economics and Business, Al. Niepodległości 10, 61-875 Poznań
Armand Faganel
Faculty of Management, University of Primorska
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-15067

Published 2024-05-02

Keywords

  • e-commerce,
  • wine marketing,
  • hedonistic cue,
  • utilitarian cue,
  • eye tracking.

How to Cite

Szymkowiak, A., Garczarek-Bąk, U., & Faganel, A. (2024). Enriching product exposure in e-commerce through a hedonistic and utilitarian cue. Wine Economics and Policy, 13(1), 109–126. https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-15067

Copyright (c) 2024 Associate Professor , Urszula Garczarek, Professor

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

With the projected growth in the global wine market, the ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the increasing prevalence of e-commerce, a pressing need arises to devise unique and engaging ways to present product offerings. While prior research has shed light on the potential of online sales platforms for wineries and the role of wine bottle labels in influencing consumer purchasing behavior, scant attention has been given to the presentation of wine products in the realm of e-commerce. Therefore, the primary objective of this study is to examine the impact of including visual cues (symbols) in online product displays on individuals’ perceptions of the product and their likelihood to make a purchase. Specifically, we aim to investigate how the placement of elements related to wine consumption, such as a ‘Glass’, and the representation of the product’s raw materials, such as a bunch of ‘Grapes’, affect consumer purchasing choices. The results from a simulated online wine store demonstrate the substantial influence of including a ‘Glass’ symbol on consumers’ selections. Furthermore, a series of eye-tracking laboratory experiments conducted in Poland, involving a total of 140 participants, provides deeper insight into underlying mechanisms. These findings reveal that augmenting a wine product with a hedonic symbol, such as a ‘Glass’, significantly enhances consumer perception of the product. Additionally, it exerts influence on their ‘Product Attitude’ and ‘Product Taste’ assessment, both of which are integral components of product perception. This study has the potential to offer valuable insights for wine marketers, e-commerce retailers and researchers specializing in the field of consumer behavior and marketing. Beyond the wine industry, the implications of this research extend to other sectors that rely on e-commerce platforms for sales.

