Article

Business and Customer-Based Chatbot Activities: The Role of

Customer Satisfaction in Online Purchase Intention and
Intention to Reuse Chatbots
Doğan Mert Akdemir 1, * and Zeki Atıl Bulut 2

1 Department of International Trade, Faculty of Business, Istanbul Ticaret University, Istanbul 34445, Türkiye
2 Department of Marketing and Advertising, Izmir Vocational School, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir 35380,
Türkiye; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: In the online shopping context, brands aim to achieve a high level of profit by providing
better customer satisfaction by using various artificial intelligence tools. They try creating a satis-
factory customer experience by creating a system that provides never-ending customer support by
using dialog-based chatbots, especially in the field of customer service. However, there is a lack of
research investigating the impact of business and customer-based chatbot activities together on online
purchase intention and the intention to reuse chatbots. This research considers the use of chatbots as
a marketing tool from both customer and business perspectives and aims to determine the factors
that affect the customers’ intention to purchase online and reuse chatbots. Accordingly, the impact
on customer satisfaction with chatbot usage, which is based on chatbots’ communication quality
and customers’ motivations to use chatbots, on online purchase intention and intention to reuse
chatbots was examined. Through an online questionnaire with two hundred and ten participants,
employing structural equation modeling, we revealed that customer satisfaction with chatbot usage
has a greater impact on the intention to reuse chatbots than on online purchase intentions. In addition,
chatbot communication quality has a greater impact on customer satisfaction with chatbot usage
than customers’ motivation to use chatbots. To solidify these findings, confirmatory factor analysis,
Citation: Akdemir, D.M.; Bulut, Z.A.
along with reliability and validity assessments, were implemented within the analytical framework
Business and Customer-Based
to provide robust support for the study’s hypotheses. These findings not only provide empirical
Chatbot Activities: The Role of
evidence and implications for companies in online shopping but also extend the understanding of AI
Customer Satisfaction in Online
tools in marketing, highlighting their subtle impact on consumer decision-making in the dynamic
Purchase Intention and Intention to
Reuse Chatbots. J. Theor. Appl.
digital marketplace.
Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19,
2961–2979. https://doi.org/10.3390/ Keywords: chatbot activities; customer satisfaction; online purchase intention; intention to reuse chatbots
jtaer19040142

Academic Editor: Hyunchul Ahn

Received: 21 August 2024 1. Introduction

Revised: 3 October 2024 Companies have become more consumer-centric and renewed their business mod-
Accepted: 24 October 2024 els to adapt products and services to the rapid inventions of internet technology and
Published: 28 October 2024 e-commerce [1,2]. It has become a crucial issue to respond to consumer demands as soon
as possible and in the most accurate way given the increase in internet usage and online
shopping [3]. In this respect, companies conduct various marketing activities and seek
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
innovative ways and tools to meet increasing and unique consumer expectations in the
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. online environment, such as social media channels, online marketplaces, and shopping
This article is an open access article websites [4,5]. Thanks to integrating new technologies into their marketing activities,
distributed under the terms and companies try performing more effective and interactive marketing activities to ensure cus-
conditions of the Creative Commons tomer satisfaction and secure the competitive advantage that stems from superior customer
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// satisfaction [6].
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ Especially in the context of e-commerce, due to the intense competition, it is crucial
4.0/). to attract customers and keep them satisfied. To achieve that in the pre-purchase phase

J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19, 2961–2979. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer19040142 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jtaer
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2962

and maintain it in the post-purchase process, it is necessary to establish fast, reliable, and
solution-oriented online communication. At this point, by leveraging artificial intelligence
(AI) capabilities, marketers strive to establish an emotional connection with customers
that goes beyond mere satisfaction [7]. They are able to deliver versatile and impactful
communication through online channels, tapping into the immense power and poten-
tial of AI. Chatbots, the fastest-growing global service channels [8], enable personalized
communication with useful services, recommendations, or convenient shopping [9] while
enabling computers to conduct business with humans from the human’s perspective [10].
According to Artasanchez and Joshi [11], a well-designed chatbot possesses four essential
characteristics: adaptability, personalization, availability, and relatability. Adaptability
refers to the chatbot’s ability to comprehend user input and respond appropriately to vary-
ing situations, including by providing polite responses when encountering unrecognized
or unexpected input. Personalization is achieved by the chatbot’s ability to gather and
retain user information, allowing it to recall previous interactions and make the user feel
valued during subsequent engagements. Availability ensures that the chatbot is accessible
whenever needed, offering prompt responses to user inquiries. Finally, relatability ensures
that users feel as though they are engaging in a familiar, coherent conversation. Without
these core features, a chatbot cannot function effectively or fulfill its intended purpose.
With the help of customer service assistants, decision support systems, smart logistics
applications, and big data analytics, companies can better analyze customer needs and
make operational and managerial decisions based on data [12]. At this point, benefits from
customer service assistants such as chatbots improve the effectiveness and sustainability of
the services that are provided to customers. In addition to delivering support, AI-driven
customer service that utilizes chatbots powered by deep learning and machine learning can
anticipate customer needs and offer individualized recommendations and guidance [13].
Chatbots are designed as text-based or voice-based channels using an artificial intelligence
solution that works uninterruptedly and can interact with the customer as a marketing tool.
Juniper Research [14] predicts that consumer retail spending via chatbots worldwide will
reach $72 billion—up from just $12 billion in 2023—by 2028, because chatbots are growing
in popularity among businesses and consumers alike, as consumers request 24 h assistance
in areas ranging from banking and finance to health and wellness. According to Gartner,
Inc. [15], by 2027, about 25% of organizations will rely on chatbots as their main customer
service channel. According to a survey of more than 2000 customer service professionals
with different roles, company sizes, and locations conducted by Intercom (2024), 44% of
them believe that chatbots are the most promising area of investment for support teams.
Furthermore, the rise in AI technology is creating new strategic support positions, such as
chatbot analysts who evaluate the performance of chatbots and customer conversation data
to identify new opportunities and insights, accounting for 42% of the focus. As reported by
Invesp [16], two-thirds of consumers worldwide used a chatbot for customer support in the
last year, and 40% of consumers did not consider whether they were communicating with
a real customer service representative or a chatbot as long as they got what they needed.
In a study by the Capgemini Research Institute [17] on conversational bots, 74%
of respondents revealed that they use chatbots to research and purchase products and
services, create shopping lists, and check order status. Another study found that users
expect chatbots to provide assistance around the clock, provide quick responses, and
connect them to a human representative when requested [18]. Aivo [19] found that the
chatbots applied in the e-commerce industry effectively solve 65% of customers’ questions
and requests while only transferring 21% to live support.
Although there are many studies in the literature examining chatbots as a marketing
tool, prior research has mostly approached the issue from either a business perspective,
such as chatbot effectiveness, chatbot marketing efforts, or anthropomorphism [20–23],
or from consumer perspectives, such as the factors affecting chatbot use or customer
satisfaction [24–27]. While there are studies focusing on research on chatbots, their impact
on consumer behavior, and findings on the consumers’ positive perception of the use of
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2963

