Research on the Use, Characteristics, and Impact of e-Commerce Product Recommendation Agents: A Review and Update for 2007–2012

  • Bo Xiao
  • Izak Benbasat
Part of the Progress in IS book series (PROIS)


Five years have passed since the publication of our MISQ 2007 paper on the use, characteristics, and impact of e-commerce product recommendation agents (RAs). We are interested to learn how the research on e-commerce product RAs has progressed since then. More specifically, we are interested to find out whether the conceptual model that we have developed in our MISQ 2007 paper have received further empirical support and how the conceptual model has been extended. In this chapter, we review empirical studies on e-commerce product recommendation agents published between 2007 and 2012, particularly with respect to the theory that we have advanced in the MISQ 2007 paper. In addition, we update our original conceptual model by integrating important additional dimension(s), if any, revealed in the review of empirical studies.


Product recommendation agents Electronic commerce Adoption Consumer decision making Social presence 


  1. Al-Natour, S., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R. (2006). The role of design characteristics in shaping perceptions of similarity: The case of online shopping assistants. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(12), 821–861.Google Scholar
  2. Al‐Natour, S., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R.T. (2008). The effects of process and outcome similarity on users’ evaluations of decision aids, Decision Sciences, 39(2), 175–211.Google Scholar
  3. Anand, P., & Sternthal, B. (1989). Strategies for designing persuasive messages: Deductions from the resource matching hypothesis.Google Scholar
  4. Benlian, A., Titah, R., and Hess, T. (2012). Differential effects of provider recommendations and consumer reviews in e-commerce transactions: An experimental study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(1), 237–272.Google Scholar
  5. Chang, C.-C., & Chin, Y.-C. (2010). The impact of recommendation sources on online purchase intentions: The moderating effects of gender and perceived risk. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 66, 111–114.Google Scholar
  6. Chen, L., and Pu, P. (2008). A cross-cultural user evaluation of product recommender interfaces: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Recommender systems (pp. 75–82). Lausanne, Switzerland: ACM.Google Scholar
  7. Choi, J., Lee, H.J., & Kim, Y.C. (2011). The influence of social presence on customer intention to reuse online recommender systems: The roles of personalization and product type. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 16(1), 129–154.Google Scholar
  8. Dabholkar, P.A., & Sheng, X. (2012). Consumer participation in using online recommendation agents: Effects on satisfaction, trust, and purchase intentions. The Service Industries Journal, 32(9), 1433–1449.Google Scholar
  9. Doong, H.S., Wang, H.C., & Fong, J.G. (2009). The effects of virtual product experience on changing consumers’ first impression bias. Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2009, 111–121.Google Scholar
  10. Gorgoglione, M., Panniello, U., & Tuzhilin, A. (2011). The effect of context-aware recommendations on customer purchasing behavior and trust: Proceedings of the fifth ACM conference on Recommender systems: ACM, pp. 85–92.Google Scholar
  11. Hess, T., Fuller, M., & Campbell, D. (2009). Designing interfaces with social presence: Using vividness and extraversion to create social recommendation agents. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10(12), 889–919.Google Scholar
  12. Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ho, S.Y., Bodoff, D., & Tam, K.Y. (2011). Timing of adaptive Web personalization and its effects on online consumer behavior. Information Systems Research, 22(3), 660–679.Google Scholar
  14. Hostler, R.E., Yoon, V.Y., & Guimaraes, T. (2012, February 15). Recommendation agent impact on consumer online shopping: The movie magic case study. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(3), 2989–2999.Google Scholar
  15. Hostler, R.E., Yoon, V.Y., Guo, Z., Guimaraes, T., & Forgionne, G. (2011). Assessing the impact of recommender agents on on-line consumer unplanned purchase behavior. Information and Management, 48(8), 336–343.Google Scholar
  16. Huang, L.T., & Kao, W.S. (2011). Exploring intention to reuse recommendation agents from accessibility-diagnosticity perspective: The moderating effect of domain knowledge. ECIS.Google Scholar
  17. Jin, S.A.A., & Sung, Y. (2009). The roles of spokes-avatars’ personalities in brand communication in 3d virtual environments. Journal of Brand Management, 17(5), 317–327.Google Scholar
  18. Knijnenburg, B., Kobsa, A., Moritz, S., & Svensson, M.A. (2011). Exploring the effects of feed-forward and feedback on information disclosure and user experience in a context-aware recommender system: Joint Proceedings of the Workshop on Decision Making and Recommendation Acceptance Issues in Recommender Systems and the 2nd Workshop on User Models for Motivational Systems: The Affective and the Rational Routes to Persuasion. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, pp. 35–42.Google Scholar
  19. Knijnenburg, B.P., Willemsen, M.C., Gantner, Z., Soncu, H., & Newell, C. (2012). Explaining the user experience of recommender systems. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 1–64.Google Scholar
  20. Köhler, C.F., Breugelmans, E., & Dellaert, B.G.C. (2011). Consumer acceptance of recommendations by interactive decision aids: The joint role of temporal distance and concrete versus abstract communications. Journal of Management Information Systems, 27(4), 231–260.Google Scholar
  21. Kwon, S.J., & Chung, N. (2010). The moderating effects of psychological reactance and product involvement on online shopping recommendation mechanisms based on a causal map. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9(6), 522–536.Google Scholar
  22. Lee, Y.E., & Benbasat, I. (2010). Interaction design for mobile product recommendation agents: Supporting users’ decisions in retail stores. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 17(4), 17.Google Scholar
  23. Lee, Y.E., & Benbasat, I. (2011). The influence of trade-off difficulty caused by preference elicitation methods on user acceptance of recommendation agents across loss and gain conditions. Information Systems Research, 22(4), 867–884.Google Scholar
  24. Lee, G., & Lee, W.J. (2009). Psychological reactance to online recommendation services. Information and Management, 46(8), 448–452.Google Scholar
  25. Li, T., & Tsekouras, D. (2012). Reciprocity in effort to personalize: Examining perceived effort as a signal for quality: Proceedings of the 14th Annual International Conference on Electronic Commerce: ACM, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
  26. Lui, S.M., & Hui, W. (2010). Effects of smiling and gender on trust toward a recommendation agent. International Conference on Cyberworlds (CW): IEEE, 398–405.Google Scholar
  27. Pu, P., & Chen, L. (2007). Trust-inspiring explanation interfaces for recommender systems. Knowledge-Based Systems, 20(6), 542–556.Google Scholar
  28. Pu, P., Chen, L., & Kumar, P. (2008). Evaluating product search and recommender systems for e-commerce environments. Electronic Commerce Research, 8(1–2), 1–27.Google Scholar
  29. Punj, G.N., & Moore, R. (2007). Smart versus knowledgeable online recommendation agents. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(4), 46–60.Google Scholar
  30. Qiu, L., & Benbasat, I. (2009). Evaluating anthropomorphic product recommendation agents: A social relationship perspective to designing information systems. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(4), 145–182.Google Scholar
  31. Qiu, L., & Benbasat, I. (2010). A study of demographic embodiments of product recommendation agents in electronic commerce. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(10), 669–688.Google Scholar
  32. Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, televisions, and new media like real people and places. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Tan, C.H., Teo, H.H., & Benbasat, I. (2010). Assessing screening and evaluation decision support systems: A resource-matching approach. Information Systems Research, 21(2), 305–326.Google Scholar
  34. Thirumalai, S., & Sinha, K.K. (2011). Customization of the online purchase process in electronic retailing and customer satisfaction: An online field study. Special Issue on Field Research in Operations and Supply Chain Management, 29(5), 477–487.Google Scholar
  35. Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The use of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Wang, W., & Benbasat, I. (2012). A contingency approach to investigating the effects of user-system interaction modes of online decision aids. Information Systems Research (in press).Google Scholar
  37. Wang, H.-C., and Doong, H.-S. 2010a. Argument form and spokesperson type: The recommendation strategy of virtual salespersons. International Journal of Information Management, 30(6), 493–501.Google Scholar
  38. Wang, H.-C., & Doong, H.-S. 2010b. Online customers’ cognitive differences and their impact on the success of recommendation agents. Information and management, 47(2), 109–114.Google Scholar
  39. Xiao, B., & Benbasat, I. (2007). E-commerce product recommendation agents: use, characteristics, and impact. MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 137–209.Google Scholar
  40. Yang, X., & Wang, K. (2012). An experimental study of user-customized products online: Based on regulatory focus theory: Proceedings of the 14th Annual International Conference on Electronic Commerce: ACM, pp. 70–73.Google Scholar
  41. Zhang, T., Agarwal, R., & Lucas Jr, H.C. (2011). The value of IT-enabled retailer learning: personalized product recommendations and customer store loyalty in electronic markets. MIS Quarterly-Management Information Systems, 35(4), 859.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Information Technology Management DepartmentShidler College of Business, University of HawaiiHonoluluUSA
  2. 2.Sauder School of BusinessUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations