SOSYAL TİCARETE YÖNELİK TUTUMUN SATIN ALMA NİYETİNE ETKİSİ

Öz

Sosyal ticaret, e-ticaretin bir alt kümesi olarak, tüketicilerin çevrimiçi alışveriş sürecinde sosyal medya platformları üzerinden etkileşimde bulunmalarını sağlamaktadır. Bu çalışma, bu bağlamda satın alma niyetini etkileyen faktörleri incelemekte ve özellikle ürün belirsizliği, kullanıcı tarafından oluşturulan içerik (UGC) desteği ile sosyal ticarete yönelik tutumları odak noktası olarak ele almaktadır. Veriler, WhatsApp üzerinden dağıtılan çevrimiçi bir anket aracılığıyla toplanmış ve 457 geçerli yanıt elde edilmiş, analizler ise AMOS 24 programı kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bulgular, hem ürün belirsizliği hem de UGC desteğinin satın alma niyeti üzerinde olumlu etkisi olduğunu göstermektedir. Geleneksel beklentilerin aksine, ürün belirsizliği satın alma niyetini azaltmak yerine artırıcı bir etki göstermiş ve tüketicilerin sosyal ipuçlarına dayanarak etkileşimde bulunmalarını teşvik etmiştir. Ayrıca, sosyal ticarete yönelik tutumlar, UGC desteği ile satın alma niyeti arasındaki ilişkiyi dolaylı olarak aracılık etmekte ve doğrudan satın alma niyeti üzerinde olumlu bir etki göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• E-ticaret
• Sosyal Ticaret
• Tutum
• Satın Alma Niyeti

THE IMPACT OF ATTITUDE TOWARDS SOCIAL COMMERCE ON PURCHASE INTENTION

Öz

Social commerce, a subset of e-commerce, allows consumers to interact via social media platforms during online shopping. This study investigates the factors influencing purchase intentions in this context, focusing on product uncertainty, user-generated content (UGC) support, and attitudes toward social commerce. Data were collected through an online survey distributed via WhatsApp, yielding 457 valid responses, and analyzed using AMOS 24. The findings reveal that both product uncertainty and UGC support positively affect purchase intention. Contrary to conventional expectations, product uncertainty was found to enhance, rather than reduce, purchase intentions by stimulating engagement and reliance on social cues. Moreover, attitudes toward social commerce exert both a mediating effect between UGC and purchase intention and a direct positive effect on purchase intention.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• E-Commerce
• Social Commerce
• Attitude
• Purchase Intention

Kaynakça

1. Abdelsalam, S., Salim, N., Alias, R. A., & Husain, O. (2020). Understanding online impulse buying behavior in social commerce: A systematic literature review. IEEE Access, 8, 89041–89058. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2993671.
2. Akbıyık, A., & Coşkun, E. (2013). Eğitsel sosyal yazılımların kabul ve kullanımına yönelik bir model. Online Academic Journal of Information Technology, 4(13), 39–62. https://doi.org/10.5824/1309-1581.2013.4.003.x.
3. Argyriou, E., & Melewar, T. C. (2011). Consumer attitudes revisited: A review of attitude theory in marketing research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(4), 431–451. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00299.x.
4. Bagram, M. M. M., & Khan, S. (2012). Attaining customer loyalty! The role of consumer attitude and consumer behavior. International Review of Management and Business Research, 1(1), 1–8.
5. Bahtar, A. Z., & Muda, M. (2016). The impact of user-generated content (UGC) on product reviews towards online purchasing – A conceptual framework. Procedia Economics and Finance, 37, 337–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30134-4.
6. Bai, Y., Yao, Z., & Dou, Y. F. (2015). Effect of social commerce factors on user purchase behavior: An empirical investigation from Renren.com. International Journal of Information Management, 35(5), 538–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.04.011.
7. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.
8. Bock, G. W., Lee, J., Kuan, H. H., & Kim, J. H. (2012). The progression of online trust in the multi-channel retailer context and the role of product uncertainty. Decision Support Systems, 53(1), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2011.12.007.

