社会交互对用户知识付费意愿的作用机理研究

doi:10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2019.04.012

图书情报工作 ›› 2019, Vol. 63 ›› Issue (4): 94-100.DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2019.04.012

社会交互对用户知识付费意愿的作用机理研究

周涛¹, 檀齐¹, Takirova Bayan¹, 邓胜利²

1. 杭州电子科技大学管理学院杭州 310018;
2. 武汉大学信息管理学院武汉 430072

收稿日期:2018-06-07 修回日期:2018-09-09 出版日期:2019-02-20 发布日期:2019-02-20
作者简介:周涛(ORCID:0000-0002-4695-0381),教授,博士,E-mail:zhoutao@hdu.edu.cn;檀齐(ORCID:0000-0002-3825-8846),硕士研究生;Takirova Bayan (ORCID:0000-0002-1241-8530),硕士研究生(留学生);邓胜利(ORCID:0000-0001-7489-4439),教授,博士,博士生导师。
基金资助:
本文系国家自然科学基金项目"社会交互对用户参与社会化商务行为的作用机理研究"（项目编号：71771069）研究成果之一。

The Effect of Social Interaction on Users' Intention of Knowledge Payment

Zhou Tao¹, Tan Qi¹, Takirova Bayan¹, Deng Shengli²

1. School of Management, Hangzhou Dianzi University, Hangzhou 310018;
2. School of Information Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072

Received:2018-06-07 Revised:2018-09-09 Online:2019-02-20 Published:2019-02-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： [目的/意义]知识付费产品数量众多，品质良莠不齐，使得用户付费意愿降低，这可能导致知识付费模式的失败。本文旨在研究社会交互对用户知识付费意愿的作用机理，考察信任和认同（包括认知维、情感维和评价维）对用户付费意愿的作用。[方法/过程]研究共收集有效问卷377份，采用SPSS和LISREL进行数据分析。[结果/结论]研究结果显示，信息交互和情感交互显著影响信任，信息交互和信任影响认同，信任和认同决定付费意愿。因此，知识付费平台应重视引导用户之间进行社会交互，培养用户对平台的信任和认同，以促进用户付费意愿。

关键词: 知识付费, 社会交互, 信任, 认同

Abstract: [Purpose/significance] Knowledge payment products have many types and inconsistent quality, which may undermine users' payment intention. This may lead to the failure of knowledge payment models. This research examined the effect of social interaction on knowledge payment user intention, and identified the effect of trust and identification on users' payment intention. [Method/process] A total of 377 valid questionnaires were obtained and data analysis was conducted using SPSS and LISREL. [Result/conclusion] The results show that informational interaction and emotional interaction significantly affect trust. Informational interaction and trust have significant impacts on identification. Trust and identification determine payment intention. Thus, the platforms should attach importance to social interaction between users, and foster users' trust and identification in order to motivate their payment intention.

Key words: knowledge payment, social interaction, trust, identification

中图分类号:

G250

周涛, 檀齐, Takirova Bayan, 邓胜利. 社会交互对用户知识付费意愿的作用机理研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2019, 63(4): 94-100.

Zhou Tao, Tan Qi, Takirova Bayan, Deng Shengli. The Effect of Social Interaction on Users' Intention of Knowledge Payment[J]. LIS, 2019, 63(4): 94-100.

参考文献

[1] 艾瑞咨询. 2018年中国在线知识付费市场研究报告[R/OL].[2018-06-01]. https://www.iresearch.com.cn/Detail/report?id=3191&isfree=0.
[2] 张帅, 王文韬, 李晶. 用户在线知识付费行为影响因素研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2017,61(10):94-100.
[3] WU T, DENG Z, ZHANG D, et al. Seeking and using intention of health information from doctors in social media:the effect of doctor-consumer interaction[J]. International journal of medical informatics, 2018,115(7):106-113.
[4] WANG Y, YU C. Social interaction-based consumer decision-making model in social commerce:the role of word of mouth and observational learning[J]. International journal of information management, 2017,37(3):179-189.
[5] XIANG L, ZHENG X, LEE M K O, et al. Exploring consumers' impulse buying behavior on social commerce platform:the role of parasocial interaction[J]. International journal of information management, 2016,36(3):333-347.
[6] 邹伯涵, 罗浩. 知识付费——以开放、共享、付费为核心的知识传播模式[J]. 新媒体研究, 2017,3(11):110-112.
[7] 王传珍. 知识付费奇点与未来[J]. 互联网经济, 2017(S1):68-73.
[8] 张杨燚, 彭子健, 刘齐凯. 问答平台用户付费围观持续参与意愿的影响因素[J]. 图书馆论坛, 2018,38(6):1-8.
[9] 黄彬. 网络社区知识服务的购买意愿研究[D]. 上海:华东师范大学, 2017.
[10] 李钢, 卢艳强, 滕树元. 用户在线知识付费行为研究——基于计划行为理论[J]. 图书馆学研究, 2018(10):49-60.
[11] 赵保国, 姚瑶. 用户持续使用知识付费APP意愿的影响因素研究[J]. 图书馆学研究, 2017(17):96-101.
[12] 方爱华, 陆朦朦, 刘坤锋. 虚拟社区用户知识付费意愿实证研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2018,62(6):105-115.
[13] 赵杨, 袁析妮, 李露琪, 等. 基于社会资本理论的问答平台用户知识付费行为影响因素研究[J]. 图书情报知识, 2018(4):15-23.
[14] WIENER N. Subtle and obvious keys for the minnesota multiphasic personality inventory[J]. Journal of consulting psychology, 1948,12(3):164-170.
[15] HORTON D, WOHL R R. Mass communication and para-social interaction[J]. Psychiatry-interpersonal and biological processes, 1956,19(3):215-229.
[16] CHANG C C. Examining users' intention to continue using social network games:a flow experience perspective[J]. Telematics and informatics, 2013,30(4):311-321.
[17] NG C S. Intention to purchase on social commerce websites across cultures:a cross-regional study[J]. Information & management, 2013,50(8):609-620.
[18] SHEN Y C, HUANG C Y, CHU C H, et al. Virtual community loyalty:an interpersonal-interaction perspective[J]. International journal of electronic commerce, 2010,15(1):49-73.
[19] JANG H Y, KO I S, KOH J. The influence of on-line brand community characteristics on community commitment and brand loyalty[J]. International journal of electronic commerce,2008,12(3):57-80.
[20] KUO Y F, FENG L H. Relationships among community interaction characteristics, perceived benefits, community commitment, and oppositional brand loyalty in online brand communities[J]. International journal of information management, 2013,33(6):948-962.
[21] PHANG C W, ZHANG C H, SUTANTO J. The influence of user interaction and participation in social media on the consumption intention of niche products[J]. Information & management, 2013,50(8):661-672.
[22] CHEN J, ZHANG C, XU Y J. The role of mutual trust in building members' loyalty to a C2C platform provider[J]. International journal of electronic commerce, 2009,14(1):147-171.
[23] STEWART K J. Trust transfer on the world wide web[J]. Organization science, 2003,14(1):5-17.
[24] ZAJONC R B. The attitudinal effects of mere exposure[J]. Journal of personality & social psychology monograph supplements, 1968,9(2):1-27.
[25] PREECE J. Empathic communities:balancing emotional and factual communication[J]. Interacting with computers, 1999,12(1):63-77.
[26] 楼天阳. 虚拟社区与成员心理联结机制的实证研究:基于认同与纽带视角[J]. 南开管理评论, 2011,14(2):14-25.
[27] MCKNIGHT D H, CHOUDHURY V, KACMAR C. Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce:an integrative typology[J]. Information systems research, 2002,13(3):334-359.
[28] KEH H T, XIE Y. Corporate reputation and customer behavioral intentions:the roles of trust, identification and commitment[J]. Industrial marketing management, 2009,38(7):732-742.
[29] HULTMAN M, SKARMEAS D, OGHAZI P, et al. Achieving tourist loyalty through destination personality, satisfaction, and identification[J]. Journal of business research, 2015, 68(11):2227-2231.
[30] YAHIA I B, Al-NEAMA N, KERBACHE L. Investigating the drivers for social commerce in social media platforms:importance of trust, social support and the platform perceived usage[J]. Journal of retailing and consumer services, 2018,41(3):11-19.
[31] OGHAZI P, KARLSSON S, HELLSTRÖM D, et al. Online purchase return policy leniency and purchase decision:mediating role of consumer trust[J]. Journal of retailing and consumer services, 2018,41(3):190-200.
[32] FU S H, YAN Q, FENG G C. Who will attract you? Similarity effect among users on online purchase intention of movie tickets in the social shopping context[J]. International journal of information management, 2018,40(6):88-102.
[33] XU J J, CENFETELLI R T, AQUINO K. Do different kinds of trust matter:an examination of the three trusting beliefs on satisfaction and purchase behavior in the buyer-seller context[J]. Journal of strategic information systems, 2016,25(1):15-31.
[34] TAJFEL H. Differentiation between social groups[M]. London:Academic Press, 1978.
[35] ELLEMERS N, KORTEKAAS P, OUWERKERK J W. Self-categorisation, commitment to the group and group self-esteem as related but distinct aspects of social identity[J]. European journal of social psychology, 1999,29(2/3):371-389.
[36] ZHOU T. Understanding online community user participation:a social influence perspective[J]. Internet research, 2011,21(1):67-81.
[37] TENG C. Impact of avatar identification on online gamer loyalty:perspectives of social identity and social capital theories[J]. International journal of information management, 2017,37(6):601-610.
[38] CHEN R, SHARMA S K, RAO H R. Members' site use continuance on Facebook:examining the role of relational capital[J]. Decision support systems, 2016,90(10):86-98.
[39] POPP B, WILSON B. Investigating the role of identification for social networking Facebook brand pages[J]. Computers in human behavior, 2018,84(7):141-152.
[40] SHAPIRO S L, REAMS L, SO K K F. Is it worth the price? The role of perceived financial risk, identification, and perceived value in purchasing pay-per-view broadcasts of combat sports[J]. Sport management review, 2018,21(4):1-12.
[41] LIANG T P, HO Y T, LI Y W, et al. What drives social commerce:the role of social support and relationship quality[J]. International journal of electronic commerce, 2011,16(2):69-90.
[42] WAN J L, LU Y B, WANG B, et al. How attachment influences users'willingness to donate to content creators in social media:a socio-technical systems perspective[J]. Information & management, 2017,54(7):837-850.
[43] LU B Z, FAN W G, ZHOU M. Social presence, trust, and social commerce purchase intention:an empirical research[J]. Computers in human behavior, 2016,56(3):225-237.
[44] 静婷. 36氪首发|用内容+社交切入知识付费"小红圈"获800万人民币Pre-A轮融资[EB/OL].[2018-09-08]. https://36kr.com/p/5148621.html.