PDF

References

  1. R. Oyekunle, O. Bello, Q. Jubril, I. Sikiru, A. Balogun, Usability evaluation using eye-tracking on e-commerce and education domains, J. Inf. Technol. Comput. 1 (2020) 1-13. https://doi.org/10.48185/jitc.v1i1.43 DOI: https://doi.org/10.48185/jitc.v1i1.43
  2. J. N. Sari, L. E. Nugroho, P. I. Santosa, R. Ferdiana, Product Recommendation Based on Eye Tracking Data Using Fixation Duration, IJITEE (Int. J. Inf. Technol. Electr. Eng.) 5 (2021) 109-116. https://doi.org/10.22146/ijitee.58693 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/ijitee.58693
  3. M. Eftimov, G. Popovski, M. Petković, B. Koroušić Seljak, D. Kocev, COVID-19 pandemic changes the food consumption patterns, Trends Food Sci. Technol. 104 (2020) 268-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2020.08.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2020.08.017
  4. European Commission (EC), Short-term outlook for EU agricultural markets. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/food-farming-fisheries/farming/documents/short-term-outlook-spring-2020_en.pdf, 2022 (accessed 21 January 2022).
  5. B. Harfmann, Online sales drive 55% of wine growth. https://www.bevindustry.com/articles/93851-online-sales-drive-55-of-wine-growth, 2022 (accessed 3 February 2022).
  6. N. Cobelli, G. Wilkinson, Online wine purchasing: a comparison between South Africa and Italy, The TQM J. 32 (2020) 837-847. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-10-2019-0242 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-10-2019-0242
  7. D. Vergamini, F. Bartolini, G. Brunori, Wine after the pandemic? All the doubts in a glass, Bio-based Appl. Econ. 10 (2021) 51-71. https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-9017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-9017
  8. L. Thach, Overview of 2020 US Wine Market Stats and 10 Hot Wine Trends for 2021. https://lizthachmw.com/winestars/overview-of-2020-us-wine-market-stats-and-10-hot-wine-trends-for-2021, 2021 (accessed 21 January 2022).
  9. F. Huq, V. Jones, D.A. Hensler, A time series projection model of online seasonal demand for American wine and potential disruption in the supply channels due to COVID-19, Int. J. Wine Bus. Res. 34 (2022) 349-372. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-03-2021-0015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-03-2021-0015
  10. Z. Jiang, I. Benbasat, Investigating the Influence of the Functional Mechanisms of Online Product Presentations, Inf. Syst. Res. 18 (2007) 367-475. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1070.0124 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1070.0124
  11. J. Pavlič, T. Tomažič, The (In)effectiveness of Attention Guidance Methods for Enhancing Brand Memory in 360° Video, Sensors 22 (2022) 8809. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22228809 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/s22228809
  12. J. Park, S. J. Lennon, L. Stoel, Online product presentation: effects on mood, perceived risk, and purchase intention, Psychol. & Mark. 22 (2005) 695-719. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20080 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20080
  13. A. Risius, B. O. Klann, S. G. Meyerding, Choosing a lifestyle? Reflection of consumer extrinsic product preferences and views on important wine characteristics in Germany, Wine Econ. Policy 8 (2019) 141-154. https://doi.org/10.14601/web-8204 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wep.2019.09.001
  14. D. C. Petrescu, I. Vermeir, P. Burny, R. M. Petrescu-Mag, Consumer evaluation of food quality and the role of environmental cues, Eur. Res. on Manag. and Bus. Econ. 28 (2022) 100178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2021.100178 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2021.100178
  15. J.C. Olson, J. Jacoby, Cue utilization in the quality perception process, ACR Special Volumes (1972).
  16. N.C. Lago, A. Marcon, J.L.D. Ribeiro, J.F. de Medeiros, V.B. Brião, V.L. Antoni, Determinant attributes and the compensatory judgement rules applied by young consumers to purchase environmentally sustainable food products, Sustain. Prod. Consum. 23 (2020) 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.06.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.06.003
  17. J. Jacoby, Stimulus‐organism‐response reconsidered: an evolutionary step in modeling (consumer) behavior, J. Consum. Psychol. 12 (2002) 51-57. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327663JCP1201_05 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327663JCP1201_05
  18. A. d’Astous, R. Legoux, F. Colbert, Consumer perceptions of promotional offers in the performing arts: An experimental approach, Can. J. Adm. Sci. 21 (2004) 242–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1936-4490.2004.tb00339.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1936-4490.2004.tb00339.x
  19. R. Batra, O. Ahtola, Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Sources of Consumer Attitudes, Market. Lett. 2 (1990) 159-170. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00436035 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00436035
