JOURNAL OF TEXTILE RESEARCH ›› 2015, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (08): 144-148.

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Factors influencing sale assessment ratio of garment e-shopping consumers

  

  • Received:2014-09-16 Revised:2015-04-05 Online:2015-08-15 Published:2015-08-07

Abstract:

online evaluation, as the new word of mouth, is highly regarded for its significant influence on e-shopping consumer's intention and enterprise credit, improving online evaluation ratio of e-shopping consumers has become an important issue for e-commerce. Three independent variables of SKU depth, price, selling levels as well as two adjustment variables of product gender and product grade were analysized as the influencing factors of sale assessment ratio. Sales data were drawn from the sale system of a large-scale clothing enterprise, with the corresponding online appraisal data of garment consumers included. Results show: sale assessment ratio of e-shopping consumers is not high, with the average of 55.6%; the three independent variables have significant positive impacts on sale assessment ratio; the two mediator variables also influence the sale assessment ratio: The sale assessment ratio of female's clothing is less easily influenced by the SKU depth than male's, while it is more easily influenced by selling levels than that of male's; Premium products’ sale assessment ratio is more easily influenced by the SKU depth than popular products’, while it is not significantly influenced by selling levels.

Key words: stock keeping unit depth, sale evaluation ratio, online rating, adjustment effect

No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text
321
HTML PDF
Just accepted Online first Issue Just accepted Online first Issue
0 0 0 0 0 321

  From Others local
  Times 193 128
  Rate 60% 40%

Abstract
359
Just accepted Online first Issue
0 0 359
  From Others local
  Times 294 65
  Rate 82% 18%

Cited

Web of Science  Crossref   ScienceDirect  Search for Citations in Google Scholar >>
 
This page requires you have already subscribed to WoS.
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] . [J]. JOURNAL OF TEXTILE RESEARCH, 1982, 3(09): 60 -62 .
[2] . [J]. JOURNAL OF TEXTILE RESEARCH, 1987, 8(01): 53 -56 .
[3] . [J]. JOURNAL OF TEXTILE RESEARCH, 2004, 25(03): 19 -20 .
[4] . [J]. JOURNAL OF TEXTILE RESEARCH, 2000, 21(04): 60 -62 .
[5] . [J]. JOURNAL OF TEXTILE RESEARCH, 2003, 24(06): 79 -81 .
[6] . [J]. JOURNAL OF TEXTILE RESEARCH, 1986, 7(04): 56 .
[7] . [J]. JOURNAL OF TEXTILE RESEARCH, 1996, 17(04): 54 -56 .
[8] . [J]. JOURNAL OF TEXTILE RESEARCH, 1990, 11(03): 40 -42 .
[9] . [J]. JOURNAL OF TEXTILE RESEARCH, 1987, 8(01): 15 -16 .
[10] . [J]. JOURNAL OF TEXTILE RESEARCH, 1998, 19(05): 31 -32 .