9. Brown, M., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models, pp. 136-162. Beverly Hills, CA:Sage.
10. Bui, S. N., & Kettinger, W. J. (2013). Adverse selection in online new-goods market: An analysis of product uncertainty and seller uncertainty. Im Amcis 2013 Proceedings 8. 1–7.
11. Burgess, S., Sellitto, C., Cox, C., & Buultjens, J. (2009). User-generated content (UGC) in tourism: Benefits and concerns of online consumers. In ECIS. 417–429.
12. Cabı, E. (2016). Dijital teknolojiye yönelik tutum ölçeği. Kastamonu Education Journal, 24(3), 1229–1244.
13. Chen, X., Li, Y., Davison, R. M., & Liu, Y. (2021). The impact of imitation on Chinese social commerce buyers’ purchase behavior: The moderating role of uncertainty. International Journal of Information Management, 56, 102262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102262
14. Chen, X., Wei, S., Ding, R., & Li, Y. (2024). Managing users' uncertainty in social commerce: The moderating role of cultural tightness. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 124(2), 666-697. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-11-2022-0796
15. Durukal, E., Doğaner, M., & Armağan, E. (2019). E-ticaret sitelerinde algılanan sosyal medya pazarlaması faaliyetlerinin e-sadakate etkisi. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 11(1), 129–143.
16. Gatautis, R., & Medziausiene, A. (2014). Factors affecting social commerce acceptance in Lithuania. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110, 1235-1242.
17. Gedik, Y. (2020). Pazarlamada yeni bir çerçeve: Sosyal medya ve web 2.0. Uluslararası Yönetim Akademisi Dergisi, 3(1), 252–269. https://doi.org/10.33712/mana.706162
18. Gibreel, O., AlOtaibi, D. A., & Altmann, J. (2018). Social commerce development in emerging markets. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 27, 152-162
19. Guo, W., Haghtalab, N., Kandasamy, K., & Vitercik, E. (2023). Leveraging reviews: Learning to price with buyer and seller uncertainty. ACM SIGecom Exchanges, 22(1), 74-82. https://doi.org/10.1145/3699824.3699830
20. Gürbüz, S. (2021). Amos ile yapısal eşitlik modellemesi: temel ilkeler ve uygulamalı analizler (2. Basım). Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.
21. Huang, J. H., Lee, B. C., & Hsun Ho, S. (2004). Consumer attitude toward gray market goods. International Marketing Review, 21(6), 598–614. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651330410568033.
22. Kanani, R., & Glavee-Geo, R. (2021). Breaking the uncertainty barrier in social commerce: The relevance of seller and customer-based signals. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 48, 101059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2021.101059.
23. Kara, T. (2012). Sosyal medya ağlarının sosyal ticaret ağına dönüşümü: Facebook örneği. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 11(4). 1419–1438.
24. Khan, A., Ashfaq, J., Bilal, M., Khan, M. H., & Shad, F. (2021). Destination image formation through User Generated Content (UGC): An updated literature review. Indian Journal of Economics and Business, 20(2), 1223–1238.
25. Koç, E. (2019). Tüketici davranışı ve pazarlama stratejileri (8. Basım). Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi.
26. Leong, L. Y., Hew, T. S., Ooi, K. B., Hajli, N., & Tan, G. W. H. (2024). Revisiting the social commerce paradigm: The social commerce (SC) framework and a research agenda. Internet Research, 34(4), 1346–1393. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-08-2022-0657.
27. Li, S., Liu, F., Zhang, Y., Zhu, B., Zhu, H., & Yu, Z. (2022). Text mining of user-generated content (UGC) for business applications in e-commerce: A systematic review. Mathematics, 10(19), 3554. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10193554.
28. Liao, S. H., Widowati, R., & Hsieh, Y. C. (2021). Investigating online social media users’ behaviors for social commerce recommendations. Technology in Society, 66, 101655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101655.
29. Meilatinova, N. (2021). Social commerce: Factors affecting customer repurchase and word-of-mouth intentions. International Journal of Information Management, 57, 102300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102300.
30. Nguyen, H. G., Nguyen, D. T., & Le, B. N. (2025). Consumer buying intention in livestreaming commerce: An integrated model of socio-technical system theory and uses & gratifications theory. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 19(2), 198-225.