chatbots [28–30], there is indeed a gap in the literature specifically addressing the combined
effects of consumer- and business-oriented chatbot activities on online purchase intention
and chatbot reuse intention.
The investigation of this phenomenon through various theoretical perspectives is
essential for understanding the emergence of human–chatbot relationships across different
contexts and cultures. Additionally, there is a pressing need for future research in the
domain of humanoid chatbots [31,32]. Based on our current knowledge, research that
combines both consumer- and business-oriented chatbot activities, particularly in relation
to consumers’ online purchase intentions and their intention to reuse chatbots, is lacking.
To fill this gap, we conducted a study that evaluates the relationships between chatbot
marketing efforts, motivation to use chatbots, chatbot communication quality, satisfaction
with chatbot usage, purchase intention, and continued usage intention of chatbots, which
will allow for a more comprehensive look at the subject. We extend knowledge by investi-
gating a broader perspective on factors affecting customers’ purchase and continued usage
intention toward chatbots in online shopping. This study seeks to address four research
questions. First, do chatbot marketing activities lead to improved chatbot communication
quality? Second, can chatbot communication quality be a predictor of customer satisfaction
with chatbot usage? Third, which motivations behind the use of chatbots impact customer
satisfaction with chatbot usage? Fourth, what is the impact of satisfaction with using
chatbots on both (1) online purchase intention and (2) continuous usage intention?
To address these questions, we developed a model that examines the relationships be-
tween chatbot marketing efforts, chatbot communication quality, chatbot usage motivations,
satisfaction with chatbot usage, reuse, and purchase intention. An online questionnaire
with 210 Turkish participants facilitated the empirical examination of these relationships
through structural equation modeling (SEM).
This study enriches the body of knowledge in digital marketing and consumer be-
havior by exploring the critical role of chatbot interactions in enhancing online shopping
experiences and offers valuable insights for e-commerce businesses aiming to leverage arti-
ficial intelligence for superior customer engagement. Moreover, this study offers practical
insights for practitioners and policymakers, enabling them to optimize chatbot function-
alities and thereby elevate online reuse and purchase intentions and cultivate consumer
satisfaction towards chatbot integration to achieve a competitive advantage in the digi-
tal marketplace.
The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 establishes a theoretical grounding by
critically reviewing relevant literature. Section 3 then delves into the adopted methodology.
Section 4 unfolds the study’s findings through analysis and results. Section 5 engages
in a critical discussion of these insights, drawing out their theoretical and practical im-
plications. Finally, the paper examines its limitations and offers valuable suggestions for
future research.

2. Theoretical Background and Hypotheses Development

2.1. Chatbot Marketing Efforts
Brands try to influence users’ decision-making processes through various marketing
efforts. Kim and Ko [33] evaluated the marketing efforts of luxury brands in the context
of social media marketing with the dimensions of entertainment, interaction, trendiness,
customization, and word of mouth (WOM). They found that these dimensions significantly
positively affect value equity, relationship equity, and brand equity. Considering these exact
dimensions as a holistic concept, Godey et al. [34] found that these dimensions positively
and directly affect consumer response and brand equity. On the other hand, Chung
et al. [35] used the dimensions of interaction, trendiness, customization, and problem-
solving to measure the effectiveness of marketing efforts in communicating with brands
online. Similarly, Cheng and Jiang [36] used interaction, information, accessibility, and
customization as dimensions of marketing efforts to test the impact of chatbot marketing
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2964

efforts on chatbot communication quality. Within the scope of chatbot marketing efforts, this
study examines the roles of interaction, trendiness, customization, and problem-solving.
A well-designed chatbot can reduce marketing costs and increase conversion rates,
creating an additional revenue channel for companies. In this context, chatbots can be
defined as an important marketing tool for brands. The initial focus area, interaction, is
defined as the effectiveness of communication between the chatbot and the customer. By
creating an entirely new communication channel to interact with customers, thanks to the
virtual customer support assistant, companies can more effectively improve their capacity
to provide real-time customer support with fewer employees [37]. Being a 24 h active
software, obtaining quick answers, solving simple questions, and having features such
as easy communication make chatbots a useful communication tool for customers [38].
The second construct, trendiness, examines the extent to which utilizing the chatbot is
perceived as being current and fashionable. Another important factor, problem-solving,
examines the chatbot’s effectiveness in efficiently addressing and resolving customer issues.
Although chatbots cannot apply humanoid features such as empathy, innuendo, and critical
thinking very well, and their communicative and social competence is still insufficient [39]
as they start to serve more effectively, it is expected that the chatbot will reach a solution
by understanding and empathizing with the customer’s problems. It is also underlined
that human intervention will be required only for extreme problems in the future. Last
but not least, customization assesses the chatbot’s ability to create tailored experiences for
individual customers. It is expected that chatbots will be able to access information from
various online communication channels and provide faster and more effective service by
using this information [11].

2.2. Chatbot Communication Quality

Communication quality is crucial for positive customer experiences and the main-
tenance of a unique market position for brands in online interactions [40]. Mohr and
Sohi [41] assess communication quality by considering factors like timeliness, accuracy,
completeness, credibility, and adequacy. In this respect, high-quality communication in
chatbot-customer interactions hinges on designing chatbots that deliver prompt, accurate,
and comprehensive responses, while ensuring the information is credible and relevant to
individual customer needs. Besides that, Edwards et al. [42] propose drivers like attraction,
communication competence, credibility, and intent to interact as crucial drivers for effec-
tive communication quality. In other words, leveraging chatbots that engage customers,
demonstrate competence, build trust, and proactively address needs can lead to marked
improvements in communication quality. Edwards et al. [42] conducted a study investi-
gating potential differences in communication quality between human and bot agents on
Twitter. Their findings suggest that, in terms of perceived source credibility, communication
competence, and interactional intentions, users did not differentiate between the two types
of agents.
Grounded in the existing literature on bot agent communication, this study explores
communication quality through the lens of established dimensions like accuracy, credibility,
and communication competence, as identified by Edwards et al. [42] and Chung et al. [35].
Accuracy signifies the chatbot’s ability to provide precise and reliable information, fos-
tering trust and consistency within the interaction. Furthermore, credibility represents
the perceived honesty and trustworthiness of the chatbot. Ultimately, communication
competence evaluates the chatbot’s efficiency and effectiveness in facilitating interactions
with customers. By prioritizing accuracy, credibility, and communication competence,
brands can cultivate trust in digital interactions through chatbots. This not only meets
users’ expectations and needs but also highlights the chatbot’s ability to facilitate smoother
and faster customer service experiences.
Drawing upon the established literature, we anticipate a positive impact on commu-
nication quality due to enhanced chatbot marketing efforts. Such marketing efforts can
improve communication quality by expediting inquiry resolution, improving information
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2965

accuracy, and fostering personalized interactions that resonate with individual needs and
preferences. Accordingly, the following hypothesis was developed:

H1: Chatbot marketing efforts significantly and positively impact chatbot communication quality.

