A holistic framework of corporate website favourability

This paper extends the current knowledge of corporate website favourability (CWF) by developing a comprehensive conceptual model of its influence on corporate image, corporate reputation, loyalty and identification. The paper reviews previous studies on corporate websites from the perspectives of marketing, management, corporate identity and corporate visual identity in order to inform our understanding of the antecedents and consequences of CWF. The propositions and the conceptual framework present an approach by which a corporation can design and manage a favourable corporate website. A number of important contributions are offered: First, the paper adds to the understanding of CWF; second, it discusses the antecedents of CWF by drawing upon the existing literature; third, it is beneficial for practitioners in shaping CWF strategies, and fourth, it offers possible consequences of CWF and provides a framework for future testing

Consumer\u27s Online Shopping Influence Factors and Decision-Making Model

Previous research on online consumer behavior has mostly been confined to the perceived risk which is used to explain those barriers for purchasing online. However, perceived benefit is another important factor which influences consumers’ decision when shopping online. As a result, an integrated consumer online shopping decision-making model is developed which contains three elements—Consumer, Product, and Web Site. This model proposed relative factors which influence the consumers’ intention during the online shopping progress, and divided them into two different dimensions—mentally level and material level. We tested those factors with surveys, from both online volunteers and offline paper surveys with more than 200 samples. With the help of SEM, the experimental results show that the proposed model and method can be used to analyze consumer’s online shopping decision-making process effectively

Ethical judgments: what do we know, where do we go?

Investigations into ethical judgments generally seem fuzzy as to the relevant research domain. We first attempted to clarify the construct and determine domain parameters. This attempt required addressing difficulties associated with pinpointing relevant literature, most notably the varied nomenclature used to refer to ethical judgments (individual evaluations of actions' ethicality). Given this variation in construct nomenclature and the difficulties it presented in identifying pertinent focal studies, we elected to focus on research that cited papers featuring prominent and often-used measures of ethical judgments (primarily, but not exclusively, the Multidimensional Ethics Scale). Our review of these studies indicated a preponderance of inferences and conclusions unwarranted by empirical evidence (likely attributable at least partly to inconsistent nomenclature). Moreover, ethical judgments related consistently to few respondent characteristics or any other variables, emergent relationships may not always be especially meaningful, and much research seems inclined to repetition of already verified findings. Although we concluded that knowledge about ethical judgments seems not to have advanced appreciably after decades of investigation, we suggested a possible path forward that focuses on the content of what is actually being judged as reflected in the myriad of vignettes used in the literature to elicit judgments