31. Onurlubaş, E. (2023). Hazır giyim sektöründe influencerların marka imajı ve satın alma niyeti üzerindeki etkisi: Z kuşağı örneği. Tekstil ve Mühendis, 30(130), 148–157. https://doi.org/10.7216/teksmuh.1320585.
32. Paradergi, (2023, August 01). Paradergi. https://www.paradergi.com.tr/sektorler/2023/09/11/e-ticaret-2023-yilinda-2-milyon-yeni-musteri-kazandi.
33. Paramita, A. S. (2023). Social commerce purchase intention factors in developing countries: A systematic literature review. Journal of Applied Engineering and Technological Science (JAETS), 4(2), 847–854. https://doi.org/10.37385/jaets.v4i2.1585.
34. Păuceanu, A. M., Văduva, S., & Nedelcuț, A. C. (2023). Social commerce in Europe: A literature review and implications for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 18(3), 1283–1300. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer18030065
35. Pavlou, P. A., & Dimoka, A. (2008). Understanding and mitigating product uncertainty in online auction marketplaces. In 2008 Industry Studies Conference Paper. 1–51.
36. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
37. Santos, M. L. B. D. (2022). The “so-called” UGC: An updated definition of user-generated content in the age of social media. Online Information Review, 46(1), 95–113. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-06-2020-0258.
38. Sezginer, A. (2023). Reklamlarda ulusal kimlik unsurlarının kullanımının tüketici tutumları ve satın alma niyeti üzerindeki etkisinde tüketici etnosentrizminin rolü [PhD Thesis]. Kocaeli University.
39. Statista, (2023, August 1). Social commerce, Statistics & facts. https://www.statista.com/topics/8757/social-commerce/
40. Sun, C., Fang, Y., Kong, M., Chen, X., & Liu, Y. (2022). Influence of augmented reality product display on consumers’ product attitudes: A product uncertainty reduction perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 64, 102828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102828.
41. TÜİK, (2024, August 01). Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-(BT)-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2023-49407.
42. Tuncer, İ. (2021). The effects of social support, trust and social presence on social commerce intention: A meta-analysis. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 45, 440–453. https://doi.org/10.52642/susbed.929870.
43. Um, N. H. (2019). Antecedents and consequences of consumers' attitude toward social commerce sites. Journal of Promotion Management, 25(4), 500–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2018.1448324.
44. Vrontis, D., Makrides, A., Christofi, M., & Thrassou, A. (2021). Social media influencer marketing: A systematic review, integrative framework and future research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 45(4), 617–644. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12647.
45. Wang, H., & Xie, J. (2020). A review of social commerce research. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 10(4), 793–803. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2020.104053.
46. Wang, L., Liu, Y., Liu, X., & Liu, M. (2025). The influence of informative and normative features of social e-commerce UGC on consumers’ purchase intention: The moderating effect of persuasive resistance. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2025.1925094
47. Xu, H., Gong, X., & Yan, R. (2024). Online impulsive buying in social commerce: Mixed-methods research. Information & Management, 61(3), 103943.
48. Yaşlıoğlu, M. M. (2017). Sosyal bilimlerde faktör analizi ve geçerlilik: keşfedici ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizlerinin kullanılması. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 46, 74–85.
49. Yoşumaz, İ. (2024). A qualitative research on the awareness of trend technologies used in digital transformation of businesses across G20 countries. Current Research in Social Sciences, 10(2), 230-269. https://doi.org/10.30613/curesosc.1393698.
50. Zhou, L., Zhang, P., & Zimmermann, H. D. (2013). Social commerce research: An integrated view. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 12(2), 61–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2013.02.003.
51. Zhuang, W., Zeng, Q., Zhang, Y., Lin, D., & Fan, W. (2024). What makes UGC more popular on social media platforms? Insights from information adoption theory. Behaviour & Information Technology, 44(8), 1521–1538. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2024.2361835