Çevrim içi İkinci El Pazar Yerlerinde Tüketicilerin Bulaşıcılık Algısı ve Satın Alma Niyeti

Year 2026, Volume: 40 Issue: 2 , 301 - 316 , 31.03.2026

Oguzhan Aydın

https://doi.org/10.16951/trendbusecon.1862004

https://izlik.org/JA59RC87KW

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın temel amacı, ikinci el dijital pazar yerlerinde algılanan bulaşıcılığın (perceived contamination) satın alma niyeti (purchase intention) üzerindeki etkisini, ekonomik motivasyon (economic motivation) ve ikinci el ürün satın almaya yönelik tutum (attitude toward buying second-hand) aracılığıyla incelemektir. Araştırma, Birleşik Krallık’ta 551 kişinin katılımıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu çalışmanın diğer bir amacı da insan unsurunun, kontaminasyon derecesine göre ikinci el ürünlerde satın alma niyeti üzerindeki etkisinin değişip değişmediğini ortaya koymaktır. Bu doğrultuda, temas derecesi düşük ve yüksek olan ürün senaryolarında görsel içeriklerin etkileri, senaryo temelli deneysel bir yöntemle test edilmiştir. Oluşturulan araştırma modelinde algılanan bulaşıcılığın düzenleyicilik ve tutumun aracılık etkisi, PROCESS Macro’dan faydalanılarak Bootstrap yöntemine dayalı regresyon analiziyle (Model 7) ele alınmıştır. Sonuçlar, ekonomik motivasyonun tutum üzerinde güçlü bir etkisi olduğunu ancak bu etkinin yüksek kontaminasyon koşullarında daha da belirginleştiğini göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte bu çalışmada, yüksek temas riski taşıyan ürünlerde insan figürü kullanımının satın alma niyetini azaltmadığı aksine “Pozitif Bulaşma” etkisiyle bir güven unsuru oluşturduğu görülmektedir. Bu araştırma, dijital pazarlama iletişiminde özellikle yüksek riskli ikinci el ürünlerin sunumunda, güven artırıcı görsel stratejilerin kullanılmasını önermektedir.

Keywords

Çevrim içi ikinci el alışveriş , Bulaşma Teorisi , Pozitif Bulaşma , Ekonomik Motivasyon , Satın alma niyeti , Sürdürülebilirlik

Ethical Statement

Çevrimiçi İkinci El Pazar Yerlerinde Tüketicilerin Bulaşıcılık Algısı ve Satın Alma Niyeti (Consumers’ Perceived Contagion and Purchase Intention in Online Second-Hand Marketplace) adlı çalışmanın etik kurallara uygunluğu, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Beşerî Bilimler Araştırma ve Yayın Etik Kurulu tarafından 30.10.2025 tarihli ve 68282350/2025/15 sayısı kararıyla onaylanmıştır.

Consumers' Perceived Contagion and Purchase Intention in Online Second-Hand Marketplaces

https://izlik.org/JA59RC87KW

Abstract

The primary aim of this research is to examine the effect of perceived contamination on purchase intention in digital second-hand marketplaces, through the mediating role of attitude toward buying second-hand products and economic motivation. The research was conducted with 551 participants in the United Kingdom. Another objective of this study is to determine whether the effect of the human element on purchase intention for second-hand products varies depending on the degree of contamination. Accordingly, the effects of visual content were tested using a scenario-based experimental method featuring product scenarios with low and high degrees of contact. In the developed research model, the moderating effect of perceived contamination and the mediating effect of attitude were analysed via regression analysis based on the Bootstrap method using the PROCESS Macro (Model 7). The results indicate that economic motivation has a strong effect on attitude, but this effect becomes even more pronounced under high contamination conditions. Furthermore, the study reveals that the use of human figures in products carrying high contact risk does not reduce purchase intention; on the contrary, it creates an element of trust through the “Positive Contagion” effect. This research recommends the use of trust-enhancing visual strategies in digital marketing communications, particularly in the presentation of high-risk second-hand products.

Keywords

Online Second-Hand Shopping , Contagion Theory , Positive Contagion , Economic Motivation , Purchase Intention , Sustainability

Ethical Statement

The ethical compliance of the study titled "Consumers’ Perceived Contagion and Purchase Intention in Online Second-Hand Marketplace" was approved by the Pamukkale University Social and Human Sciences Research and Publication Ethics Committee with decision number 68282350/2025/15 dated October 30, 2025.

References

• Ackerman, D. S., & Hu, J. (2017). Assuring me that it is as “good as new” just makes me think about how someone else used it. Examining consumer reaction toward marketer‐provided information about secondhand goods. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 16(3), 233-241. [CrossRef]
• Argo, J. J., Dahl, D. W., & Morales, A. C. (2006). Consumer contamination: How consumers react to products touched by others. Journal of Marketing, 70(2), 81-94. [CrossRef]
• Argo, J. J., Dahl, D. W., & Morales, A. C. (2008). Positive consumer contagion: Responses to attractive others in a retail context. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(6), 690-701. [CrossRef]
• Aydın, O. & Haşıloğlu S. B. (2021). Tüketici utangaçlık ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi. Tüketici ve Tüketim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 13(1), 1-32 [CrossRef]
• Aydın, O., Haşıloğlu, S. B., & Serinkan, C. (2020) Utangaç tüketici ölçeği ve internetten satın alma: Kırgız üniversite öğrencileri örneği. İnternet Uygulamaları ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 11(2), 131-140. [CrossRef]
• Aydın, O., & Gürbüzer, Ş. G. (2025). The moderating effect of e-marketplaces familiarity on the relationship between trust and risk reduction based on product types. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (70), 361-376. [CrossRef]
• Aydın, O., & Haşıloğlu, S. B. (2017). Shy customers vs non shy customers: Who does love more online shopping?. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 13(12), 269-274. [CrossRef]
• Baek, E., & Oh, G. E. G. (2021). Diverse values of fashion rental service and contamination concern of consumers. Journal of Business Research, 123, 165-175. [CrossRef]
• Bardhi, F., & Eckhardt, G. M. (2012). Access-based consumption: The case of car sharing. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 881-898. [CrossRef]
• Barnes, S. J., & Mattsson, J. (2016). Understanding current and future issues in collaborative consumption: A four-stage Delphi study. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 104, 200-211. [CrossRef]
• Baxter, W., Aurisicchio, M., Mugge, R., & Childs, P. (2017). Positive and negative contamination in user interactions. In DS 87-8 Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 17) Vol 8: Human Behaviour in Design, Vancouver, Canada, 21-25.08. 2017 (pp. 509-518). [CrossRef]
• Benoit, S., Baker, T. L., Bolton, R. N., Gruber, T., & Kandampully, J. (2017). A triadic framework for collaborative consumption (CC): Motives, activities and resources & capabilities of actors. Journal of Business Research, 79, 219-227. [CrossRef]
• Bezançon, M., Guiot, D., & Le Nagard, E. (2019). The role of negative physical contagion in the online purchase of second-hand products. Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition), 34(4), 2-28. [CrossRef]
• Calvo-Porral, C., Orosa-González, J., & Viejo-Fernández, N. (2024). Barriers to online second-hand purchase behavior. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 42(2), 213-233. [CrossRef]
• Costello, J. P., & Reczek, R. W. (2020). Providers versus platforms: marketing communications in the sharing economy. Journal of Marketing, 84(6), 22-38. [CrossRef]
• Ek-Styvén, M., & Mariani, M. M. (2020). Understanding the intention to buy secondhand clothing on sharing economy platforms: The influence of sustainability, distance from the consumption system, and economic motivations. Psychology & Marketing, 37(5), 724-739. [CrossRef]
• Fernando, A. G., Sivakumaran, B., & Suganthi, L. (2018). Comparison of perceived acquisition value sought by online second-hand and new goods shoppers. European Journal of Marketing, 52(7/8), 1412-1438. [CrossRef]
• Ferraro, C., Sands, S., & Brace-Govan, J. (2016). The role of fashionability in second-hand shopping motivations. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 32, 262-268. [CrossRef]
• Gérard, J., & Helme‐Guizon, A. (2018). Within a hair's breadth of buying the product: The impact of tangible and intangible bodily cues of contamination: The role of disgust and mental imagery. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32(5), 537-549. [CrossRef]
• Guiot, D., & Roux, D. (2010). A second-hand shoppers’ motivation scale: Antecedents, consequences, and implications for retailers. Journal of Retailing, 86(4), 355-371. [CrossRef]
• Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., & Ukkonen, A. (2016). The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(9), 2047-2059. [CrossRef]
• Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications, New York. [CrossRef]
• Hazée, S., & Van Vaerenbergh, Y. (2021). Customers' contamination concerns: an integrative framework and future prospects for service management. Journal of Service Management, 32(2), 161-175. [CrossRef]
• Hazée, S., Van Vaerenbergh, Y., Delcourt, C., & Warlop, L. (2019). Sharing goods? Yuck, no! An investigation of consumers’ contamination concerns about access-based services. Journal of Service Research, 22(3), 256-271. [CrossRef]
• Hazen, B. T., Mollenkopf, D. A., & Wang, Y. (2016). Remanufacturing for the circular economy: An examination of consumer switching behavior. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(4), 451-464. [CrossRef]
• Kapitan, S., & Bhargave, R. (2013). Navigating residue sensitivity in the used goods marketplace. Psychology & Marketing, 30(4), 305-317. [CrossRef]
• Kim, N. L., & Jin, B. E. (2021). Addressing the contamination issue in collaborative consumption of fashion: does ownership type of shared goods matter?. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 25(2), 242-256. [CrossRef]
• Kim, N. L., Jin, B. E., & Kim, T. H. (2023). Negative and positive contamination in secondhand fashion consumption: does culture matter?. International Marketing Review, 40(6), 1509-1530. [CrossRef]
• Lamberton, C. P., & Rose, R. L. (2012). When is ours better than mine? A framework for understanding and altering participation in commercial sharing systems. Journal of Marketing, 76(4), 109-125. [CrossRef]
• Meng, M. D., & Leary, R. B. (2021). It might be ethical, but I won't buy it: Perceived contamination of, and disgust towards, clothing made from recycled plastic bottles. Psychology & Marketing, 38(2), 298-312. [CrossRef]
• Möhlmann, M. (2015). Collaborative consumption: determinants of satisfaction and the likelihood of using a sharing economy option again. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 14(3), 193-207. [CrossRef]
• Morales, A. C., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2007). Product contagion: Changing consumer evaluations through physical contact with “disgusting” products. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(2), 272-283. [CrossRef]
• Parguel, B., Lunardo, R., & Benoit-Moreau, F. (2017). Sustainability of the sharing economy in question: When second-hand peer-to-peer platforms stimulate indulgent consumption. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 125, 48-57. [CrossRef]
• Plouffe, C. R. (2008). Examining “peer‐to‐peer” (P2P) systems as consumer‐to‐consumer (C2C) exchange. European Journal of Marketing, 42(11/12),1179-1202. [CrossRef]
• Silva, S. C., Santos, A., Duarte, P., & Vlačić, B. (2021). The role of social embarrassment, sustainability, familiarity and perception of hygiene in second-hand clothing purchase experience. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 49(6), 717-734. [CrossRef]
• Wallner, T. S., Snel, S., Magnier, L., & Mugge, R. (2023). Contaminated by its prior use: strategies to design and market refurbished personal care products. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 3(2), 1077-1098. [CrossRef]
• Wei, X., & Wang, C. (2025). Contamination concerns and face consciousness in fashion-sharing services. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 29(2), 269-285. [CrossRef]
• White, K., Lin, L., Dahl, D. W., & Ritchie, R. J. (2016). When do consumers avoid imperfections? Superficial packaging damage as a contamination cue. Journal of Marketing Research, 53(1), 110-123. [CrossRef]