2.3. Satisfaction with Chatbot Usage

Customer satisfaction stands as a cornerstone concept in contemporary marketing
theory and practice, emphasizing the reciprocal relationship between delivering superior
customer value and achieving sustainable profitability. It serves as a critical metric for
gauging the extent to which an organization fulfills the diverse needs of both its customers
and its firms [43]. Customer satisfaction occurs at the point where the performance of the
products and services offered by the brand meets customer expectations.
In a highly competitive e-commerce environment, online businesses must provide
effective customer service to ensure and increase customer satisfaction. Hassan et al. [44]
suggest that companies implementing robust and reliable CRM practices can cultivate
higher levels of customer satisfaction. Chatbots, as an integral part of CRM strategies, play
a vital role in this process. It is essential for chatbots to be able to provide high-quality
communication in order for them to be effective in customer service to satisfy customers.
This highlights the significance of accuracy, reliability, and coordination in the responses
that they provide.
The low quality of online communication causes complaints about customer experi-
ence [45], harms trust, and reduces customer satisfaction [46]. When customers encounter
false information given by chatbots, it can raise concerns about the reliability of the source.
Providing accurate information increases the trust in the chatbot source and is proof that the
chatbot fulfills its task completely [24,35]. The lack of an appropriate and coordinated response
from chatbots can have an unfavorable effect on the overall customer experience [47].
At this point, in order for chatbots to be an effective communication tool for online
companies, they must be able to correctly understand the needs of customers and respond
to the information they seek quickly and correctly [48]. For this reason, the ability of
the chatbots to provide services to the specified features will help companies achieve
their targeted results and increase customer satisfaction with chatbot usage by making a
positive contribution to the customer experience [35,42,49]. Thus, the following hypothesis
was formed:

H2: Chatbot communication quality has a significant and positive impact on customer satisfaction
with chatbot usage.

2.4. Motivation for Chatbot Usage

To influence the decision-making process of consumers with effective marketing cam-
paigns in the online environment, companies have to design chatbots that will respond
to customers’ needs and expectations at the right time and in the right way. Achieving
this success on the brand side is possible by researching the purposes of consumers us-
ing chatbots and implementing a system suitable for related factors. It is found that the
most important reason behind the motivation for using chatbots is productivity, which
includes ease of use, accessing information, and obtaining support quickly, followed by
entertainment and social and relational aspects that refer to the desire to avoid loneliness
and socialization, respectively [50]. Productivity-related perceived performance associated
with chatbot use positively affects customer satisfaction [51]. On the other hand, in situ-
ations characterized by distress and social isolation, individuals may exhibit attachment
formation towards chatbots perceived as offering emotional support, encouragement, and
a sense of psychological security [52]. By potentially satisfying inherent human needs for
social connection and self-exploration, chatbots may foster the development of emotional
attachments and contribute to the cultivation of deeper relationships [53]. Additionally,
entertainment assesses the ability of chatbot interactions to provide enjoyable and engaging
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2966

experiences for customers. While purchase intention remains a significant goal, customer
motivations extend to seeking enjoyment and engagement within the chatbot interaction
itself [54].
However, chatbots can be designed to imitate human characteristics. Anthropomor-
phism refers to the act of attributing traits or characteristics that are typically associated
with humans to agents that are not human [55], such as giving chatbots a name (e.g.,
“Alexa”) [56], ascribing them consciousness or emotions [57], and using conversational cues
like empathy, language style, and emojis [58] to enhance interactions in specific customer
contexts. Han [59] asserted that users find chatbots more entertaining if the anthropo-
morphism level of the chatbot is high. Rietz et al. [60] argued that chatbots with more
anthropomorphic designs increase user satisfaction. Sheehan et al. [61] also claimed that
chatbots with anthropomorphic features may satisfy the social expectations of customers
who need more human interaction. A chatbot lacking anthropomorphic features has the
potential to heighten dissatisfaction among customers, consequently leading to negative
word-of-mouth and potentially influencing customer attitude and behavior in a negative
manner [62]. Consequently, the following hypothesis was developed:

H3: Motivation to use chatbots has a significant and positive impact on customer satisfaction with
chatbot usage.

2.5. Purchase and Reuse Intention

According to the Theory of Planned Behavior, the most effective determinant of
behavior is behavioral intention [63]. Consumer behavior can generally be predicted by
consumers’ intentions. Accordingly, purchase intention refers to the likelihood that a
consumer will make an online purchase in the near future. Purchase intention can also
be defined as an individual’s desire to purchase a product of a certain brand as a result
of some evaluations [64]. Users who perform various e-commerce activities may tend to
purchase if they are satisfied with the various services provided by the business, and also
tend to repeat their positive experiences by using the same services again.
There are many studies in the relevant literature that examine the determinants of
online purchase intention. It is clearly revealed in these studies that customer satisfaction
is one of the key factors that affect online purchase intention [65–70]. In line with this, the
relationship between online purchase intention and continuous intention of use has been
investigated in many studies by using the Expectation-Confirmation Theory, the Cognitive
Model, and the Technology Continuance Theory [71].
The Expectancy-Confirmation Theory (ECT) offers a comprehensive framework de-
rived from consumer behavior studies and prior research in the field of Information Systems
(IS) to understand the dynamics behind the engagement of users with IS platforms [72].
Mainly, this framework examines the factors that influence individuals’ continued use of
IS. According to ECT, satisfaction, which is influenced by the confirmation of expectations
and perceived usefulness, determines users’ continuance intention. In the Cognitive Model
of Oliver [73], the model begins by establishing an individual’s initial attitude towards
a product as a function of their expectations before use. After experiencing the product,
the individual’s satisfaction level is assessed based on their expectations and the degree to
which those expectations were met or not met, thus satisfaction is defined as a function
of expectations and disconfirmation. Satisfaction, in turn, is believed to influence attitude
change and purchase intention. Technology Continuance Theory (TCT), developed by Liao
et al. [74], merges three influential information system models—Technology Acceptance
Model (TAM), Expectation Confirmation Model (ECM), and Cognitive Model (COG)—to
predict and explain users’ engagement with technology and their ongoing intention to
use it. In short, TCT is a model that predicts how likely it is that people will keep using a
technology, and it is applicable across different adoption stages. Its significant advance-
ment lies in incorporating both satisfaction and attitude to enhance understanding of users’
 influence attitude change and purchase intention. Technology Continuance Theory (TCT),
developed by Liao et al. [74], merges three influential information system models—Tech-
nology Acceptance Model (TAM), Expectation Confirmation Model (ECM), and Cognitive
Model (COG)—to predict and explain users’ engagement with technology and their on-
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19
going intention to use it. In short, TCT is a model that predicts how likely it is that people 2967
will keep using a technology, and it is applicable across different adoption stages. Its sig-
nificant advancement lies in incorporating both satisfaction and attitude to enhance un-
continuous
derstandingusage intentions,
of users’ thereby
continuous usageoffering a more
intentions, comprehensive
thereby framework
offering a more than its
comprehen-
predecessors.
sive framework than its predecessors.
According
According totothese
thesetheories,
theories, customer
customer satisfaction
satisfaction has ahas a positive
positive impactimpact
on reuseonin-reuse
intention [72–75].
tention [72–75]. Thus,
Thus, thethe following
following hypotheses
hypotheses werewere formed:
formed:

H4: Customer
H4: Customersatisfaction
satisfactionwith
withchatbot usage
chatbot positively
usage affects
positively online
affects purchase
online intention.
purchase intention.

H5: Customer
H5: Customersatisfaction
satisfactionwith
withchatbot usage
chatbot positively
usage affects
positively the the
affects reuse intentions
reuse of chatbots.
intentions of chatbots.

Figure 11 shows
Figure showsthe
theconceptual model
conceptual of this
model of study based based
this study on the on
fivethe
hypotheses pro-
five hypotheses
posed above.
proposed above.

Figure1.
Figure 1. Conceptual
Conceptual model.
model.

