Modeling the Role of C2C Information Quality on Purchase Decision in Facebook

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11195)


A market which provides an innovative way to allow customers to interact with each other called Customer-to-customer (C2C) market. In C2C communications, online communities play an important role in decision making to buy a product. This investigation develops a research model for online communities of Facebook commerce (F-Commerce) in Bangladesh region, which is based on Information Adoption Model (IAM). This study exhibits a model to influences of C2C communication on Bangladeshi consumers’ purchase decision in the online communities of F-Commerce. The proposed model used the Partial Least Squares (PLS) technique to test 120 effective survey data. This survey data has been taken from the Bangladesh Facebook users and strongly involved in product buy-sell at F-Commerce. The analyzed results show that Argument Quality (AQ), Source Credibility (SC) and Tie Strength (TS) positively influence Purchase Decision (PD) through Product Usefulness Evaluation (PUE). In addition, Tie Strength exhibits difference effect on Product Usefulness Evaluation between the contexts of consumers communicating with virtual consumers relationships. Theoretical and executive implications are discussed for constructing our proposed model.


Social media Facebook commerce Consumer to consumer (C2C) 



The research investigation was organized by the assist of the Software Engineering department, Daffodil International University. This examination has been guided based on thesis dissertation [59] under the supervision of Dr. Imran Mahmud. We have developed our proposed models at Cyber Security Center (CSC) laboratory. Cyber Security Center (CSC) is a one of the potential research labs of Daffodil International University.


