Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Relational Consequences of Perceived Deception in Online Shopping: The Moderating Roles of Type of Product, Consumer’s Attitude Toward the Internet and Consumer’s Demographics

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigates the negative influence of consumer’s perceptions of online retailer’s deceptive practices (perceived deception) on consumer’s relational variables (satisfaction and loyalty intentions to the online retailer). Also, the moderating role of product type (goods versus services), consumer’s attitude toward the Internet, and consumer’s demographics in the deception-relational outcomes link is considered. Data from 398 online consumers revealed that satisfaction totally mediated the influence of deception on loyalty. Furthermore, the deception-satisfaction link was moderated by all the hypothesized variables. Interestingly, a direct effect of deception on loyalty was found among more educated consumers, consumers who had a more positive attitude toward the Internet and consumers who had purchased a physical product. Implications for theory and management are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, J.S.: 1963, “Toward An Understanding of Inequity”, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67 , 422-38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aditya, R.N.: 2001, “The Psychology of Deception in Marketing: A Conceptual Framework for Research and Practice”, Psychology & Marketing 18, 735-761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R.E. and S.S. Srinivasan: 2003, “E-satisfaction and E-loyalty: A Contingency Framework”, Psychology & Marketing 20, 123-138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R.P. and Y. Yi: 1988, “On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 16, 74-94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S. J., Auh, S., and K. Smalley: 2005, “Customer Relationship Dynamics: Service Quality and Customer Loyalty in the Context of Varying Levels of Customer Expertise and Switching Costs”. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 33 , 169–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Ner, A. and L. Putterman: 2003. Trust in the New Economy, In D.C. Jones (Ed.). New Economy Handbook, (pp. 1067-1095), Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biros, D.P., George, J.F.; and Zmud R.W.: 2002. “Inducing Sensitivity to Deception in Order to Improve Decision Making Performance: A Field Study”, MIS Quarterly 26, 119-140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biswas, D. and A. Biswas: 2004, “The Diagnostic Role of Signals in the Context of Perceived Risks in Online Shopping: Do Signals Matter More on the Web”, Journal of Interactive Marketing 18, 30-45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolton, R. N., and K.N. Lemon: 1999, “A Dynamic Model of Customers’ Usage of Services: Usage as an Antecedent and Consequence of Satisfaction”, Journal of Marketing Research 36, 171-186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockman, B.K. and R.M. Morgan: 2006, “The Moderating Effect of Organizational Cohesiveness in Knowledge Use and New Product Development”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 34, 295-307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, R., DeSarbo, W., Oliver, R.L., and T.S. Robertson: 1988, “Deception by Implication: An Experiental Investigation”, Journal of Consumer Research 14, 483-494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, T.L., Wokutch, R.E. and J.E. Cox Jr.: 1985. “An Ethical Analysis of Deception in Advertising”, Journal of Business Ethics 4, 93-104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coupey, E.: 2001, Marketing and the Internet: Conceptual Foundations, Prentice-Hall, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronin, J.J. Jr., Brady, M.K., and G.T. Hult: 2000, “Assesing the Effects of Quality, Value, and Customer Satisfaction on Consumer Behavioral Intentions in Service Encounters”, Journal of Marketing 56, 55-68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dabholkar, P.A., and R.P. Bagozzi, R.P.: 2002, “An Attitudinal Model of Technology-Based Self-Service: Moderating Effects of Consumer Traits and Situational Factors”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 30, 184-201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darke, P.R., and R.J.B. Ritchie: 2007, “The Defensive Consumer: Advertising Deception, Defensive Processing, and Distrust”, Journal of Marketing Research 44, 114-127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Wulf, K. Odekerken-Schröder, G. and Iacobucci. 2001, “Investments in Consumer Relationships: A Cross-Country and Cross-Industry Exploration”, Journal of Marketing 65, 33-50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo, B.M.: 1992, “Nonverbal Behavior and Self-presentation”, Psychological Bulletin 111, 203-243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evanschitzky, H., Gopalkrishnan, R.I., Hesse, J., and D. Ahlert: 2004, “E-Satisfaction: A Re-Examination”, Journal of Retailing 80, 234-247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fassnacht, M., and I. Köse: 2007, “Consequences of Web-Based Service Quality: Uncovering a Multi-Faceted Chain of Effects”, Journal of Interactive Marketing 21, 35-54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M. and I. Azjen: 1975, Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, P. and S.C. Zyglidopoulos.: 2008, “The Escalation of Deception in Organizations”. Journal of Business Ethics 81, 837-850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C. and D.F. Larcker: 1981, “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error”, Journal of Marketing Research 28, 39-50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frambach, R.T., Roest, H.C.A., and T.V. Krishnan: 2007, “The Impact of Consumer Internet Experience on Channel Preference and Usage Intentions across the Different Stages of the Buying Process”, Journal of Interactive Marketing 21, 26-41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garbarino, E., and M. Strahilevitz: 2004, “Gender Differences in the Perceived Risk of Buying Online and