Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Year 2021, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 86 - 100, 30.06.2021

Edin Guclu Sozer

https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1400

Abstract

References

  • Azuma, R., Baillot, Y., Behringer, R., Feiner, S., Julier, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2001). Recent advances in augmented reality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, November-December, 34-47.
  • Bauer, H. H., Falk, T., & Hammerschmidt, M. (2006). eTransQual: A transaction process-based approach for capturing service quality in online shopping. Journal of Business Research, 59(7), 866–875.
  • Bauer, R. A. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking. In R. Hancock (Ed.), Dynamic marketing for a changing world. Proceedings of 43rd Conference, American Marketing Association, 389-398.
  • Beck, M., & Crié, D. (2016). I virtually try it… I want it! Virtual fitting room: a tool to increase on-line and off-line exploratory behavior, patronage, and purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 40(January 2018), 279-286.
  • Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
  • Campbell, M.C., & Goodstein, R.C. (2001). The moderating effect of perceived risk on consumers' evaluations of product incongruity: preference for the norm. Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (December), 439-449.
  • Carmigniani, J., Furht, B., Anisetti, M.,Ceravolo, P., Damiani, E., Ivkovic, M., 2011. Augmented reality technologies, systems, and applications. Multimedia Tools Applications, 51, 341–377.
  • Childers, T. L., Carr, C. L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77(4), 511–535.
  • Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2008). Delight by design: the role of hedonic versus utilitarian benefits. Journal of Marketing, 72(3), 48–63.
  • Dacko, S. G. (2016). Enabling smart retail settings via mobile augmented reality shopping apps. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 124(November 2017), 243-256.
  • Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results (PhD thesis) Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management.
  • Domina, T., Lee, S.E., & Mac Gillivray, M. (2012). Understanding factors affecting consumer intention to shop in a virtual world. Journal of Retail Consumer Services, 19(6), 613–620.
  • Donovan, R. J. & Rossiter, J. R. (1982). Store atmosphere: an environmental psychology approach. Journal of Retailing, 58(1), 34-57.
  • Fiore, A. M., Kim, J., & Lee, H.-H. (2005). Effect of image interactivity technology on consumer responses toward the online retailer. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(3), 38–53.
  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I., 1975. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison Wesley, Reading, MA.
  • FitzGerald, E., Ferguson, R., Adams, A., Gaved, M., Mor, Y., & Thomas, R. (2013). Augmented reality and mobile learning: The state of the art. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 5(4), 43–58.
  • Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
  • Gaudiosi, J. (2015). How augmented reality and virtual reality will generate $150 billion in revenue by 2020 [WWW Document]. URL 〈http://fortune.com/2015/ 04/25/augmented-reality-virtual-reality/〉.
  • Hilken, T., Ruyter, K., Chylinski, M., Mahr, D., & Keeling, D.I. (2017). Augmenting the eye of the beholder: exploring the strategic potential of augmented reality to enhance online service experiences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45, 884-905.
  • Hong, I., & Cha, H. S. (2013). The mediating role of consumer trust in an online merchant in predicting purchase intention. International Journal of Information Management, 33, 927–939.
  • Huang, T.-L. & Liao, S.-L. (2017). Creating e-shopping multisensory flow experience through augmented-reality interactive technology. Internet Research, 27(2), 449-475.
  • Huang, T.-L. & Liao, S. (2015). A model of acceptance of augmented-reality interactive technology: the moderating role of cognitive innovativeness. Electronic Commercial Research, 15(2), 269–295.
  • Huang, E. (2012). Online experiences and virtual goods purchase intention. Internet Research, 22(3), 252-274.
  • Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791–815.
  • Javornik, A. (2016a). Augmented reality: Research agenda for studying the impact of its media characteristics on consumer behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 30, 252-261.
  • Javornik, A. (2016b). It is an illusion, but it looks real! Consumer affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses to augmented reality applications. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(9-10), 987-1011.
  • Javornik, A., Rogers, Y., Moutinho, A.M., & Freeman, R., (2016). Revealing the shopper experience of using a ‘magic mirror' augmented reality make-up application. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, 871–882.
  • Jin, S.-A.A. (2009). The roles of modality richness and involvement in shopping behavior in 3D virtual stores. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23(3), 234-246.
