IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joinma/v22y2008i4p58-72.html

The persuasiveness of online safety cues: The impact of prevention focus compatibility of Web content on consumers’ risk perceptions, attitudes, and intentions

Author

Listed:
  • Noort, Guda Van
  • Kerkhof, Peter
  • Fennis, Bob M.

Abstract

Safety cues are frequently used in online stores to relieve consumers’ risk perceptions concerning online purchases. This paper uses regulatory focus theory (RFT) to predict the persuasiveness of online safety cues. According to RFT (Higgins, 1997), people process information differently depending on whether they strive for achieving gains (promotion focus) or avoiding losses (prevention focus). The aim of the present study is to examine the impact of the regulatory focus compatibility of Web content on online consumer behavior. Using different online stores, two experiments show that the effect of online safety cues depends on the consumers’regulatory focus. A pilot study demonstrates that safety-oriented Web content lowers consumers’ risk perceptions, but only when in a prevention focus. The main study replicates and extends this finding by showing that online safety cues both lower consumers’ risk perceptions and engender more favorable attitudes and intentions, depending on the regulatory focus.

Suggested Citation

  • Noort, Guda Van & Kerkhof, Peter & Fennis, Bob M., 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, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 58-72.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:joinma:v:22:y:2008:i:4:p:58-72
    DOI: 10.1002/dir.20121
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094996808700185
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/dir.20121?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Derbaix, C., 1983. "Perceived risk and risk relievers: An empirical investigation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 19-38.
    2. Van den Poel, Dirk & Leunis, Joseph, 1999. "Consumer Acceptance of the Internet as a Channel of Distribution," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-256, July.
    3. Dowling, Grahame R & Staelin, Richard, 1994. "A Model of Perceived Risk and Intended Risk-Handling Activity," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 119-134, June.
    4. Pham, Michel Tuan & Avnet, Tamar, 2004. "Ideals and Oughts and the Reliance on Affect versus Substance in Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(4), pages 503-518, March.
    5. Shimp, Terence A & Bearden, William O, 1982. "Warranty and Other Extrinsic Cue Effects on Consumers' Risk Perceptions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 9(1), pages 38-46, June.
    6. Forsythe, Sandra M. & Shi, Bo, 2003. "Consumer patronage and risk perceptions in Internet shopping," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 56(11), pages 867-875, November.
    7. Aaker, Jennifer L & Lee, Angela Y, 2001. ""I" Seek Pleasures and "We" Avoid Pains: The Role of Self-Regulatory Goals in Information Processing and Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(1), pages 33-49, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Aghekyan-Simonian, Mariné & Forsythe, Sandra & Suk Kwon, Wi & Chattaraman, Veena, 2012. "The role of product brand image and online store image on perceived risks and online purchase intentions for apparel," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 325-331.
    2. Ashraf, Abdul R. & Thongpapanl, Narongsak (Tek), 2015. "Connecting with and Converting Shoppers into Customers: Investigating the Role of Regulatory Fit in the Online Customer's Decision-making Process," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 13-25.
    3. Shiu, Edward & Walsh, Gianfranco & Hassan, Louise M. & Parry, Sara, 2015. "The direct and moderating influences of individual-level cultural values within web engagement: A multi-country analysis of a public information website," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 534-541.
    4. Nepomuceno, Marcelo Vinhal & Laroche, Michel & Richard, Marie-Odile, 2014. "How to reduce perceived risk when buying online: The interactions between intangibility, product knowledge, brand familiarity, privacy and security concerns," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 619-629.
    5. Ahmad, Saba, 2026. "Online Signals, Consumer Trust and Confidence in Online Commerce," MPRA Paper 128601, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Steinhart, Yael & Kamins, Michael A. & Mazursky, David & Noy, Avraham, 2013. "Thinking or Feeling the Risk in Online Auctions: The Effects of Priming Auction Outcomes and the Dual System on Risk Perception and Amount Bid," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 47-61.
    7. Avi Goldfarb & Catherine Tucker, 2011. "Online Display Advertising: Targeting and Obtrusiveness," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 389-404, 05-06.
    8. Matea Matic & Katija Vojvodic, 2014. "Customer-Perceived Insecurity of Online Shopping Environment," International Review of Management and Marketing, International Review of Management and Marketing, vol. 4(1), pages 59-65.
    9. Chakraborty, Debarun & Paul, Justin, 2023. "Healthcare apps’ purchase intention: A consumption values perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    10. Sergio Román, 2010. "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," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(3), pages 373-391, September.