3.3.Methodology
Methodology
The items
The items developed
developed bybyChung
Chungetetal.al.[35]
[35]regarding
regarding chatbot marketing
chatbot marketing efforts werewere
efforts
usedto
used to measure
measure the
the sub-dimensions
sub-dimensionsnamednamed engagement,
engagement, trendiness, customization,
trendiness, customization,and and
problem-solving. The
problem-solving. Theitems
itemsrelated
relatedtotomotivations
motivations forfor
using
using chatbots, productivity,
chatbots, and and
productivity,
socialand
social and relational
relational motivation,
motivation,were
weremeasured
measured using
usingthethe
items developed
items developedby Rieke [76], [76],
by Rieke
and
and anthropomorphism was measured using the opposite expressions determinedthe
anthropomorphism was measured using the opposite expressions determined by by the
authors. Entertainment
authors. Entertainment waswasmeasured
measured byby
using
using items
itemsfrom
fromChung et al.
Chung et[35]. Accuracy,
al. [35]. Accuracy,
credibility, and communication competence, which are specified as the dimensions
credibility, and communication competence, which are specified as the dimensions deter-
mining communication quality, were also measured using the items developed by Chung
et al. [35]. Their study was also used for items related to customer satisfaction. The items
developed by Hsiao et al. [77] were adapted to measure the reuse intentions of chatbots.
Items developed by Kim et al. [78] were adapted to measure purchase intentions. Partici-
pants were asked to respond to the statements in the questionnaire in the range of “strongly
disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (7).
Since it is impossible to define the population who has used chatbots on e-commerce
sites before, the non-probability convenience sampling method was used. Potential partici-
pants were reached through social media platforms, professional networks, and particularly
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2968

channels where discussions about technology and consumer behavior are prevalent. An
online questionnaire on Google Forms was used for data gathering. The questionnaire was
distributed electronically through social media and professional networking groups. A
control question was first asked of the participants to ensure that participants had used
chatbots at least one time in their prior online shopping experience. Ethical approval was
received from the Ethical Board of Dokuz Eylul University, and participants were first asked
to approve their consent. The questionnaire was conducted over a period of two months,
and it was distributed to individuals in Türkiye. A pilot study was conducted with a small
group of participants to ensure clarity and understanding of the questionnaire items. A
total of 246 responses were obtained; however, 36 of them were excluded due to repetitive
and incomplete data, representing a total of 210 participants. The structural equation model
was used to test the study hypothesis. Seeing that the sample size is sufficient [79,80], data
were analyzed using SPSS 26 and Amos 26.
Most participants are women (58 percent) between the ages of 18–34 (93.9 percent),
have at least a graduate level of education (68.6 percent), and spend more than 4 h on the
Internet (72.4 percent). Considering online shopping, most of them stated that they shopped
online more than 15 times (51.4 percent) and used chatbots at least two times (77.1 percent)
in a year. The most frequently used online shopping website for a chatbot is trendyol.com
which is the biggest online shopping platform as a marketplace in Türkiye according to
similarweb (accessed on 3 October 2024) [81]. The key demographic information is detailed
in Table 1.

Table 1. Summary of Participant Demographics.

Frequency (n) Percent (%)

Gender
Female 122 58.1
Male 85 40.5
Rather not say 3 1.4
Total 210 100.0
Age
18–24 107 51.0
25–34 90 42.9
35–44 7 3.3
45+ 6 2.9
Total 210 100.0
Marital Status
Married 31 14.8
Single 179 85.2
Total 210 100.0
Education Level
High school graduate 12 5.7
Bachelor’s degree 144 68.6
Master’s or Doctorate degree 54 25.7
Total 210 100.0
Internet Usage Time (Daily)
0–3 h 58 27.6
4–6 h 91 43.3
7–9 h 26 12.4
10+ h 34 16.2
No response 1 0.5
Total 210 100.0
E-commerce Shopping
Those who do 209 99.5
Those who do not 1 0.5
Total 210 100.0
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2969

Table 1. Cont.

Frequency (n) Percent (%)

Number of E-Commerce Purchases (Annual)
0–15 102 48.6
16–30 62 29.5
31–45 13 6.2
46–60 19 9.0
61+ 14 6.7
Total 210 100.0
Number of Interactions with a Chatbot on an
E-Commerce Website (Annual)
1 48 22.9
2–5 94 44.8
6–10 36 17.1
10+ 32 15.2
Total 210 100.0
E-commerce Websites You Use Chatbots on
Trendyol 123 36.72
Yemeksepeti 51 15.2
n11 39 11.6
Hepsiburada 39 11.6
Getir 7 2.1
AtasunOptik 4 1.2
VatanBilgisayar 16 4.8
Other (please specify) 56 28.7
Total 335 100.0

Potential non-response bias was assessed by comparing early (n = 108) respondents

who completed the questionnaire within the first month of distribution and late (n = 102)
respondents who completed it afterward on all constructs. Independent sample t-tests
were performed on the variables. No statistically significant differences were identified
between early and late responses in terms of gender (p = 0.35), age (p = 0.80), frequency of
online shopping (p = 0.89), time spent on the Internet (p = 0.82), and frequency of chatbot
use (p = 0.92).

4. Analysis and Results

This research incorporated two phases used to define and confirm the factors that
affect online purchase intention and the intentions to reuse chatbots. First, confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to confirm the factor structure of the measurement
models and to examine its reliability and validity. Also, Hair et al. [82] state that in order to
demonstrate the validity of the second-order model, there should be a strong and significant
correlation between the second-order component and its dimensions (p < 0.05), and the R2
of each dimension of the first-order models should be larger than 0.5. Thus, second-order
components and related dimensions were analyzed. Second, the structural model was
tested by second-order SEM analysis and the path coefficients were estimated. The variance
inflation factor (VIF) scores were calculated to evaluate multicollinearity. The highest VIF
value was 3409, indicating no multicollinearity among variables [83].

4.1. Measurement Model (First-Order Constructs)

Internal reliability was measured using Cronbach’s α Coefficients and Composite
Reliability (CR) values. Convergent validity and discriminant validity were evaluated with
Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and HTMT (Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio), respectively.
The item means, standard deviations, factor loadings, AVE, and reliability values are shown
in Table 2.
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2970

Table 2. Results of first-order factors.