  • Kim, H.C., & Hyun, M.Y. (2016). Predicting the use of smartphone-based augmented reality (AR): does telepresence really help? Computers in Human Behavior, 59(June 2016), 28–38.
  • Kim, A.J. & Ko, E. (2012). Do social media marketing activities enhance customer equity? An empirical study of luxury fashion brand. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1480-1486.
  • Kim, J. & Forsythe, S. (2008). Adoption of virtual try-on technology for online apparel shopping. Journal of International Marketing, 22(2), 45–59.
  • Klein, L. R. (2003). Creating virtual product experiences: The role of telepresence. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 17(1), 41–55.
  • Koller, M. (1988). Risk as a determinant of trust. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 9(4), 265–276.
  • Kozinets, R.V., de Valck, K., Wojnicki, A.C., Wilner, S. J. (2010). Networked narratives: understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities. Journal of Marketing, 74, 71–89.
  • Lee, H.-H., Fiore, A.M. & Kim, J. (2006). The role of the technology acceptance model in explaining effects of image interactivity technology on consumer responses. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 34(8), 621-644.
  • Lombard, M., & Snyder-Duch, J. (2001). Interactive advertising and presence: A framework. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1(2), 56–65.
  • Markets and Markets. (2015). Augmented reality market worth 56.8 billion USD by 2020 [WWW Document]. URL 〈http://www.marketsandmarkets.com/ PressReleases/augmented-reality.asp〉.
  • Mehrabian, A. & Russell, J.A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Murray, K. B. (1991). A test of services marketing theory: consumer information acquisition activities. Journal of Marketing, 55(1), 11‐25.
  • Olsson, T., Lagerstam, E., Kärkkäinen, T., & Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K. (2013). Expected user experience of mobile augmented reality services: A user study in the context of shopping centres. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17(2), 287–304.
  • Pantano, E. & Servidio, R. (2012). Modeling innovative points of sales through virtual and immersive technologies. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19(3), 279-286.
  • Parker, J. R., Lehmann, D. R., & Xie, Y. (2016). Decision comfort. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(1), 113–133.
  • Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 69–103.
  • Poncin, I., & Mimoun, M. S. B. (2014). The impact of “e-atmospherics” on physical stores. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(5), 851–859.
  • Poushneh, A. & Vasquez-Parraga, A.Z. (2017). Discernible impact of augmented reality on retail customer’s experience, satisfaction, and willingness to buy. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 229-234.
  • Rauschnabel, P.A., Felix, R. & Hinsch, C. (2019). Augmented reality marketing: How mobile AR-apps can improve brands through inspiration. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 49(2019), 43-53.
  • Rauschnabel, P.A. (2018). Virtually enhancing the real world with holograms: an exploration of expected gratifications of using augmented reality smart glasses. Psychology and Marketing, 35(8), 557–572.
  • Riva, G., Baños, R.M., Botella, C., Mantovani, F., & Gaggioli, A. (2016). Transforming experience: The potential of augmented reality and virtual reality for enhancing personal and clinical change. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 7(164), 1-14.
  • Rese, A., Baier, D., Geyer-Schulz, A., & Schreiber, S. (2017). How augmented reality apps are accepted by consumers: A comparative analysis using scales and opinions. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 124 (2017), 306–319.
  • Spreer, P. & Kallweit, K. (2014). Augmented reality in retail: assessing the acceptance and potential for multimedia product presentation at the PoS. SOP Transactions on Marketing Research, 1(1), 20–35.
  • Ström, R., Vendel, M., & Bredican, J. (2014). Mobile marketing: a literature review on its value for consumers and retailers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21, 1001–1012.
  • Van Noort, G., Voorveld, H.A.M., & van Reijmersdal, E. A. (2012). Interactivity in brand web sites: cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses explained by consumers’ online flow experience. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4), 223–234.
  • Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.
  • Watson, A., Bethan, A., & Salavati, L. (2020). The impact of experiential augmented reality applications on fashion purchase intention. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 48(5), 433-451.
  • Wu, W., Lee, C., Fu, C. & Wang, H. (2013). How can online store layout design and atmosphere influence consumer shopping intention on a website? International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 42(1), 4-24.
  • Yadav, M. S., & Pavlou, P. (2014). Marketing in computer-mediated environments: research synthesis and new directions. Journal of Marketing, 78, 20–40

THE EFFECT OF MOBILE AR APPS ON PURCHASE INTENTIONS OF RETAIL CONSUMERS: A STUDY ON THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED RISK

Year 2021, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 86 - 100, 30.06.2021

Edin Guclu Sozer

https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1400

Abstract

Purpose - The objective of this study is to identify the factors which contribute to the effectiveness of Augmented Reality (AR) apps on generating favorable consumer responses and to investigate the mediating role of perceived risk on this effect in the retailing context.
Methodology - A field study is conducted with 144 participants who plan to buy a sports shoe product. Subjects are introduced an AR app to test the sports shoes in digital format in their physical home environment and then they are asked to fill-out the questionnaire measuring the effect of using AR in their shopping experience and purchase intentions.
Findings- The results of the study confirmed the positive and significant influence of AR app features including perceived augmentation, utilitarian, and hedonic benefits on decision comfort level of customers. In turn, the decision comfort is found to be positively influencing the purchase intention. The perceived risk related to the product is found to have a mediating effect on the impact of decision comfort on purchase intention.
Conclusion- The study reports a positive impact of AR app experience on retail purchases. In the light of the findings, some academic and managerial implications are provided.

Keywords

Augmented reality perceived augmentation AR benefits purchase intention perceived risk

References

  • Azuma, R., Baillot, Y., Behringer, R., Feiner, S., Julier, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2001). Recent advances in augmented reality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, November-December, 34-47.
  • Bauer, H. H., Falk, T., & Hammerschmidt, M. (2006). eTransQual: A transaction process-based approach for capturing service quality in online shopping. Journal of Business Research, 59(7), 866–875.
  • Bauer, R. A. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking. In R. Hancock (Ed.), Dynamic marketing for a changing world. Proceedings of 43rd Conference, American Marketing Association, 389-398.
  • Beck, M., & Crié, D. (2016). I virtually try it… I want it! Virtual fitting room: a tool to increase on-line and off-line exploratory behavior, patronage, and purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 40(January 2018), 279-286.
  • Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
  • Campbell, M.C., & Goodstein, R.C. (2001). The moderating effect of perceived risk on consumers' evaluations of product incongruity: preference for the norm. Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (December), 439-449.
  • Carmigniani, J., Furht, B., Anisetti, M.,Ceravolo, P., Damiani, E., Ivkovic, M., 2011. Augmented reality technologies, systems, and applications. Multimedia Tools Applications, 51, 341–377.
  • Childers, T. L., Carr, C. L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77(4), 511–535.
  • Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2008). Delight by design: the role of hedonic versus utilitarian benefits. Journal of Marketing, 72(3), 48–63.
  • Dacko, S. G. (2016). Enabling smart retail settings via mobile augmented reality shopping apps. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 124(November 2017), 243-256.
  • Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results (PhD thesis) Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management.
  • Domina, T., Lee, S.E., & Mac Gillivray, M. (2012). Understanding factors affecting consumer intention to shop in a virtual world. Journal of Retail Consumer Services, 19(6), 613–620.
  • Donovan, R. J. & Rossiter, J. R. (1982). Store atmosphere: an environmental psychology approach. Journal of Retailing, 58(1), 34-57.
  • Fiore, A. M., Kim, J., & Lee, H.-H. (2005). Effect of image interactivity technology on consumer responses toward the online retailer. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(3), 38–53.
  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I., 1975. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison Wesley, Reading, MA.
  • FitzGerald, E., Ferguson, R., Adams, A., Gaved, M., Mor, Y., & Thomas, R. (2013). Augmented reality and mobile learning: The state of the art. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 5(4), 43–58.
  • Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
  • Gaudiosi, J. (2015). How augmented reality and virtual reality will generate $150 billion in revenue by 2020 [WWW Document]. URL 〈http://fortune.com/2015/ 04/25/augmented-reality-virtual-reality/〉.
  • Hilken, T., Ruyter, K., Chylinski, M., Mahr, D., & Keeling, D.I. (2017). Augmenting the eye of the beholder: exploring the strategic potential of augmented reality to enhance online service experiences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45, 884-905.
  • Hong, I., & Cha, H. S. (2013). The mediating role of consumer trust in an online merchant in predicting purchase intention. International Journal of Information Management, 33, 927–939.
  • Huang, T.-L. & Liao, S.-L. (2017). Creating e-shopping multisensory flow experience through augmented-reality interactive technology. Internet Research, 27(2), 449-475.
  • Huang, T.-L. & Liao, S. (2015). A model of acceptance of augmented-reality interactive technology: the moderating role of cognitive innovativeness. Electronic Commercial Research, 15(2), 269–295.
  • Huang, E. (2012). Online experiences and virtual goods purchase intention. Internet Research, 22(3), 252-274.
  • Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791–815.
  • Javornik, A. (2016a). Augmented reality: Research agenda for studying the impact of its media characteristics on consumer behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 30, 252-261.
  • Javornik, A. (2016b). It is an illusion, but it looks real! Consumer affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses to augmented reality applications. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(9-10), 987-1011.
  • Javornik, A., Rogers, Y., Moutinho, A.M., & Freeman, R., (2016). Revealing the shopper experience of using a ‘magic mirror' augmented reality make-up application. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, 871–882.
  • Jin, S.-A.A. (2009). The roles of modality richness and involvement in shopping behavior in 3D virtual stores. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23(3), 234-246.
  • Kim, H.C., & Hyun, M.Y. (2016). Predicting the use of smartphone-based augmented reality (AR): does telepresence really help? Computers in Human Behavior, 59(June 2016), 28–38.
  • Kim, A.J. & Ko, E. (2012). Do social media marketing activities enhance customer equity? An empirical study of luxury fashion brand. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1480-1486.
  • Kim, J. & Forsythe, S. (2008). Adoption of virtual try-on technology for online apparel shopping. Journal of International Marketing, 22(2), 45–59.
  • Klein, L. R. (2003). Creating virtual product experiences: The role of telepresence. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 17(1), 41–55.
  • Koller, M. (1988). Risk as a determinant of trust. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 9(4), 265–276.
  • Kozinets, R.V., de Valck, K., Wojnicki, A.C., Wilner, S. J. (2010). Networked narratives: understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities. Journal of Marketing, 74, 71–89.
  • Lee, H.-H., Fiore, A.M. & Kim, J. (2006). The role of the technology acceptance model in explaining effects of image interactivity technology on consumer responses. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 34(8), 621-644.
  • Lombard, M., & Snyder-Duch, J. (2001). Interactive advertising and presence: A framework. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1(2), 56–65.
  • Markets and Markets. (2015). Augmented reality market worth 56.8 billion USD by 2020 [WWW Document]. URL 〈http://www.marketsandmarkets.com/ PressReleases/augmented-reality.asp〉.
  • Mehrabian, A. & Russell, J.A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Murray, K. B. (1991). A test of services marketing theory: consumer information acquisition activities. Journal of Marketing, 55(1), 11‐25.
  • Olsson, T., Lagerstam, E., Kärkkäinen, T., & Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K. (2013). Expected user experience of mobile augmented reality services: A user study in the context of shopping centres. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17(2), 287–304.
  • Pantano, E. & Servidio, R. (2012). Modeling innovative points of sales through virtual and immersive technologies. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19(3), 279-286.
  • Parker, J. R., Lehmann, D. R., & Xie, Y. (2016). Decision comfort. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(1), 113–133.
  • Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 69–103.
  • Poncin, I., & Mimoun, M. S. B. (2014). The impact of “e-atmospherics” on physical stores. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(5), 851–859.
  • Poushneh, A. & Vasquez-Parraga, A.Z. (2017). Discernible impact of augmented reality on retail customer’s experience, satisfaction, and willingness to buy. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 229-234.
  • Rauschnabel, P.A., Felix, R. & Hinsch, C. (2019). Augmented reality marketing: How mobile AR-apps can improve brands through inspiration. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 49(2019), 43-53.
  • Rauschnabel, P.A. (2018). Virtually enhancing the real world with holograms: an exploration of expected gratifications of using augmented reality smart glasses. Psychology and Marketing, 35(8), 557–572.
  • Riva, G., Baños, R.M., Botella, C., Mantovani, F., & Gaggioli, A. (2016). Transforming experience: The potential of augmented reality and virtual reality for enhancing personal and clinical change. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 7(164), 1-14.
  • Rese, A., Baier, D., Geyer-Schulz, A., & Schreiber, S. (2017). How augmented reality apps are accepted by consumers: A comparative analysis using scales and opinions. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 124 (2017), 306–319.
  • Spreer, P. & Kallweit, K. (2014). Augmented reality in retail: assessing the acceptance and potential for multimedia product presentation at the PoS. SOP Transactions on Marketing Research, 1(1), 20–35.
  • Ström, R., Vendel, M., & Bredican, J. (2014). Mobile marketing: a literature review on its value for consumers and retailers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21, 1001–1012.
  • Van Noort, G., Voorveld, H.A.M., & van Reijmersdal, E. A. (2012). Interactivity in brand web sites: cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses explained by consumers’ online flow experience. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4), 223–234.
  • Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.
  • Watson, A., Bethan, A., & Salavati, L. (2020). The impact of experiential augmented reality applications on fashion purchase intention. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 48(5), 433-451.
  • Wu, W., Lee, C., Fu, C. & Wang, H. (2013). How can online store layout design and atmosphere influence consumer shopping intention on a website? International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 42(1), 4-24.
  • Yadav, M. S., & Pavlou, P. (2014). Marketing in computer-mediated environments: research synthesis and new directions. Journal of Marketing, 78, 20–40
There are 56 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Behaviour-Personality Assessment in Psychology
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Edin Guclu Sozer This is me 0000-0003-4984-4629

Publication Date June 30, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021 Volume: 8 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Sozer, E. G. (2021). THE EFFECT OF MOBILE AR APPS ON PURCHASE INTENTIONS OF RETAIL CONSUMERS: A STUDY ON THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED RISK. Research Journal of Business and Management, 8(2), 86-100. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1400
AMA Sozer EG. THE EFFECT OF MOBILE AR APPS ON PURCHASE INTENTIONS OF RETAIL CONSUMERS: A STUDY ON THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED RISK. RJBM. June 2021;8(2):86-100. doi:10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1400
Chicago Sozer, Edin Guclu. “THE EFFECT OF MOBILE AR APPS ON PURCHASE INTENTIONS OF RETAIL CONSUMERS: A STUDY ON THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED RISK”. Research Journal of Business and Management 8, no. 2 (June 2021): 86-100. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1400.
EndNote Sozer EG (June 1, 2021) THE EFFECT OF MOBILE AR APPS ON PURCHASE INTENTIONS OF RETAIL CONSUMERS: A STUDY ON THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED RISK. Research Journal of Business and Management 8 2 86–100.
IEEE E. G. Sozer, “THE EFFECT OF MOBILE AR APPS ON PURCHASE INTENTIONS OF RETAIL CONSUMERS: A STUDY ON THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED RISK”, RJBM, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 86–100, 2021, doi: 10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1400.
ISNAD Sozer, Edin Guclu. “THE EFFECT OF MOBILE AR APPS ON PURCHASE INTENTIONS OF RETAIL CONSUMERS: A STUDY ON THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED RISK”. Research Journal of Business and Management 8/2 (June 2021), 86-100. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1400.
JAMA Sozer EG. THE EFFECT OF MOBILE AR APPS ON PURCHASE INTENTIONS OF RETAIL CONSUMERS: A STUDY ON THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED RISK. RJBM. 2021;8:86–100.
MLA Sozer, Edin Guclu. “THE EFFECT OF MOBILE AR APPS ON PURCHASE INTENTIONS OF RETAIL CONSUMERS: A STUDY ON THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED RISK”. Research Journal of Business and Management, vol. 8, no. 2, 2021, pp. 86-100, doi:10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1400.
Vancouver Sozer EG. THE EFFECT OF MOBILE AR APPS ON PURCHASE INTENTIONS OF RETAIL CONSUMERS: A STUDY ON THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED RISK. RJBM. 2021;8(2):86-100.

Research Journal of Business and Management (RJBM) is a scientific, academic, double blind peer-reviewed, quarterly and open-access online journal. The journal publishes four issues a year. The issuing months are March, June, September and December. The publication languages of the Journal are English and Turkish. RJBM aims to provide a research source for all practitioners, policy makers, professionals and researchers working in all related areas of business, management and organizations. The editor in chief of RJBM invites all manuscripts that cover theoretical and/or applied researches on topics related to the interest areas of the Journal. RJBM publishes academic research studies only. RJBM charges no submission or publication fee.

Ethics Policy - RJBM applies the standards of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). RJBM is committed to the academic community ensuring ethics and quality of manuscripts in publications. Plagiarism is strictly forbidden and the manuscripts found to be plagiarized will not be accepted or if published will be removed from the publication. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work. Plagiarism, duplicate, data fabrication and redundant publications are forbidden. The manuscripts are subject to plagiarism check by iThenticate or similar. All manuscript submissions must provide a similarity report (up to 15% excluding quotes, bibliography, abstract, method).

Open Access - All research articles published in PressAcademia Journals are fully open access; immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Open access is a property of individual works, not necessarily journals or publishers. Community standards, rather than copyright law, will continue to provide the mechanism for enforcement of proper attribution and responsible use of the published work, as they do now.