An Application of Rogers’s Innovation Model: Use of the Internet to Purchase Apparel, Food, and Home Furnishing Products by Small Community Consumers

The purpose of our research was to assess beliefs of small community consumers regarding use of the Internet for product acquisition. We applied a portion of Rogers’s (1995) innovation diffusion model where he hypothesizes characteristics of an innovation (e.g., complexity, trialability) that facilitate or impede adoption. In addition, we were interested in whether these characteristics differed between small community purchasers and non-purchasers of innovations. Usable questionnaires were returned by 2,198 small community consumers. Data were analyzed using multivariate and univariate analyses of variance. Small community consumers who purchased through the Internet were more likely than non-purchasers to perceive Internet shopping as being relatively advantageous; more compatible with their values, beliefs, needs, and past experiences; less complex; more trialable; and more observable. Furthermore, small community consumers who were purchasers using the Internet perceived Internet shopping as less risky than did non-purchasers. The results were parallel across the three product categories of food, apparel, and home furnishing products.

[1]  N. Y. Siu,et al.  A Study of the Expected Adoption of Online Shopping—The Case of Hong Kong , 2001 .

[2]  E. Malecki Going digital in rural America , 2001 .

[3]  B. Lukas,et al.  The Nature and Social Uses of the Internet: A Qualitative Investigation. , 1997 .

[4]  M. Suh,et al.  ESTIMATION OF CONSUMER DEMANDS : AN APPLICATION TO U . S . APPAREL EXPENDITURES , 2000 .

[5]  D. Hoffman,et al.  Building Consumer Trust in Online Environments: The Case for Information Privacy* , 1998 .

[6]  Gerald L. Lohse,et al.  Consumer Buying Behavior on the Internet: Findings from Panel Data , 2000 .

[7]  E. Arnould Toward a Broadened Theory of Preference Formation and the Diffusion of Innovations: Cases from Zinder Province, Niger Republic , 1989 .

[8]  S. Fournier,et al.  Paradoxes of Technology: Consumer Cognizance, Emotions, and Coping Strategies , 1998 .

[9]  Joseph M. Jones,et al.  Internet consumer catalog shopping: findings from an exploratory study and directions for future research , 1998, Internet Res..

[10]  W. Miller,et al.  The adoption process and environmental innovations: a case study of a government project. , 1978 .

[11]  D. Dillman,et al.  How to conduct your own survey , 1994 .

[12]  K. P. Johnson,et al.  Exploring differences between Internet apparel purchasers, browsers, and non-purchasers , 2002 .

[13]  Terry S. Overton,et al.  Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys , 1977 .

[14]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1964 .

[15]  M. Rowley,et al.  Shopping.com: Analysis of a Trend , 2000 .

[16]  R. Bharat Rao,et al.  Browsers or Buyers in Cyberspace? An Investigation of Factors Influencing Electronic Exchange , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[17]  H. Raghav Rao,et al.  On risk, convenience, and Internet shopping behavior , 2000, CACM.

[18]  D. Pavitt Retailing and the super high street: the future of the electronic home shopping industry , 1997 .

[19]  Hean Tat Keh,et al.  Online grocery retailing: Success factors and potential pitfalls , 2001 .

[20]  J. Jacoby,et al.  The Components of Perceived Risk , 1972 .

[21]  Gerald L. Lohse,et al.  Predictors of online buying behavior , 1999, CACM.

[22]  M. Polonsky,et al.  Causal linkages between psychographic and demographic determinants of outshopping behaviour , 1993 .

[23]  D. Campbell BIAS IN MAIL SURVEYS , 1949 .