  20. G. Mallapragada, S. R. Chandukala, Q. Liu, Exploring the effects of “What” (product) and “Where” (website) characteristics on online shopping behavior, J. Mark. 80 (2016) 21-38. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.15.0138 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.15.0138
  21. C. Liao, P.-L. To, Y.-C. Wong, M. D. Kakhki, The impact of presentation mode and product type on online impulse buying decisions, J. Electron. Commer. Res. 17 (2016) 153-168.
  22. D. Bettiga, A. M. Bianchi, L. Lamberti, G. Noci, Consumers’ Emotional Responses to Functional and Hedonic Products: A Neuroscience Research, Front. Psychol. 11 (2020) 559779. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.559779 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.559779
  23. K. Basso, C. D. Duschitz, C. M. Giacomazzi, M. Sonego, C. A. V. Rossi, D. Reck, Purchase decision and purchase delay of hedonic and utilitarian products in the face of time pressure and multiplicity of options, Rev. Gestão 26 (2019) 112-125. https://doi.org/10.1108/REGE-01-2018-0022 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/REGE-01-2018-0022
  24. X. Wang, A. R. Ashraf, N. Thongpapanl, K. Y. Wang, Perceived deception and online repurchase intention: The moderating effect of product type and consumer regulatory orientation, J. Consum. Behav. 21 (2022) 1522-1539. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2109
  25. A. Kronrod, A. Grinstein, L. Wathieu, Enjoy! Hedonic consumption and compliance with assertive messages, J. Consum. Res. 39 (2012) 51-61. https://doi.org/10.1086/661933 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/661933
  26. R. G. Dugan, J. J. Clarkson, J. T. Beck, When cause‐marketing backfires: differential effects of one‐for‐one promotions on hedonic and utilitarian products, J. Consum. Psychol. 31 (2021) 532-550. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1229 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1229
  27. A. Galati, S. Tinervia, A. Tulone, M. Crescimanno, G. Rizzo, Label Style and Color Contribution to Explain Market Price Difference in Italian Red Wines Sold in the Chinese Wine Market, J. Int. Food & Agribusiness Mark. 30 (2018) 175-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/08974438.2017.1402728 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08974438.2017.1402728
  28. F. Celhay, H. Remaud, What does your wine label mean to consumers? A semiotic investigation of Bordeaux wine visual codes, Food Qual. Prefer. 65 (2018) 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.10.015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.10.020
  29. D. Escandon-Barbosa, J. Rialp-Criado, The Impact of the Content of the Label on the Buying Intention of a Wine Consumer, Front. Psychol. 9 (2019) 2761. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02761 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02761
  30. C. Ferreira, L. Lourenço-Gomes, L. M. C. Pinto, A. P. Silva, Is there a gender effect on wine choice in Portugal? – A qualitative approach, Int. J. Wine Bus. Res. 31 (2019) 618-639. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-08-2018-0040 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-08-2018-0040
  31. I. M. Chaney, External Search Effort for Wine, Int. J. Wine Mark. 12 (2000) 5-21. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb008706 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb008706
  32. A. Thomas, G. Pickering, The importance of wine label information, Int. J. Wine Mark. 15 (2003) 58-74. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb008757 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb008757
  33. D. Kokole, P. Anderson, E. Jané-Llopis, Nature and potential impact of alcohol health warning labels: a scoping review, Nutrients 13 (2021) 3065. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13093065 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13093065
  34. A. Annunziata, L. Agnoli, R. Vecchio, S. Charters, A. Mariani, The influence of alcohol warning labels on consumers’ choices of wine and beer, Wine Econ. Policy 9 (2020) 3-21. https://doi.org/10.36253/web-8189 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/web-8189
  35. C. Staub, C. Fuchs, M. Siegrist, Risk perception and acceptance of health warning labels on wine, Food Qual. Prefer. 96 (2022) 104435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104435 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104435
  36. O. Jorge, A. Pons, J. Rius, C. Vintró, J. Mateo, J. Vilaplana, Increasing online shop revenues with web scraping: a case study for the wine sector, British Food J. 122 (2020) 3383-3401. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-07-2019-0522 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-07-2019-0522
  37. A. P. Kieling, R. Tezza, G. L. Vargas, Website stage model for Brazilian wineries: an analysis of presence in digital and mobile media, Int. J. Wine Bus. Res. 35 (2023) 45-65. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-05-2021-0032 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-05-2021-0032
  38. Wine Market Council (WMC), Wine Market Council Webinar: A Look at Online & Direct Wine Purchasing in a New Reality, April 3, 2020.
  39. Q. Wang, X. Cui, L. Huang, Y. Dai, Seller reputation or product presentation? An empirical investigation from cue utilization perspective, Int. J. Inf. Manag. 36 (2016) 271-283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.12.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.12.006
  40. C. Flavián Blanco, R. Gurrea Sarasa, C. Orús Sanclemente, Effects of visual and textual information in online product presentations: looking for the best combination in website design, Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 19 (2010) 668-686. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2010.42 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2010.42
  41. J.-E. Pelet, F. Durrieu, E. Lick, Label design of wines sold online: Effects of perceived authenticity on purchase intentions, J. Retailing and Consum. Serv. 55 (2020) 102087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102087 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102087
  42. M. Cho, M. A. Bonn, S. Kang, Wine attributes, perceived risk and online wine repurchase intention: The cross-level interaction effects of website quality, Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 43 (2014) 108-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.09.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.09.002
  43. I. Onur, J. Bruwer, L. Lockshin, Reducing information asymmetry in the auctioning of non-perishable experience goods: The case of online wine auctions, J. Retailing and Consum. Serv. 54 (2020) 102060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102060 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102060
  44. M. A. Bonn, W. G. Kim, S. Kang, M. Cho, Purchasing Wine Online: The Effects of Social Influence, Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and Wine Involvement, J. Hosp. Mark. & Manag. 25 (2016) 841-869. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2016.1115382 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2016.1115382
  45. S. Sohn, B. Seegebarth, M. Kissling, T. Sippel, Social Cues and the Online Purchase Intentions of Organic Wine, Foods 9 (2020) 643. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9050643 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9050643
  46. T. Tomažič, The importance of social media from the wine marketing perspective, Lex localis 15 (2017) 827-844. https://doi.org/10.4335/15.4.827-844(2017) DOI: https://doi.org/10.4335/15.4.827-844(2017)
  47. D. Hölle, S. Aufschnaiter, J. Bogon, C. Pfeuffer, A. Kiesel, R. Thomaschke, Quality ratings of wine bottles in e-commerce: the influence of time delays and spatial arrangement, J. Wine Res. 5 (2020) 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571264.2020.1723067 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09571264.2020.1723067
  48. S. Chironi, L. Altamore, P. Columba, S. Bacarella, M. Ingrassia, Study of Wine Producers’ Marketing Communication in Extreme Territories–Application of the AGIL Scheme to Wineries’ Website Features, Agronomy 10 (2020) 721. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10050721 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10050721
  49. J. E. Hwang, Y. S. Yang, Y. M. Oh, S. Y. Lee, J. E. Lee, S. I. Cho, Differences in visual fixation duration according to the position of graphic health warning labels: An eye-tracking approach, Tob Induc Dis 16 (2018) 39. https://doi.org/10.18332/tid/94327 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18332/tid/94327
  50. N. Maehle, N. Iversen, L. Hem, C. Otnes, Exploring consumer preferences for hedonic and utilitarian food attributes, Brit. Food J. 117 (2015) 3039-3063. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-04-2015-0148 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-04-2015-0148
  51. N. Spears, S. N. Singh, Measuring Attitude toward the Brand and Purchase Intentions, J. Curr. Issues & Res. in Advert. 26 (2004) 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2004.10505164 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2004.10505164
  52. G. Sun, S. D’Alessandro, L. W. Johnson, Exploring luxury value perceptions in China: Direct and indirect effects, Int. J. Mark. Res. 58 (2016) 711-731. https://doi.org/10.2501/IJMR-2016-021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2501/IJMR-2016-021
  53. A. Gasiński, J. Kawa-Rygielska, A. Szumny, J. Gąsior, A. Głowacki, Assessment of volatiles and polyphenol content, physicochemical parameters and antioxidant activity in beers with dotted hawthorn (Crataegus punctata), Foods 9 (2020) 775. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9060775 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9060775
  54. A. Szymkowiak, B. Borusiak, B. Pierański, P. Kotyza, L. Smutka, Household Food Waste: The Meaning of Product’s Attributes and Food-Related Lifestyle, Front. Environ. Sci. 10 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.918485 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.918485
  55. H.-J. Lee, Z.-S. Yun, Consumers’ perceptions of organic food attributes and cognitive and affective attitudes as determinants of their purchase intentions toward organic food, Food Qual. Prefer. 39 (2015) 259-267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.06.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.06.002
  56. E. Fernandes, H. Semuel, M. Adiwijaya, The influence of social media advertising on purchase intention through utilitarian and hedonic shopping motivation: a study at beauty care and anti-aging clinic service in Surabaya, Petra Int. J. Bus. Stud. 3 (2020) 23-36. https://doi.org/10.9744/ijbs.3.1.23-36 DOI: https://doi.org/10.9744/ijbs.3.1.23-36
  57. F. Habann, C. Zerres, L. Zaworski, Investigating the segment-specific preferences for hedonic and utilitarian online-shop characteristics: the case of German online wine shops, Int. J. Internet Mark. Advert. 12 (2018) 255-269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIMA.2018.093390
  58. J. Mundel, P. Huddleston, B. Behe, L. Sage, C. Latona, An eye tracking study of minimally branded products: hedonism and branding as predictors of purchase intentions, J. Prod. & Brand Manag. 27 (2018) 146-157. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-07-2016-1282 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-07-2016-1282
  59. P. Oyinseye, A. Suárez, E. Saldaña, P. Fernández-Zurbano, D. Valentin, M.-P. Sáenz-Navajas, Multidimensional representation of wine drinking experience: Effects of the level of consumers’ expertise and involvement, Food Qual. Prefer. 98 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2022.104536 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2022.104536
  60. A. Fenko, L. Kersten, S. Bialkova, Overcoming consumer scepticism toward food labels: The role of multisensory experience, Food Qual. Prefer. 48 (2016) 81-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.08.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.08.013
  61. M. A. Delmas, N. Lessem, Eco-premium or eco-penalty? Eco-labels and quality in the organic wine market, Bus. & Soc. 56 (2017) 318-356. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650315576119 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650315576119
  62. L. Pérez y Pérez, A. Gracia, J. Barreiro-Hurlé, Not Seeing the Forest for the Trees: The Impact of Multiple Labelling on Consumer Choices for Olive Oil, Foods 9 (2020) 186. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9020186 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9020186
  63. S. S. Samant, P. G. Crandall, H.-S. Seo, The effect of varying educational intervention on consumers’ understanding and attitude toward sustainability and process-related labels found on chicken meat products, Food Qual. Prefer. 48 (2016) 146-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.09.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.09.005
  64. L. Changbao, H. Peishan, A Literature Review of the Consumer Cognitive Miserliness Behavior and Its Marketing Implications: Based on the Framework of the Cue Utilization Theory, Foreign Econ. & Manag. 40 (2018) 58-70. https://doi.org/10.16538/j.cnki.fem.2018.08.005
  65. J. Baldoni, Using Stories to Persuade, Harvard Bus. Rev. https://hbr.org/2011/03/using-stories-as-a-tool-of-persuasion, 2021 (accessed 28 January 2022).
  66. Á. Veszelszki, Persuasion Strategies on Instagram in Wine Communication and Branding, Acta Univ. Sapientiae, Communication 6 (2019) 83−104. https://doi.org/10.2478/auscom-2019-0005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/auscom-2019-0005
  67. T. Drugova, K. R. Curtis, S. B. Akhundjanov, Are multiple labels on food products beneficial or simply ignored? Can. J. Agric. Econ./Rev. Can. d’agroecon. 68 (2020) 411-427. https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12259 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12259
  68. P. Roca, R. Symoneaux, D. Ugalde, F. Jourjon, Analysis of the perceptions of wine consumers toward environmental approaches: Support for the management of environmental strategy, BIO Web of Conferences 15 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20191503020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20191503020
  69. A. Rihn, X. Wei, H. Khachatryan, Text vs. logo: Does eco-label format influence consumers’ visual attention and willingness-to-pay for fruit plants? An experimental auction approach, J. Behav. and Exp. Econ. 82 (2019) 101452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2019.101452 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2019.101452
  70. T.P. Titova, V.G. Nachev, C.I. Damyanov, Food quality evaluation according to their color characteristics, Facta Univ., Series: Automatic Control and Robotics 14 (2015) 1-10.
  71. R. Capitello, L. Agnoli, S. Charters, D. Begalli, Labelling environmental and terroir attributes: Young Italian consumers’ wine preferences, J. Cleaner Prod. 304 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126991 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126991
  72. L. Hu, R. Filieri, F. Acikgoz, L. Zollo, R. Rialti, The effect of utilitarian and hedonic motivations on mobile shopping outcomes: A cross‐cultural analysis, Int. J. Consum. Stud. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12868 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12868
  73. C. Longoni, L. Cian, Artificial intelligence in utilitarian vs. hedonic contexts: The “word-of-machine” effect, J. Mark. 86 (2022) 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224292095734 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920957347
  74. E. Wang, Creating Utilitarian and Hedonic Value from Website Quality an Online Retail Performance, J. Electron. Commerce in Organ. 15 (2017) 1-13. https://doi.org/10.4018/JECO.2017070101 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/JECO.2017070101