Variable Item Mean SD Factor Loading AVE CR α

INT1 4.01 1.777 0.891
Interaction 0.692 0.817 0.861
INT2 4.20 1.911 0.767
TRE1 4.51 1.892 0.873
Trendiness TRE2 3.86 1.827 0.656 0.686 0.865 0.855
TRE3 4.48 1.887 0.929
CUS1 3.57 1.84 0.716
Customization CUS2 3.65 1.806 0.820 0.664 0.855 0.861
CUS3 4.14 1.693 0.899
PRB1 3.81 1.793 0.778
Problem-solving PRB2 4.03 1.884 0.820 0.708 0.879 0.878
PRB3 3.71 1.781 0.920
PRO1 4.03 1.956 0.895
PRO2 4.54 1.932 0.818
Productivity 0.650 0.880 0.889
PRO3 4.54 1.959 0.820
PRO4 3.39 1.919 0.675
SOC1 2.08 1.69 0.898
Social & Relational
SOC2 2.39 1.796 0.888 0.798 0.922 0.921
Motivation
SOC3 2.01 1.647 0.894
ANT1 3.47 1.556 0.759
Anthropomorphism ANT2 3.54 1.553 0.752 0.547 0.783 0.783
ANT3 4.04 1.622 0.705
ENT1 3.00 1.904 0.768
ENT2 3.17 1.951 0.688
Entertainment 0.638 0.875 0.866
ENT3 2.61 1.744 0.915
ENT4 2.35 1.657 0.808
ACC1 3.50 1.772 0.811
Accuracy ACC2 3.56 1.758 0.891 0.759 0.904 0.903
ACC3 3.34 1.800 0.909
CRE1 4.37 1.857 0.807
Credibility CRE2 4.54 1.838 0.774 0.660 0.853 0.855
CRE3 4.32 1.879 0.855
COM1 3.17 1.876 0.902
Communication
COM2 3.02 1.82 0.904 0.626 0.825 0.787
Competence
COM3 4.70 1.961 0.498
SAT1 4.06 1.792 0.956
Satisfaction with chatbot SAT2 3.97 1.741 0.966
0.914 0.977 0.976
usage SAT3 3.94 1.793 0.973
SAT4 4.06 1.775 0.929
REU1 4.21 1.803 0.935
Reuse Intention REU2 3.18 1.737 0.744 0.685 0.866 0.904
REU3 3.56 1.747 0.791
PUR1 3.58 1.908 0.852
PUR2 3.42 1.896 0.937
Purchase Intention 0.800 0.941 0.940
PUR3 3.40 1.902 0.957
PUR4 3.70 2.015 0.824
Note: SD: standard deviation, AVE: average variance extracted, CR: composite reliability, α: Cronbach’s Alpha.

The CR values ranged from 0.783 to 0.977, greater than the recommended threshold
of 0.70 [82]. The results showed that the AVE values were greater than 0.5, all CR values
were above 0.7, and all factor loadings were significant, indicating convergent validity [82].
HTMT values were found to be less than 039. Thus, the discriminant validity was con-
firmed [84] (Table 3). The CFA also showed that all items loaded on their related factors
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2971

and the measurement model showed a good fit (χ2 /df = 2.023; CFI: 0.907; RMSEA: 0.070;
SRMR: 0.073) [85].

Table 3. Discriminant validity of the first-order CFA.

Constructs PUR ANT INT TRE CUS PRB PRO SOC ENT ACC CRE COM SAT REU
PUR 0.894
ANT 0.410 0.739
INT 0.608 0.496 0.831
TRE 0.535 0.348 0.617 0.828
CUS 0.722 0.499 0.677 0.696 0.815
PRB 0.722 0.457 0.626 0.770 0.702 0.841
PRO 0.648 0.374 0.696 0.669 0.677 0.709 0.806
SOC 0.357 0.197 0.209 0.141 0.343 0.352 0.270 0.893
ENT 0.547 0.311 0.445 0.404 0.557 0.550 0.484 0.736 0.799
ACC 0.587 0.439 0.601 0.550 0.654 0.680 0.622 0.290 0.519 0.871
CRE 0.507 0.245 0.587 0.667 0.636 0.654 0.625 0.138 0.430 0.711 0.813
COM 0.649 0.432 0.460 0.415 0.613 0.681 0.556 0.475 0.524 0.708 0.571 0.791
SAT 0.600 0.381 0.714 0.711 0.604 0.769 0.718 0.178 0.452 0.688 0.711 0.598 0.956
REU 0.726 0.403 0.709 0.644 0.655 0.749 0.620 0.186 0.474 0.653 0.659 0.599 0.743 0.827
Note: Square-roots of AVE are in bold, on the diagonal; Off-diagonal values represent the correlations between
the latent constructs.

In addition, Harman’s single-factor test was conducted to assess for potential common
method bias [86]. The results of Harman’s single-factor test showed that the largest variance
explained by an individual factor was 40.93%, which is below the 50% threshold. This
clearly indicates that common method bias is not a concern in this study.

4.2. Measurement Model (Second-Order Constructs)

After conducting and validating the first-order CFA, we continued to check the proper
fit of the second-order model. This study estimates second-order factor models; chatbot
marketing efforts, chatbot communication quality, and motivation for chatbot usage. The
substantial significant correlations (p < 0.001) between the three second-order constructs
(chatbot marketing efforts (CME), chatbot communication quality (CCQ), and motivation
for chatbot usage (MFCU)) and their dimensions are shown via a hierarchical construct
model. Particularly, interaction (t = 13.687, p < 0.001), trendiness (t = 13.010, p < 0.001),
customization (t = 11.281, p < 0.001), and problem-solving (t = 12.364, p < 0.001) have
significant correlations with chatbot marketing efforts. In addition, accuracy (t = 11.642,
p < 0.001), credibility (t = 9.842, p < 0.001), and communication competence (t = 11.394,
p < 0.001) also have a significant correlation with chatbot communication quality. In
addition, productivity (t = 9.615, p < 0.001), social and relational motivation (t = 10.303,
p < 0.001), anthropomorphism (t = 5.914, p < 0.001), and entertainment (t = 10.467, p < 0.001)
are found to be significant determiners of motivation for chatbot usage. Furthermore, it
is recommended that the R2 of each construct’s dimensions be greater than 0.5 in order
for the second-order models to be valid [82]. The R2 of the four dimensions of the CME
construct found in this study ranged from 0.769 to 0.990, the R2 of the three subscales of
the CCQ construct ranged from 0.605 to 0.775, and the R2 of the four dimensions of the
MFUC ranged from 0.545 to 0.730. All the first-order constructs’ factor loading values and
other values of chatbot marketing efforts, chatbot communication quality, and motivation
for chatbot usage (CR, AVE, and Cronbach alpha values) all meet the value standard [82].
The second-order measurement model’s results, convergence, and discriminant validity
are shown in Tables 4 and 5.
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2972

Table 4. Results of second-order factor.

Second-Order Constructs Factor Loading AVE CR α

Chatbot marketing efforts (CME)
Interaction 0.888
Trendiness 0.877
0.851 0.958 0.915
Customization 0.995
Problem-solving 0.925
Chatbot communication quality (CCQ)
Accuracy 0.881
Credibility 0.778 0.674 0.861 0.858
Communication competence 0.801
Motivation for using chatbot (MFUC)
Productivity 0.738
Social and relational motivation 0.843
0.643 0.878 0.718
Anthropomorphism 0.767
Entertainment 0.854
Note: AVE: average variance extracted, CR: composite reliability, α: Cronbach’s Alpha.

Table 5. Discriminant validity of the second-order CFA.

Constructs CME CCQ MFCU

CME 0.992
CCQ 0.787 0.821
MFCU 0.654 0.657 0.802
Note: CME: Chatbot marketing efforts; CCQ: chatbot communication quality; MFCU: motivation for using
chatbots. Square-roots of AVE are in bold, on the diagonal; Off-diagonal values represent the correlations between
the latent constructs.

4.3. Structural Model

Structural equation modeling was used to test the proposed hypotheses. Estimated
path coefficients, t-values, and the squared multiple correlations and the results of each
hypothesis are presented in Table 6.

Table 6. Results of hypotheses tests.

Hypothesis Standardized β SE t Result

H1: Chatbot Marketing Efforts →
0.887 *** 0.075 9.803 Supported
Chatbot Communication Quality
H2: Chatbot Communication Quality →
0.910 *** 0.129 10.242 Supported
Satisfaction with chatbot usage
H3: Motivations for Chatbot Usage →
−0.033 0.062 0.682 Rejected
Satisfaction with chatbot usage
H4: Satisfaction with chatbot usage →
0.790 *** 0.060 12.285 Supported
Purchase Intention
H5: Satisfaction with chatbot usage →
0.939 *** 0.042 23.247 Supported
Reuse Intention of Chatbots
Note: *** p < 0.001.

According to the results, four of five hypotheses were found to be significant. More
specifically, H1, which suggested that chatbot marketing efforts positively affect the chatbot
communication quality, was accepted (β = 0.887, p < 0.001). H2, which suggested that
chatbot communication quality has a significant impact on customer satisfaction with
chatbot usage, was also accepted (β = 0.910, p < 0.001). H4, which suggests that customer
satisfaction with chatbot usage positively affects the purchase intention (β = 0.790, p < 0.001)
was supported. Finally, H5, which predicted that customer satisfaction with chatbot usage
positively affects the reuse intention of chatbots (β = 0.939, p < 0.001) was also supported.
In contrast, H3, which suggested that motivation for using chatbots has a significant impact
on customer satisfaction with chatbot usage (β = −0.033, p > 0.05) was rejected.
A bootstrap analysis was applied to test the likely mediation effect [87] of chatbot com-
munication quality on the relationship between motivations for chatbot use and customer
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2973

satisfaction with chatbot usage. The tests demonstrated that the direct effect of motivations
for chatbot use on customer satisfaction with chatbot usage in the presence of the chatbot
communication quality (p = 0.301, 95% CI = −0.241–2.252) is not significant. Also, there
is no significant indirect effect of motivations for chatbot use on customer satisfaction
with chatbot usage via the intervention of chatbot communication quality (p = 0.156, 95%
CI = −0.435–2.415). Thus, it is found that motivations for chatbot use and customer sat-
isfaction with chatbot usage are not connected directly or indirectly. The results indicate
that chatbot communication quality, which is triggered by chatbot marketing efforts, meets
customer satisfaction with chatbot usage and enhances purchase intention and reuse of
chatbots. Overall, the model explains approximately 79% of the variance in chatbot com-
munication quality (R2 = 0.788), 79% of the variance in customer satisfaction with chatbot
usage (R2 = 0.794), 62% of the variance in purchase intention (R2 = 0.623), and 88% of the
variance of reuse intention of chatbots (R2 = 0.882).

5. Conclusions and Implication

5.1. Conclusions
This study examined how chatbot marketing efforts, chatbot communication quality,
and motivation for using chatbots can interact with customer satisfaction with chatbot
usage in online shopping and the impact of customer satisfaction with chatbot usage on
online purchase intention and reuse intention of chatbots. This study provides a more
comprehensive perspective by considering business- and consumer-based chatbot activities
together. Specifically, it assesses how chatbot marketing efforts and chatbot communi-
cation quality from businesses (business-oriented activities) and consumer motivations
for using chatbots (consumer-oriented activities) interact to influence key outcomes like
customer satisfaction with chatbot usage, purchase intention, and reuse intention. This
comprehensive perspective enables a better understanding of the interdependencies be-
tween chatbot strategies implemented by businesses and how these strategies align with
consumers’ expectations and needs, ultimately affecting their satisfaction and behavior. In
this study, factors that determine the consumers’ intention to purchase and reuse of chat-
bots on e-commerce websites were investigated by considering consumer motivations for
chatbot usage and chatbot marketing efforts of businesses. By addressing four key research
questions, several significant findings that contribute to both the theoretical understanding
and practical application of chatbot technology in online shopping environments have
been uncovered. This study found that chatbot marketing efforts positively affect chatbot
communication quality (H1). This finding addresses our first research question and under-
scores the importance of strategic marketing initiatives in enhancing the communication
quality of chatbot interactions. In response to the second research question, strong evidence
was found that chatbot communication quality positively affects customer satisfaction
with chatbot usage (H2). This highlights the critical role of chatbots’ accurate, credible,
and competent features in shaping customer satisfaction with chatbot usage. Addressing
our fourth research question, it is found that satisfaction with chatbot usage positively
affects online purchase intention (H4) and reuse intention of chatbots (H5). Notably, the
effect on reuse intention was stronger, indicating that satisfied customers are more likely
to continue using chatbots for future interactions. Contrary to our expectations, our third
research question yielded an unexpected result. The effect of chatbot usage motivations
on customer satisfaction with chatbot usage was not statistically significant (H3). This
finding challenges some existing assumptions about user motivations and their impact on
satisfaction with chatbot usage. Users with different motivations to use chatbots might
have higher expectations for the chatbot’s performance. These expectations may not have
been fully met.

5.2. Theoretical Implications

This study makes some valuable theoretical contributions to the existing literature.
First, this study combines the impact of both consumer-oriented and business-oriented
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2974

chatbot activities on consumer satisfaction with chatbot usage, purchase intention and
reuse intention. In this way, this study addresses gaps in the existing literature, which
often treats business and consumer aspects of chatbots separately. By considering both
aspects in a single model, it provides a more complete picture of chatbot effectiveness in the
e-commerce environment. In addition, this study offers a comprehensive perspective on the
determinants influencing the intention to purchase and reuse of chatbots, extending beyond
the scope of the current literature by considering a wider range of contributing factors. The
findings of this study are consistent with the previous findings. It was revealed that chatbot
marketing efforts positively affect chatbot communication quality. This is partly in line
with the findings of Chung et al. [35], who found that chatbot marketing efforts positively
affected the communication quality components of accuracy and credibility but did not
have a positive effect on communication competence. Similarly, the findings of this research
extend the findings of Chung et al. [35] by revealing the impact of all dimensions, including
communication competence, which is not supported by Chung et al. [35], of communication
quality on customer satisfaction. Furthermore, the positive and significant direct effects
of chatbot marketing efforts on dimensions of communication quality is consistent with
the findings of Cheng and Jiang [36]. Moreover, our finding that chatbot communication
quality positively affects satisfaction with chatbot usage is also consistent with previous
studies [35,88–90]. Additionally, our results align with the research conducted by Chang
et al. [91] and Pereira et al. [92], which demonstrated that satisfaction with the chatbot
positively influences the intention to make a purchase. Lastly, our results are in line with
those of Lee and Park [90], Silva et al. [93], Zhu et al. [94], and Ashfaq et al., [95] who
found that satisfaction has a positive and significant effect on continuance usage intention.
Our hypothesis that chatbot usage motivations positively influence customer satisfaction
with chatbot usage was rejected, a result that is partially inconsistent with the findings of
Rieke [76].
This study revealed that business-based chatbot activities significantly influence
customer satisfaction with chatbot usage in online shopping. Conversely, the effect of
consumer-based chatbot activities on satisfaction with chatbot usage was not statistically
significant. That is, our findings reveal that the communication quality of chatbots has
a more substantial influence than customers’ motivation to use chatbots. Consequently,
the high level of customer satisfaction with chatbot usage has a greater impact on reuse
intention rather than online purchase intention.