the Effects of Receiving a Site Recommendation”, Journal of Business Research 57, 768-775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, D.M. 1975. “Deception in Advertising: A Conceptual Approach”, Journal of Marketing 39, 40-46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, J.F.: 2002, “Influences on the Intent to make Internet Purchases”, Internet Research 12, 165-180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbins, M.: 1992, “Deception: A Tricky Issue for Behavioral Research in Accounting and Auditing”, Auditing 11, 113-126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Girard,T., Korgaonkar,P., and R. Silverblatt: 2003, “Relationship of Type of Product, Shopping Orientations, and Demographics with Preference for Shopping on the Internet”, Journal of Business and Psychology 18, 101-120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grazioli, S. and S. Jarvenpaa: 2000, “Perils of Internet Fraud: An Empirical Investigation of Deception and Trust with Experienced Internet Consumers”, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cibernetics 30, 395-410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grazioli, S. and S. Jarvenpaa: 2003, “Consumer and Business Deception over the Internet: Content Analysis of Documentary Evidence”, International Journal of Electronic Commerce 7, 93-118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grewal, D., Iyer, G.R. and M. Levy: 2004, “Internet Retailing: Enablers, Limiters and Market Consequences”, Journal of Business Research 8 , 695-743.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J.D., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., and W.C. Black: 1998, Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed.), Prentice Hall, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, T.: 2005, “Understanding Consumer Online Grocery Behavior: Results from a Swedish Study”, Journal of Euromarketing 14, 31-58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C. and A. Giering: 2001, “Personal Characteristics as Moderators of the Relationship between Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty: An Empirical Analysis”, Psychology & Marketing 18, 43-66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, J.A.: 1989, “Higher Education and a Civilization in Trouble: Producing a Virtuous Populace”, Vital Speeches 55, 314-318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huppertz, J.W., Arenson, S.J., and R.H. Evans: 1978, “An Application of Equity Theory to Buyer-Seller Exchange Situations”, Journal of Marketing Research 15, 250-260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyman, M.: 1990, “Deception in Advertising: A Proposed Complex of Definitions for Researchers, Lawyers, and Regulators”, International Journal of Advertising 9, 259.270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, R., Skinner, S.J., and V.A. Taylor: 2005, “Consumers’ Evaluations of Unethical Marketing Behaviors: The Role of Customer Commitment”, Journal of Business Ethics 62, 237-252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jayawardhena, C.: 2004, “Personal Values’ Influence on E-Shopping Attitude and Behaviour”, Internet Research 14, 127-138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K.A. and E. D Scott. : 2008, “Perceptions of Deception: Making Sense of Responses to Employee Deceit”. Journal of Business Ethics 80, 327-347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, P. E., Grazioli, S. Jamal, K., and G. Berryman: 2001, “Detecting Deception: Adversarial Problem Solving in a Low Base Rate World”, Cognitive Science 25, 355-392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M.D., Herrmann, A. and F. Huber: 2006, “The Evolution of Loyalty Intentions”, Journal of Marketing 70, 122-132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohlberg, L.: 1969, Stage and Sequence: The Cognitive Developmental Approach to Socialization, Rand McNally, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korgaonkar, P., Silverblatt, R. and T. Girard: 2006, “Online Retailing, Product Classifications, and Consumer Preferences”, Internet Research 16, 267-288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mcintyre, F.S., Thomas, J.L. Jr. and F.W. Gilbert: 1999, “Consumer Segments and Perceptions of Retail Ethics”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 2, 43-53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, A. Raymond, M.A., and C.D. Hopkins: 2008, “Can consumers recognize misleading advertising content in a media rich online environment?”, Psychology & Marketing 25, 655-674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miyazaki, A.D. and A. Fernandez: 2001, “Consumer Perceptions of Privacy and Security Risks for Online Shopping”, The Journal of Consumer Affairs 35, 27-44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris-Cotterill, N.: 1999, “Use and Abuse of the Internet in Fraud and Money Laundering”, International Review of Law Computers and Technology, 13, 211-228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikitov, A. and D. Bay: 2008, “Online Auction Fraud: Ethical Perspective”, Journal of Business Ethics 79, 235-244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver R.L.: 1980, “A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions”, Journal of Marketing Research 4, 460–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, R.L. and W.S. Desarbo: 1988, “Response Determinants in Satisfaction Judgments”, Journal of Consumer Research 14, 495-507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, D.E.: 2005, “Pop-Ups, Cookies, and Spam: Toward a Deeper Analysis of the Ethical Significance of Internet Marketing Practices”, Journal of Business Ethics 58, 271-280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R.D.: 1998, “Interactive Marketing and the Law: The Future Rise of Unfairness”, Journal of Interactive Marketing 12, 21-31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R.E., Unnava, R.H., and A.J. Strathman: 1991, Theories of attitude change, in Robertson, T.S., Kassarjian, H.H. (Eds), Handbook of Consumer Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp.241-80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitt, L., Berthon, P., and R.T. Watson: 1999, “Cyberservice: Taming Service marketing Problems with the World Wide Web”, Business Horizons 42, 11-18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter,C.E. and N. Donthu: 2006, “Using the Technology Acceptance Model to Explain How Attitudes Determine Internet Usage: The Role of Perceived Access Barriers and Demographics”, Journal of Business Research 59, 999-1007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, R.P., Marshall, G.W., Johnston, M.W., and D.R. Deeter-Schmelz: 2007, “Ethical Ideologies and Older Consumer Perceptions of Unethical Sales Tactics”, Journal of Business Ethics 70, 191-207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rest, J.R.: 1979, Developments in Judging Moral Issues Test. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rest, J.R.: 1986, Moral Development: Advances in Research and Theory, New York: Praeger Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Román, S.: 2007, “The Ethics of Online Retailing: A Scale Development and Validation from the Consumers’ Perspective”, Journal of Business Ethics 72, 131-148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Román, S. and S. Ruiz: 2005, “Relationship Outcomes of Perceived Ethical Sales Behavior: The Customer’s Perspective”, Journal of Business Research 58, 439-445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roxas, M.L. and J.Y. Stoneback: 2004, “The Importance of Gender across Cultures in Ethical Decision-Making”, Journal of Business Ethics 50 , 149-165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiffman, L.G., Sherman, E., and M.M. Long: 2003, “Toward a Better Understanding of the Interplay of Personal Values and the Internet”, Psychology & Marketing 20, 169-186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sexton, R.S., Johnson, R.A. and M.A. Hignite: 2002, “Predicting Internet e-commerce use”, Internet Research 12, 402-410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shankar, V., Smith, A.K., and A. Rangaswamy: 2003, “Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty in Online and Offline Environments”, International Journal of Research in Marketing 20, 153-75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shim, S. and M.A. Eastlick: 1998, “The Hierarchical Influence of Personal Values on Mall Shopping Attitude and Behaviour”, Journal of Retailing 74, 139-160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirohi, N., McLaughlin, E.W. and D. R. Wittink: 1998, “A Model of Consumer Perceptions and Store Loyalty Intentions for a Supermarket Retailer,” Journal of Retailing 74, 223-245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D.N., and K. Sivakumar: 2004, “Flow and Internet Shopping Behavior. A conceptual Model and Research Propositions”, Journal of Business Research 57, 1199-1208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spinello, R.A.: 2006, CyberEthics: Morality and Law in Cyberspace 3rd (Jones and Bartlett Publishers Canada, Ontario).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, E.F. and J.R. Hollenbeck (1989), “Clarifying Some Controversial Issues Surrounding Statistical Procedures for Detecting Moderator Variables: Empirical Evidence and Related Matters,” Journal of Applied Psychology 74, 3-10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swinyard, W.R. and S.M. Smith: 2003, “Why People (Don’t) Shop Online: A Lifestyle Study of the Internet Consumer”, Psychology & Marketing 20, 567-597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szymanski, D.M. and R.T. Hise: 2000, “E-Satisfaction: An Initial Examination”, Journal of Retailing 76 , 309-322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Noort, G., Kerkhof, P., and B.M. Fennis: 2008, “The Persuasiveness of Online Safety Cues: The Impact of Prevention Focus Compatibility of Web Content on Consumers’ Risk Perceptions, Attitudes, and Intentions”, Journal of Interactive Marketing 22, 58-72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitell, S.C., Singhapakdi, A., and S. Thomas: 2001, “Consumer Ethics: An Application and Empirical Testing of the Hunt-Vitell Theory of Ethics”, The Journal of Consumer Marketing 18, 153-178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weeks, W.A., Moore, C.W., McKinney, J.A., and J.G. Longenecker: 1999, “The Effects of Gender and Career Stage on Ethical Judgment”, Journal of Business Ethics 20, 301-313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whalen, J., Pitts, R.E. and J.K. Wong: 1991, “Exploring the Structure of Ethical Attributions as a Component of the Consumer Decision Model: The Vicarious Versus Personal Perspective”, Journal of Business Ethics 10, 285-293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter, S.J. Stylianou, A.C., and R.A. Giacalone: 2004, “Individual Differences in the Acceptability of Unethical Information Technology Practices: The Case of Machiavellianism and Ethical Ideology”, Journal of Business Ethics. 54, 275-301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfinbarger, M. and M.C. Gilly: 2003, “eTailQ: Dimensionalizing, Measuring and Predicting etail Quality”, Journal of Retailing 79, 183-198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimbelman, M. F.: 1997, “The effects of SAS No. 82 on Auditors’ Attention to Fraud Risk Factors and Audit Planning Decisions”, Journal of Accounting Research 35, 75-98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the grant ECO2009-13170 from the Spanish Ministry of Science & Innovation. I would like to thank Dawn Iacobucci and the two anonymous reviewers for their many helpful comments on previous drafts of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain

    Sergio Román

Authors
  1. Sergio Román
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sergio Román.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Román, S. Relational Consequences of Perceived Deception in Online Shopping: The Moderating Roles of Type of Product, Consumer’s Attitude Toward the Internet and Consumer’s Demographics. J Bus Ethics 95, 373–391 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0365-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0365-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation