Satın Alma Niyetine Dijital Etkiler: Ampirik Bir Çalışma

Bu makalenin ilk hali 30 Ocak 2026 tarihinde yayımlandı. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/gumus/article/1713440

Düzeltme Notu

Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimleri Dergisi’nin 17. cilt, 1. sayısında yayımlanan “Kayan F. (2026). Satın alma niyetine dijital etkiler: ampirik bir çalışma. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 17(1), 125-141.” referanslı makalede dizgi süreci sırasında meydana gelen editöryal bir hata nedeniyle Araştırma ve Yayın Etiği Beyanı kısmında ve araştırmanın yöntem kısmında belirtilmesi gereken “Çalışmanın araştırma kısmı Akdeniz Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Bilimsel Araştırma ve Yayın Etiği Kurulu’nun 21.01.2025 tarih ve 02/34 sayılı kararı ile alınan izin doğrultusunda gerçekleştirilmiştir.” ibaresi sehven koyulmamıştır. İlgili makalenin düzeltilmiş bilgileri, bu düzeltme metni ile birlikte aşağıda sunulmaktadır.

Öz

Araştırmanın amacı, dijital pazarlama uygulamalarının bilgilendiricilik, güvenilirlik, rahatsız edicilik ve ikna edicilik boyutlarının tüketicilerin satın alma davranışı üzerindeki doğrudan etkilerini incelemek ve demografik değişkenlerin (cinsiyet, yaş) ile internet kullanım süresinin bu ilişkiler üzerindeki düzenleyici etkilerini analiz etmektir. Toplam 511 katılımcıdan anket ile veri elde edilmiştir. Yapılan uygulamalar sonucunda elde edilen veriler SmartPLS paket programı ile analiz edilmiştir. Bulgulara göre, dijital pazarlama uygulamalarının bilgilendiriciliği, güvenilirliği ve ikna ediciliği tüketicilerin satın alma davranışını olumlu yönde etkilerken, rahatsız edici içerikler bu davranışı olumsuz etkilemektedir. Cinsiyet yalnızca bilgilendiricilik boyutunda anlamlı bir düzenleyici rol oynamış, diğer boyutlarda etkili olmamıştır. Yaş değişkeninin ise güvenilirlik ve ikna edicilik boyutlarında satın alma davranışı üzerinde anlamlı bir düzenleyici etkisi bulunmuştur. İnternet kullanım süresi de bilgilendiricilik ve ikna edicilik boyutlarında tüketici davranışını anlamlı şekilde düzenlemiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dijitalleşme
• Dijital Pazarlama
• Tüketici Davranışı
• Satın Alma Kararı
• Pazarlama İletişimi.

Digital Influence on Purchase Intention: An Empirical Study

Bu makalenin ilk hali 30 Ocak 2026 tarihinde yayımlandı. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/gumus/article/1713440

Düzeltme Notu

In the article titled “Kayan F. (2026). Digital effects on purchase intention: an empirical study. Gümüşhane University Journal of Social Sciences, 17(1), 125-141.” published in volume 17, issue 1 of the Gümüşhane University Journal of Social Sciences, the statement “The research part of the study was carried out in accordance with the permission granted by the Akdeniz University Social and Human Sciences Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Board with decision number 02/34 dated 21.01.2025.” was inadvertently omitted from the Research and Publication Ethics Statement and the methodology section due to an editorial error during the typesetting process. The corrected information of the relevant article, along with this correction text, is presented below.

Öz

The objective of this study is to investigate the direct effects of the dimensions of informativeness, credibility, intrusiveness, and persuasiveness in digital marketing practices on consumer purchase behavior. Additionally, it aims to analyze the moderating effects of demographic variables such as gender and age, as well as internet usage time, on these relationships. Data were collected via a survey from a total of 511 participants, and the analysis was conducted using the SmartPLS software package. The findings indicate that informativeness, credibility, and persuasiveness in digital marketing practices positively influence consumer purchase behavior, whereas intrusive content has a negative impact. Gender was identified as a significant moderating factor solely in the relationship between informativeness and purchase behavior, with no significant effects observed in other dimensions. Age demonstrated a significant moderating effect on the relationships between credibility, persuasiveness, and purchase behavior. Furthermore, internet usage time significantly moderated consumer behavior concerning the dimensions of informativeness and persuasiveness.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Digitalization
• Digital Marketing
• Consumer Behavior
• Purchase Decision
• Marketing Communication.

Kaynakça

1. Alwreikat, A. A., & Rjoub, H. (2020). Impact of mobile advertising wearout on consumer irritation, perceived intrusiveness, engagement and loyalty: A partial least squares structural equation modelling analysis. South African Journal of Business Management, 51(1), 1-11.
2. Atalay, Ü. Y. ve Sarıışık, M. (2022). Hizmet sektöründe dijital pazarlama ve marka ilişkisi: otelcilik sektörü araştırması. Journal of New Tourism Trends, 3(2), 138-159.
3. Baek, T. H., & Morimoto, M. (2012). Stay away from me. Journal of Advertising, 41(1), 59-76. Ballı, A. (2025). Iphone “the greatest” reklam filminin kişilik kuramları, sosyal öğrenme ve psikanalitik kuram perspektifinden incelenmesi. Uluslararası Ekonomi İşletme ve Politika Dergisi, 9(1), 229-246.
4. Balun, İ. (2023). E-ticaret ve pazarlamada arama motoru optimizasyonunun ve hedefli reklamcılığın rolü. Elektronik Cumhuriyet İletişim Dergisi, 5(2), 98-111.
5. Bennhult, L., & Frogner, H. (2021). What keeps customers subscribing to streaming services?: A quantitative study of e-loyalty towards subscription video on demand services in Sweden. Unpublished bachelor thesis, Uppsala University, Sweden.
6. Bettman, J. R. (1974). Relationship of information-processing attitude structures to private brand purchasing behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(1), 79-83.
7. Bist, A. S., Agarwal, V., Aini, Q., & Khofifah, N. (2022). Managing digital transformation in marketing: fusion of traditional marketing and digital marketing. International Transactions on Artificial Intelligence, 1(1), 18-27.
8. Blank, G., & Dutton, W. H. (2012). Age and trust in the Internet: The centrality of experience and attitudes toward technology in Britain. Social Science Computer Review, 30(2), 135-151.

9. Blau, P. M. (1964). Justice in social exchange. Sociological Inquiry, 34(2), 193-206.
10. Brackett, L. K., & Carr, B. N. (2001). Cyberspace advertising vs. other media: Consumer vs. mature student attitudes. Journal of Advertising Research, 41(5), 23–32.
11. Brand, B. M., & Reith, R. (2022). Cultural differences in the perception of credible online reviews–The influence of presentation format. Decision Support Systems, 154(3), Makale Numarası 113710.
12. Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press.
13. Bui, H. T. (2022). Exploring and explaining older consumers’ behaviour in the boom of social media. International Journalof Consumer Studies, 46(2), 601-620.
14. Chang, C. (2017). A metacognitive model of the effects of susceptibility to persuasion self-beliefs on advertising effects. Journal of Advertising, 46(4), 487-502.
15. Cheng J. M. S., Blankson C., Wang E. S. T., & Chen L. S. L. (2009). Consumer attitudes and intercative digital advertising. International Journal of Advertising, 28(3), 501-525.
16. Chi, H. H. (2011). Interactive digital advertising vs. virtual brand community: exploratory study of user motivation and social media marketing responses in Taiwan. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 12(1), 44-61.
17. Cialdini, R. B. (1993). The psychology of persuasion. New York: HarperCollins e-books.
18. Çakır, N., & Nacar, R. (2024). Dijital pazarlama ve hizmet kalitesi için yapay zekâ kullanımı: havacılık sektöründe bir araştırma. The International New Issues in Social Sciences, 12(2), 159-186.
19. Çakmak, G. (2013). Tüketicilerin özel alışveriş (Private shopping) siteleri için yapılan televizyon reklamlarına yönelik satın alma davranışları. Yayımlanmamış yükseklisans tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
20. Devrim, N. (2023). Yeni Medya Okuryazarlığı Düzeyinin Sosyal Medyaya Güven Algısına Etkisi. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
21. Dittmar, H., & Howard, S. (2004). Professional hazards? The impact of models' body size on advertising effectiveness and women's body‐focused anxiety in professions that do and do not emphasize the cultural ideal of thinness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43(4), 477-497.
22. Djamasbi, S., Siegel, M., & Tullis, T. (2010). Generation Y, web design, and eye tracking. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(5), 307-323.
23. Ducoffe, R. H. (1995). How consumers assess the value of advertising. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 17(1), 1-18.
24. Ducoffe, R. H. (1996). Advertising value and advertising on the web. Journal of Advertising Research, 36(5), 21-35.
25. Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. Handbook of theories of social psychology, 2(9), 458-476.
26. Erdoğan, Z. (2024). Dijital içerik pazarlaması. İçinde M. F. Tuna (Eds.), Dijital pazarlama yönetimi (ss. 159-184). Gaziantep: Özgür Yayınları.
27. Ferreira, M. A. G., Carvalho, M. A., Oliveira, L., & Barbosa, A. (2024). How digital influencer content and characteristics influence Generation Y persuasiveness and purchase intention. Tourism & Management Studies, 20(2), 25-38.
28. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
29. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. Indianapolis, US: Pearson Education.
30. Hashem, T. (2023). Can aggressive marketing cause an ethical dilemma. International Journal of Membrane Science and Technology, 10(4), 1216-1229.
31. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135. Ho, S. Y., & Bodoff, D. (2014). The effects of web personalization on user attitude and behavior. MIS Quarterly, 38(2), 497-520. Hollebeek, L.D. & Macky, K. (2019). Digital content marketing's role in fostering consumer engagement, trust, and value: Framework, fundamental propositions, and implications. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 45(1), 27-41.
32. Kırhan, A. (2023). Dijital pazarlamanın ve tüketici davranışlarının krize bağlı dönüşümü: kuşaklar üzerinde araştırma. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Maltepe Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
33. Kim, M. (2019). Digital product presentation, information processing, need for cognition and behavioral intent in digital commerce. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 50(9), 362-370.
34. Köysüren, T. (2019). Sosyal medya kullanımının elektronik ağızdan ağıza iletişim ve satın alma niyeti üzerindeki etkilerinin tespit edilmesi. Yayınlanmamış yükseklisans tezi, Kırşehir Ahi Evran Üniversitesi, Kırşehir.
35. Kurt, M. (2021). Dijital pazarlama çerçevesinde güven algısı: Instagram örneği. Yayımlanmamış yükseklisans tezi, Selçuk Üniversitesi, Konya.
36. Leach, C. W., Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2007). Group virtue: the importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluations of in-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(2), 234-249.
37. Levy, S., & Gvili, Y. (2015). How credible is e-word of mouth across digital-marketing channels? The roles of social capital, information richness, and interactivity. Journal of Advertising Research, 55(1), 95-109.
38. Lian, J. W., & Yen, D. C. (2014). Online shopping drivers and barriers for older adults: Age and gender differences. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 133-143.
39. Limbu, Y. B., Wolf, M., & Lunsford, D. (2012). Perceived ethics of online retailers and consumer behavioral intentions: The mediating roles of trust and attitude. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 6(2), 133-154.
40. Löckenhoff, C. E., & Carstensen, L. L. (2004). Socioemotional selectivity theory, aging, and health: The increasingly delicate balance between regulating emotions and making tough choices. Journal of Personality, 72(6), 1395-1424.
41. Lütjens, H., Eisenbeiss, M., Fiedler, M., & Bijmolt, T. (2022). Determinants of consumers’ attitudes towards digital advertising – A meta-analytic comparison across time and touchpoints. Journal of Business Research, 153, 445-466.
42. Mackiewicz, J., & Yeats, D. (2014). Product review users' perceptions of review quality: The role of credibility, informativeness, and readability. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 57(4), 309-324.
43. Mathew, V., & Soliman, M. (2021). Does digital content marketing affect tourism consumer behavior? An extension of technology acceptance model. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 20(1), 61-75.
44. Meyers-Levy, J., & Maheswaran, D. (1991). Exploring differences in males' and females' processing strategies. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(1), 63-70.
45. Meyers-Levy, J., Bublitz, M. G., & Peracchio, L.A. (2011). The sounds of the marketplace: The role of audition in marketing. In A. Krishna (Eds.), Sensory marketing (pp. 137-156). Oxfordshire: Routledge.
46. Morimoto, M., & Chang, S. (2006). Consumers’ attitudes toward unsolicited commercial e-mail and postal direct mail marketing methods: intrusiveness, perceived loss of control, and irritation. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 7(1),1-11.
47. Nikbin, D., Aramo, T., Iranmanesh, M., & Ghobakhloo, M. (2022). Impact of brands’ Facebook page characteristics andfollowers' comments on trust building and purchase intention: Alternative attractiveness as moderator. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 21(3), 494-508.
48. Nunan, D., & Di Domenico, M. (2019). Older consumers, digital marketing, and public policy: A review and research agenda. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 38(4), 469-483.
49. Paa-Kerner, G. (2018). Pan-European digital marketing tactics: a one-size-fits-all approach?. Journal of Euromarketing, 27(3), 7-25.
50. Pappas, N. (2016). Marketing strategies, perceived risks, and consumer trust in online buying behaviour. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 29(3), 92-103.
51. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123-205.
52. Pham, M. T., & Avnet, T. (2004). Ideals and oughts and the reliance on affect versus substance in persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(4), 503-518.
53. Qiu, X., Oliveira, F. M., Sahami Shirazi, D., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2017). Limited individual attention and online virality of low-quality information. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(7), Makale Numarası 132.
54. Riedel, A. S., Weeks, C. S., & Beatson, A. T. (2024). Dealing with intrusive ads: a study of which functionalities help consumers feel agency. International Journal of Advertising, 43(2), 361-387.
55. Riedl, R., Hubert, M., & Kenning, P. (2010). Are there neural gender differences in online trust? An fMRI study on the perceived trustworthiness of eBay offers. MIS Quarterly, 34(2), 397-428.
56. Sarıtaş, E. (2019). Tüketici kuşak ve değerlerinin dijital pazarlama iletişimi üzerine etkileri. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Pamukkale Üniversitesi, Denizli.
57. Sharma, A., Dwivedi, R., Mariani, M. M., & Islam, T. (2022). Investigating the effect of advertising irritation on digital advertising effectiveness: A moderated mediation model. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 180, 121731.
58. Şen, A. (2019). Marka topluluğu motivasyonlarının algılanan risk ve satın alma tutumuna etkisi: Africa twin Türkiye Facebook grubu üzerinde bir uygulama. Yayımlanmamış yükseklisans tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
59. Taylor, D. G., Lewin, J. E., & Strutton, D. (2011). Friends, fans, and followers: Do ads work on social networks? How gender and age shape receptivity. Journal of Advertising Research, 51(1), 258-275.
60. Teng, S., Khong, K. W., & Goh, W. W. (2015). Persuasive communication: A study of major attitude-behavior theories in a social media context. Journal of Internet Commerce, 14(1), 42-64.
61. Thompson, D. V., & Malaviya, P. (2013). Consumer-generated ads: Does awareness of advertising co-creation help or hurt persuasion?. Journal of Marketing, 77(3), 33-47.
62. Turhan, M. (2023). Diiji̇tal pazarlamada markaların influencer seçimlerinin Z kuşağı satın alma niyeti üzerindeki etkisi. Yayımlannmamış yükseklisans tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
63. van Deursen, A. J., & van Dijk, J. A. (2014). The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media & Society, 16(3), 507-526.
64. Verma, S. (2017). Niche level segmentation of green consumers: A key for psychographic or demographic predicament. South Asian Journal of Business Studies, 6(3), 274-290.
65. Vitak, J., Chadha, K., Steiner, L., & Ashktorab, Z. (2017, February). Identifying women’s experiences with and strategies for mitigating negative effects of online harassment. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (pp. 1231-1245). 25 Feb – 1 March 2017, Portland Oregon USA.
66. Wijaya, K. S. (2023). The influence of brand image and trust on purchase decisions in tiktok shop. Journal Research of Social Science, Economics & Management, 3(1), 1-13.
67. Wolin, L. D., & Korgaonkar, P. (2003). Web advertising: Gender differences in beliefs, attitudes and behavior. Internet Research, 13(5), 375-385. Xian, C., Vali, H., Tian, R., Xu, J. D., & Yıldırım, M. B. (2024). The differential effect of three types of conflicting online reviews on perceived informativeness. Journal of Electronic Business & Digital Economics, 3(1), 20-35.
68. Xu, Y., Chen, Z., Peng, M. Y. P., & Anser, M.K. (2020). Enhancing consumer online purchase intention through gamification in China: Perspective of cognitive evaluation theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(10), Makale Numarası 581200.
69. Zhang, L., Anjum, M. A., & Wang, Y. (2024). The impact of trust-building mechanisms on purchase intention towards metaverse shopping: the moderating role of age. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 40(12), 3185-3203.