  1. 1.
    Obar, J.A., Wildman, S.: Social media definition and the governance challenge: an introduction to the special issue. Telecommun. Policy 39(9), 745–750 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alexa Internet Inc., Traffic Statistics. Accessed 10 May 2018
  3. 3.
    Leong, L.Y., Jaafar, N.I., Ainin, S.: Understanding Facebook commerce (f-commerce) actual purchase from an artificial neural network perspective. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 19(1), 75–103 (2018)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Molinillo, S., Cabanillas, F.L., Sánchez, R.A.: A social commerce intention model for traditional e-commerce sites. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 13(2), 80–93 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sukrat, S., Mahatanankoon, P., Papasratorn, B.: The driving forces of C2C social commerce in Thailand: a developing framework. In: 9th International Conference on Advances in Information Technology, pp. 108–118. KnE Social Sciences, Bangkok (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wu, Y.L., Li, E.: Marketing mix, customer value, and customer loyalty in social commerce. Internet Res. 28(1), 74–104 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, J.V., Su, B., Widjaja, A.E.: Facebook C2C social commerce: a study of online impulse buying. Decis. Support Syst. 83, 57–69 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mahmud, F.: Daily Bangladesh Post, f-commerce on rise in Bangladesh (2017). Accessed 5 Jan 2018
  9. 9.
    Zabeen, M., Ara, H., Sarwar, N.: F-commerce in Bangladesh: “Venit, Vidit, Vicit”. IOSR J. Hum. Soc. Sci. 17(5), 1–08 (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ahmed, Z.: Effectiveness of Facebook marketing in startup business. A perspective on Limited. Internship report (BUS 400), BRAC University (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xu, X., Yao, Z.: Understanding the role of argument quality in the adoption of online reviews: an empirical study integrating value-based decision and needs theory. Online Inf. Rev. 39(7), 885–902 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McGuire, G.M., Bielby, W.T.: The variable effects of tie strength and social resources. Work. Occup. 43(1), 38–74 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Todd, P.R., Melancon, J.: Gender and live-streaming: source credibility and motivation. J. Res. Interact. Mark. 12(1), 79–89 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hügi, J., Schneider, R.: Building an online environment for usefulness evaluation. In: Aalberg, T., Papatheodorou, C., Dobreva, M., Tsakonas, G., Farrugia, Charles J. (eds.) TPDL 2013. LNCS, vol. 8092, pp. 366–369. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hanaysha, J.R.: An examination of the factors affecting consumer’s purchase decision in the Malaysian retail market. PSU Res. Rev. 2(1), 7–29 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang, Y.: Information adoption model, a review of the literature. J. Econ. Bus. Manag. 4(1), 618–622 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Taherdoost, H.: A review of technology acceptance and adoption models and theories. J. Econ. Bus. Manag. 22, 960–967 (2018)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhu, D.H., Chang, Y.P., Luo, J.J.: Understanding the influence of C2C communication on purchase decision in online communities from a perspective of information adoption model. Telematics Inform. 33(1), 8–16 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Avkiran, N.K.: Rise of the partial least squares structural equation modeling: an application in banking. In: Avkiran, N., Ringle, C. (eds.) Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol. 267, pp. 1–29. Springer, Cham (2018). Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sarstedt, M., Mitchell, R., Gudergan, S. P.: Partial least squares structural equation modeling in HRM research. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. (2018)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lin, H.F.: The impact of website quality dimensions on customer satisfaction in the B2C E-commerce context. Total. Qual. Manag. Bus. Excel. 18(4), 363–378 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ramli, R., Bakar, A.A., Ismail, R., Aziz, N.: The trust effect towards online seller in social commerce. In: 6th International Conference on Computing and Informatics (ICOCI), Kuala Lumpur, Paper No. 030, pp. 317–322 (2017)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hajli, M.N.: A study of the impact of social media on consumers. Int. J. Mark. Res. 56(3), 387–404 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Leong, L.Y., Jaafar, N.I., Ainin, S.: The effects of Facebook browsing and usage intensity on impulse purchase in f-commerce. Comput. Hum. Behav. 78, 160–173 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Choshin, M., Ghaffari, A.: An investigation of the impact of effective factors on the success of e-commerce in small-and medium-sized companies. Comput. Hum. Behav. 66, 67–74 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zuo, W., Huang, Q., Fan, C., Zhang, Z.: Quality management of B2C ecommerce service based on human factors engineering. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 12(5), 309–320 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chen, A., Lu, Y., Wang, B.: Customers’ purchase decision-making process in social commerce: a social learning perspective. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 37(6), 627–638 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Quigley, J., Walls, L., Demirel, G., MacCarthy, B., Parsa, M.: Supplier quality improvement: the value of information under uncertainty. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 264(3), 932–947 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chen, X., Huang, Q., Davison, R.M.: The role of website quality and social capital in building buyers’ loyalty. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 37(1), 1563–1574 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shin, S.Y., Van Der Heide, B., Beyea, D., Dai, Y.N., Prchal, B.: Investigating moderating roles of goals, reviewer similarity, and self-disclosure on the effect of argument quality of online consumer reviews on attitude formation. Comput. Hum. Behav. 76, 218–226 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ge, M., Helfert, M.: A review of information quality research - develop a research agenda. In: 12th International Conference on Information Quality, pp. 76–91. MIT, Cambridge (2007)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sussman, S.W., Siegal, W.S.: Informational influence in organizations: an integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Inf. Syst. Res. 14(1), 47–65 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tang, J., Sun, Y., Yang, S., Sun, Y.: Revisit the information adoption model by exploring the moderating role of tie strength: a perspective from construal level theory. In: Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS), paper no. 352. Semantic Scholar, Taiwan (2016)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Libai, B., et al.: Customer-to-customer interactions: broadening the scope of word of mouth research. J. Serv. Res. 13(3), 267–282 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yoon, C., et al.: Cognition, persuasion and decision making in older consumers. Telemat. Inform. 16(3–4), 429–441 (2005)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lautiainen, T.: Factors affecting consumers’ buying decision in the selection of a coffee brand. Bachelor’s thesis, Faculty of Business Administration, Saimaa University of Applied Sciences (2015)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T.: The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 19, 123–205 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Afolabi, I.T., Oladipupo, O.O., Worlu, R.E.K., Akinyemi, I.O.: A systematic review of consumer behaviour prediction studies. Covenant. J. Bus. Soc. Sci. 7(1), 41–60 (2016)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dholakia, U.M., Bagozzi, R.P., Pearo, L.K.: A social influence model of consumer participation in network-and small-group-based virtual communities. Int. J. Res. Mark. 21(3), 241–263 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Andreassen, T.W., Streukens, S.: Service innovation and electronic word-of-mouth: is it worth listening to? Manag. Serv. Qual. 19(3), 249–265 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wang, Y.: Information adoption model, a review of the literature. J. Econ. Bus. Manag. 4(11), 618–622 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zou, Y.: Social media review: the impact of social on brand-consumer relationships. In: Kubacki, K. (ed.) Ideas in Marketing: Finding the New and Polishing the Old. DMSPAMS, p. 624. Springer, Cham (2015). Scholar
  43. 43.
    Brown, J.J., Reingen, P.H.: Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior. J. Consum. Res. 14(3), 350–362 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kundu, S., Rajan, S.C.R.: Word of mouth: a literature review. Int. J. Econ. Manag. Sci. 6(6), 1–9 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Doloto, U., Chen-Burger, Y.H.: A survey of business models in e-Commerce. In: Jezic, G., Howlett, R., Jain, L. (eds.) Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol. 38, pp. 249–259. Springer, Cham (2015). Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hair, J.F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M., Gudergan, S.P.: Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage, Thousand Oaks (2018)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ivanova, O.A., Ivanovab, V.V., Saltanb, A.A.: Likert-scale questionnaires as an educational tool in teaching discrete mathematics. J. Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol. (2018)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Anderson, J.C., Gerbing, D.W.: Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol. Bull. 103(3), 411–423 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wood, M.: Bootstrapping Confidence Levels for Hypotheses About Regression Models. University of Portsmouth Business School, Portland Street (2012)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Person, K.: A descriptive analysis of demographic characteristics and their influence on student attendance at programming board events. Educational Administration: Theses, dissertations, and Student Research 69 (2011)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Cheung, G.W., Wang, C.: Current approaches for assessing convergent and discriminant validity with SEM: issues and solutions. In: Academy of Management Proceedings, vol. 2017, no. (1), p. 12706 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Bacon, D.R., Sauer, P.L., Young, M.: Composite reliability in structural equations modeling. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 55(3), 394–406 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sharma, P., Sharma, P., Nage, P., Bafna, D., Salvi, V.: Analyzing effect of structural equation modeling (SEM) approach in e-Commerce. IOSR J. Eng. (IOSRJEN) 7, 05–08 (2018)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Lakens, D.: Equivalence tests: a practical primer for t tests, correlations, and meta-analyses. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 8(4), 355–362 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Selya, A.S., Rose, J.S., Dierker, L.C., Hedeker, D., Mermelstein, R.J.: A practical guide to calculating Cohen’s f2, a measure of local effect size, from PROC MIXED. Front. Psychol. 3, Article 111 (2012)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mahmud, I., Ramayah, T., Kurnia, S.: To use or not to use: Modelling end user grumbling as user resistance in pre-implementation stage of enterprise resource planning system. Inf. Syst. 69, 164–179 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Alzahrani, A.I., Mahmud, I., Ramayah, T., Alfarraj, O., Alalwan, N.: Extending the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to explain online game playing among Malaysian undergraduate students. Telemat. Inform. 34(4), 239–251 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Mahmud, I., Ramayah, T., Nayeem, M.M.H., Islam, S.M., Gan, P.L.: Modelling cyber-crime protection behaviour among computer users in the context of Bangladesh. In: Design Solutions for User-Centric Information Systems, pp. 253–273. IGI Global. (2017)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Haque, R.: The role of information quality in f-Commerce. Master’s thesis, Department of Software Engineering, Daffodil International University (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringAsian University of BangladeshDhakaBangladesh
  2. 2.Department of Software EngineeringDaffodil International UniversityDhakaBangladesh
  3. 3.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringDaffodil International UniversityDhakaBangladesh

Personalised recommendations