5.3. Practical Implications

Considering the findings of the research, it is possible to say that companies running
in the e-commerce environment can benefit from the advantages of chatbot technology as
a marketing tool to provide customer satisfaction and improve the customer experience
while presenting their products and services to users or managing an order process. To
benefit from chatbot technology at the highest level, companies should provide an effective
communication quality and continuously improve the chatbots offered to users. Marketing
managers who want to improve the quality of chatbot communication can provide better
service to their customers, especially by tailoring chatbots to individual needs and by
improving the problem-solving abilities of the chatbot. Leveraging historical conversation
and purchase data, companies can improve user interactions through greater customization.
The application of sentiment analysis and natural language processing techniques facilitates
more empathetic chatbot responses as well. Furthermore, implementing post-interaction
feedback mechanisms provides valuable insights into optimizing customer experiences.
Also, companies should design chatbots to resolve customer complaints without the need
for human support without wasting time. To do this, the data based on customers’ queries
may be collected with various artificial intelligence technologies. Thus, they can train
chatbots, mainly on problematic topics, and effectively solve customer problems by saving
time. By doing so, online vendors can gain the advantage from the benefits of chatbot
technology in the most efficient way, as customers believe that chatbots offer sincere
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2975

solutions to various problems. Finally, given the stronger link between satisfaction with
chatbot usage and reuse intention (compared to purchase intention), companies should view
chatbots as long-term relationship-building tools rather than just immediate sales drivers.

6. Limitations and Future Research

Despite the relevance of the present findings, there are some remarkable limitations
in generalizing the findings of this study. The sample size is the major limitation of the
study. In addition, this study is solely built on consumer data from Türkiye by employing
convenience sampling. It was carried out based on limited consumer data gathering
through online questionnaires and convenience sampling. In future studies, the opinions of
customers who do not prefer to use chatbots and the views of managers need to be explored
and evaluated in line with these findings. Thus, it is recommended to include wider
and diverse samples from different cultures, demographic profiles, and user experiences,
particularly considering the varying levels of technology adoption and internet accessibility
across different regions. For example, the sample of the study exhibited a skew towards
younger age groups (more than 90% of the participants are between the ages of 18 and 34),
potentially reflecting the commonly held perception that older individuals are often less
adept at navigating digital technologies [96]. Future research could investigate the chatbot
experiences of older age groups to gain a more comprehensive understanding.
In addition, future research could incorporate the perspectives of customers who do
not prefer to use chatbots in an e-commerce context and gather insights from managers to
gain a more holistic understanding of chatbots in e-commerce. Future studies could also
extend the findings to specific types of online shopping, such as online marketplaces, social
commerce, mobile apps, cross-border online shopping, or specific products. Finally, live
support services provided by real customer relationship management personnel can be
compared with chatbots in the context of customer satisfaction and the perceived impact
on purchase intention in future studies. As chatbots are increasingly adopted in customer
service due to their ability to reduce costs and provide immediate responses, live support
remains a critical channel for delivering more complex and personalized interactions [97].
Further research in this domain can equip businesses with the insights necessary to effec-
tively reconcile cost-effectiveness with customer satisfaction. Such insights will enable
companies to make informed decisions regarding the integration of chatbot technologies
while maintaining the human touch in customer interactions. Finally, the current state
of chatbots may also lead to frustration among customers, the dissemination of incorrect
information, and overlooked opportunities to find solutions to problems [98]. Future re-
search should prioritize the enhancement of chatbots’ accuracy, contextual comprehension,
and capacity to alleviate user frustration. Additionally, it could be imperative to delve
into the realm of proactive problem-solving and the integration of human-in-the-loop
methodologies. While this study did not directly investigate ethical issues about chatbots,
future studies could further consider ethical considerations for chatbot development, such
as privacy, data security, and overall trust in e-commerce websites, to augment the overall
user experience and effectiveness.

Author Contributions: D.M.A.: Conceptualization (lead); data curation (lead); investigation (lead);
visualization (lead); writing—original draft (equal); writing—review and editing (equal); formal
analysis (support); methodology (support). Z.A.B.: Methodology (lead); formal analysis (lead); super-
vision (lead); writing—original draft (equal); writing—review and editing (equal); conceptualization
(support). All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration
of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee (Social and Humanities Research) of
Dokuz Eylul University (n.103904/10 date 26 August 2021).
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in
the study.
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2976

Data Availability Statement: Data are unavailable due to privacy or ethical restrictions.
Acknowledgments: This paper is extracted based on the master thesis entitled “A Research on
Factors Affecting Consumers’ Purchase Intention and Continuance Usage of Chatbots on E-Commerce
Websites” carried out at Dokuz Eylul University by Doğan Mert Akdemir under the direction of Zeki
Atıl Bulut.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Sheth, J.N.; Sisodia, R.S.; Sharma, A. The antecedents and consequences of customer-centric marketing. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2000,
28, 55–66. [CrossRef]
2. Zhao, J.; Fang, S.; Jin, P. Modeling and Quantifying User Acceptance of Personalized Business Modes Based on TAM, Trust and
Attitude. Sustainability 2018, 10, 356. [CrossRef]
3. Yao, S. Design of Brand Business Model Based on Big Data and Internet of Things Technology Application. Comput. Intell. Neurosc.
2022, 2022, 9189805. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Del Vecchio, P.; Mele, G.; Passiante, G.; Vrontis, D.; Fanuli, C. Detecting Customers Knowledge from Social Media Big Data:
Toward an Integrated Methodological Framework Based on Netnography and Business Analytics. J. Knowl. Manag. 2020, 24,
799–821. [CrossRef]
5. Rrustemi, V.; Podvorica, G.; Jusufi, G. Digital Marketing Communication in Developing Countries. LeXonomica 2020, 12, 243–260.
[CrossRef]
6. YachouAityassine, F.L.; Al-Ajlouni, M.M.; Mohammad, A. The Effect of Digital Marketing Strategy on Customer and Organiza-
tional Outcomes. Mark. Manag. Innov. 2022, 13, 45–54. [CrossRef]
7. Dwivedi, Y.K.; Hughes, L.; Ismagilova, E.; Aarts, G.; Coombs, C.; Crick, T.; Duan, Y.; Dwivedi, R.; Edwards, J.; Eirug, A.; et al.
Artificial Intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Emerging Challenges, Opportunities, and Agenda for Research,
Practice and Policy. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2021, 57, 101994. [CrossRef]
8. Kim, W.; Ryoo, Y. Hypocrisy Induction: Using Chatbots to Promote COVID-19 Social Distancing. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc.
Netw. 2022, 25, 27–36. [CrossRef]
9. Van den Broeck, E.; Zarouali, B.; Poels, K. Chatbot advertising effectiveness: When does the message get through? Comput. Hum.
Behav. 2019, 98, 150–157. [CrossRef]
10. Mohamad Suhaili, S.; Salim, N.; Jambli, M. Service chatbots: A systematic review. Expert Syst. Appl. 2021, 184, 115461. [CrossRef]
11. Artasanchez, A.; Joshi, P. Artificial Intelligence with Python, 2nd ed.; Packt Publishing: Birmingham, UK, 2020.
12. Song, X.; Yang, S.; Huang, Z.; Huang, T. The Application of Artificial Intelligence in Electronic Commerce. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019,
1302, 032030. [CrossRef]
13. Zhang, X.; Guo, F.; Chen, T.; Pan, L.; Beliakov, G.; Wu, J. A Brief Survey of Machine Learning and Deep Learning Techniques for
E-Commerce Research. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2023, 18, 2188–2216. [CrossRef]
14. Juniper Research. Retail Spend over Chatbots to Reach $12bn Globally in 2023. 2023. Available online: https://www.
juniperresearch.com/press/retail-spend-over-chatbots-to-reach-12bn-globally/ (accessed on 1 October 2024).
15. Gartner. Gartner Predicts Chatbots Will Become a Primary Customer Service Channel Within Five Years. 2022. Available
online: https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2022-07-27-gartner-predicts-chatbots-will-become-a-primary-
customer-service-channel-within-five-years (accessed on 25 March 2023).
16. Invesp. Chatbots in Customer Service—Statistics and Trends [Infographic]. 2022. Available online: https://www.invespcro.com/
blog/chatbots-customer-service/ (accessed on 15 April 2023).
17. Landbot. Conversational AI Statistics: NLP Chatbots in 2020. Capgemini Research Institute. 2019. Available online: https:
//landbot.io/blog/conversational-ai-statistics (accessed on 25 March 2023).
18. Tidio. The Future of Chatbots: 80+ Chatbot Statistics for 2025. 2024. Available online: https://www.tidio.com/blog/chatbot-
statistics/ (accessed on 1 October 2024).
19. Businesswire. Chatbots Can Effectively Resolve 65% of Customer Inquiries When Applied to the E-commerce Industry. 2019.
Available online: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190606005058/en/Chatbots-Can-Effectively-Resolve-65-of-
Customer-Inquiries-When-Applied-to-the-E-commerce-Industry (accessed on 25 March 2023).
20. Roy, R.; Naidoo, V. Enhancing chatbot effectiveness: The role of anthropomorphic conversational styles and time orientation. J.
Bus. Res. 2021, 126, 23–34. [CrossRef]
21. Ho, S.P.S.; Chow, M.Y.C. The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Consumers’ Brand Preference for Retail Banks in Hong Kong. J.
Financ. Serv. Mark. 2024, 29, 292–305. [CrossRef]
22. Yuan, C.; Wang, S.; Liu, Y. AI Service Impacts on Brand Image and Customer Equity: Empirical Evidence from China. J. Brand
Manag. 2023, 30, 61–76. [CrossRef]
23. Tsai, W.; Liu, Y.; Chuan, C. How chatbots’ social presence communication enhances consumer engagement: The mediating role of
parasocial interaction and dialogue. J. Res. Interact. Mark. 2021, 15, 460–482. [CrossRef]
24. Yen, C.; Chiang, M. Trust me, if you can: A study on the factors that influence consumers’ purchase intention triggered by
chatbots based on brain image evidence and self-reported assessments. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2020, 40, 1177–1194. [CrossRef]
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2977