    11. Jason Nguyen & Quan Vu Le & Jasmine Trang Ha, 2021. "Impacts of Health and Safety Concerns on E-Commerce and Service Reconfiguration During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Insights from an Emerging Economy," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 227-242, December.
    12. Szymkowiak, Andrzej & Madias, Konstantinos & Garczarek-Bak, Urszula Anna, 2025. "Risk, reward, and recognition: The influence of safety perception on viral challenge participation on social media," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    13. Hofacker, Charles F. & de Ruyter, Ko & Lurie, Nicholas H. & Manchanda, Puneet & Donaldson, Jeff, 2016. "Gamification and Mobile Marketing Effectiveness," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 25-36.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Das, Gopal & Mukherjee, Amaradri & Smith, Ronn J., 2018. "The Perfect Fit: The Moderating Role of Selling Cues on Hedonic and Utilitarian Product Types," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 203-216.
    2. Fei-Fei Cheng & Tien-Yin Liu, Institute of Technology Management, National Chung Hsing University, Taiwan & Chin-Shan Wu, 2013. "Perceived Risks and Risk Reduction Strategies in Online Group-Buying," Diversity, Technology, and Innovation for Operational Competitiveness: Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Technology Innovation and Industrial Management,, ToKnowPress.
    3. Chang, En-Chi & Tseng, Ya-Fen, 2013. "Research note: E-store image, perceived value and perceived risk," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(7), pages 864-870.
    4. Jin, Liyin & He, Yanqun & Song, Haiyan, 2012. "Service customization: To upgrade or to downgrade? An investigation of how option framing affects tourists’ choice of package-tour services," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 266-275.
    5. Leder, Susanne & Mannetti, Lucia & Hölzl, Erik & Kirchler, Erich, 2010. "Regulatory fit effects on perceived fiscal exchange and tax compliance," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 271-277, April.
    6. Adams, Leen & Faseur, Tineke & Geuens, Maggie, 2010. "The Influence of the Self-Regulatory Focus on the Effectiveness of Stop-Smoking Campaigns for Young Smokers," Working Papers 2010/38, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    7. Nguyen, Dung Minh & Nguyen, Trieu, 2026. "Framing luxury in the resale era: Matching influencer type with regulatory focus in second-hand luxury consumption," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    8. Lee, Khai Sheang & Tan, Soo Jiuan, 2003. "E-retailing versus physical retailing: A theoretical model and empirical test of consumer choice," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 56(11), pages 877-885, November.
    9. Florack, Arnd & Keller, Johannes & Palcu, Johanna, 2013. "Regulatory focus in economic contexts," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 127-137.
    10. Chung-Chau Chang & Bo-Chi Lin & Shin-Shin Chang, 2011. "The relative advantages of benefit overlap versus category similarity in brand extension evaluation: The moderating role of self-regulatory focus," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 391-404, November.
    11. Tine Bock & Patrick Kenhove, 2010. "Consumer Ethics: The Role of Self-Regulatory Focus," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 97(2), pages 241-255, December.
    12. Mauricio S. Featherman & Nick Hajli, 2016. "Self-Service Technologies and e-Services Risks in Social Commerce Era," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 251-269, December.
    13. Ouidade Sabri & Van Doan Hai & Faten Malek & Hager Bachouche, 2019. "When Is Transparent Packaging Beneficial?," Working Papers 2019-006, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.
    14. Wei Qi & Xiumei Guo & Xia Wu & Dora Marinova & Jin Fan, 2018. "Do the sunk cost effect and cognitive dissonance increase risk perception? An empirical study in the context of city smog," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(5), pages 2269-2289, September.
    15. Pratibha A. Dabholkar & Xiaojing Sheng, 2011. "Consumer participation in using online recommendation agents: effects on satisfaction, trust, and purchase intentions," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(9), pages 1433-1449, September.
    16. Nahid Malazizi & Habib Alipour & Hossein Olya, 2018. "Risk Perceptions of Airbnb Hosts: Evidence from a Mediterranean Island," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-23, April.
    17. Nithima Sumpradit & Richard P. Bagozzi & Frank J. Ascione, 2015. "“Give Me Happiness” or “Take Away My Pain”: Explaining consumer responses to prescription drug advertising," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 1024926-102, December.
    18. Sang Soo Kim, 2020. "Purchase Intention in the Online Open Market: Do Concerns for E-Commerce Really Matter?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, January.
    19. Aghekyan-Simonian, Mariné & Forsythe, Sandra & Suk Kwon, Wi & Chattaraman, Veena, 2012. "The role of product brand image and online store image on perceived risks and online purchase intentions for apparel," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 325-331.
    20. Sunaga, Tsutomu & Meng, Yan & Zhuang, Xuhong, 2020. "Interactions between instrumental timbre and consumers’ regulatory focus," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-12.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joinma:v:22:y:2008:i:4:p:58-72. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-interactive-marketing/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.