社会交互对用户知识付费意愿的作用机理研究

The Effect of Social Interaction on Users' Intention of Knowledge Payment

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	刘坤锋, 李艳红, 张心源. 信任视角下数据智能与专家知识的对比实证研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(6): 110-117.
[2]	郭宇, 郭勇, 刘文晴, 张传洋. 国内互联网知识付费研究现状与发展趋势[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(24): 100-108.
[3]	万晓榆, 万婧. 在线知识问答社区用户信息信任判断实证研究——来自眼动追踪实验的证据[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(23): 79-89.
[4]	李伟娟, 林升栋. 社交媒体隐私侵犯后的信任修复机制探究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(17): 33-44.
[5]	陈一, 李斯. 社交媒体用户同意自己的数据被用于研究吗？——基于用户接受意向的伦理反思[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(15): 120-129.
[6]	卢恒, 张向先, 肖彬, 刘苡声. 在线用户知识付费意愿的影响因素及其调节变量:元分析研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(13): 44-54.
[7]	邓胜利, 蒋雨婷. 用户交互特征对知识付费行为预测的贡献度研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2020, 64(8): 93-102.
[8]	齐云飞, 赵宇翔, 刘周颖, 孙晓宁, 朱庆华. 免费与付费在线问答社区用户参与行为的比较研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2020, 64(2): 105-115.
[9]	卢恒, 张向先, 张莉曼, 郭顺利. 理性与偏差视角下在线问答社区用户知识付费意愿影响因素构型研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2020, 64(19): 89-98.
[10]	刘周颖, 赵宇翔, 朱庆华. 付费知识问答平台中提问者转移行为的影响因素分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2020, 64(12): 75-86.
[11]	郭宇, 郭勇, 赵宇翔. 内容还是情境:在线用户知识付费行为机理研究——一项基于CCC-B框架的组态分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2020, 64(1): 120-130.
[12]	陆泉, 李易时, 陈静, 李保萍. 在线医疗社区患者择医行为影响因素研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2019, 63(8): 87-95.
[13]	索传军, 王雪艳. 引用行为的演变趋势及其对引文评价的影响分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2019, 63(24): 97-106.
[14]	张麒麟, 叶继元. 论当代图书馆的地位挑战与价值重申——以“知识付费”的兴起与局限为参照[J]. 图书情报工作, 2019, 63(14): 5-12.
[15]	韩梅. 用户感知视角下影响知识付费平台信息资源质量的因素分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2019, 63(13): 43-51.