25. Lo Presti, L.; Maggiore, G.; Marino, V. The role of the chatbot on customer purchase intention: Towards digital relational sales.
Ital. J. Mark. 2021, 2021, 165–188. [CrossRef]
26. Hsiao, K.; Chen, C. What drives continuance intention to use a food-ordering chatbot? An examination of trust and satisfaction.
Libr. Hi Tech 2021, 40, 929–946. [CrossRef]
27. Xu, Y.; Zhang, J.; Chi, R.; Deng, G. Enhancing customer satisfaction with chatbots: The influence of anthropomorphic communica-
tion styles and anthropomorphised roles. Nankai Bus. Rev. Int. 2022, 14, 249–271. [CrossRef]
28. Cheng, X.; Bao, Y.; Zarifis, A.; Gong, W.; Mou, J. Exploring consumers’ response to text-based chatbots in e-commerce: The
moderating role of task complexity and chatbot disclosure. Internet Res. 2021, 32, 496–517. [CrossRef]
29. Lei, S.I.; Shen, H.; Ye, S.A. Comparison Between Chatbot and Human Service: Customer Perception and Reuse Intention. Int. J.
Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2021, 33, 3977–3995. [CrossRef]
30. Meyer-Waarden, L.; Pavone, G.; Poocharoentou, T.; Prayatsup, P.; Ratinaud, M.; Tison, A.; Torné, S. How Service Quality
Influences Customer Acceptance and Usage of Chatbots? J. Serv. Manag. Res. 2020, 4, 35–51. [CrossRef]
31. Sands, S.; Ferraro, C.; Campbell, C.; Tsao, H.-Y. Managing the Human–Chatbot Divide: How Service Scripts Influence Service
Experience. J. Serv. Manag. 2020, 32, 246–264. [CrossRef]
32. Skjuve, M.; Følstad, A.; Fostervold, K.I.; Brandtzaeg, P.B. My chatbot companion—A study of human-chatbot relationships. Int. J.
Hum.-Comput. Stud. 2021, 149, 102601. [CrossRef]
33. Kim, A.J.; Ko, E. Do Social Media Marketing Activities Enhance Customer Equity? An Empirical Study of Luxury Fashion Brand.
J. Bus. Res. 2012, 65, 1480–1486. [CrossRef]
34. Godey, B.; Manthiou, A.; Pederzoli, D.; Rokka, J.; Aiello, G.; Donvito, R.; Singh, R. Social Media Marketing Efforts of Luxury
Brands: Influence on Brand Equity and Consumer Behavior. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 5833–5841. [CrossRef]
35. Chung, M.; Ko, E.; Joung, H.; Kim, S.J. Chatbot E-Service and Customer Satisfaction Regarding Luxury Brands. J. Bus. Res. 2020,
117, 587–595. [CrossRef]
36. Cheng, Y.; Jiang, H. Customer–Brand Relationship in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: Understanding the Role of Chatbot
Marketing Efforts. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2021, 31, 252–264. [CrossRef]
37. Markiewicz, T.; Zheng, J. Getting Started with Artificial Intelligence, 1st ed.; O’Reilly Media: Sebastopol, CA, USA, 2018.
38. Drift. The 2018 State of Chatbots Report. 2018. Available online: https://www.slideshare.net/DrifttHQ/the-2018-state-of-
chatbots-report (accessed on 22 October 2023).
39. Fox, J.; Gambino, A. Relationship development with humanoid social robots: Appliying interpersonal theories to human-robot
interaction. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2021, 24, 294–299. [CrossRef]
40. Hänninen, N.; Karjaluoto, H. The Effect of Marketing Communication on Business Relationship Loyalty. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2017,
35, 458–472. [CrossRef]
41. Mohr, J.J.; Sohi, R.S. Communication Flows in Distribution Channels: Impact on Assessments of Communication Quality and
Satisfaction. J. Retail. 1995, 71, 393–415. [CrossRef]
42. Edwards, C.; Edwards, A.; Spence, P.R.; Shelton, A.K. Is That a Bot Running the Social Media Feed? Testing the Differences in
Perceptions of Communication Quality for a Human Agent and a Bot Agent on Twitter. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 33, 372–376.
[CrossRef]
43. Yi, Y.; Nataraajan, R. Customer Satisfaction in Asia. Psychol. Mark. 2018, 35, 387–391. [CrossRef]
44. Hassan, R.S.; Nawaz, A.; Lashari, M.N.; Zafar, F. Effect of Customer Relationship Management on Customer Satisfaction. Procedia
Econ. Financ. 2015, 23, 563–567. [CrossRef]
45. Oh, J.C.; Yoon, S.J.; Park, B.I. A structural approach to examine the quality attributes of e-shopping malls using the Kano model.
Asia Pac. J. Public Health 2012, 24, 305–327. [CrossRef]
46. Mero, J. The effects of two-way communication and chat service usage on consumer attitudes in the e-commerce retailing sector.
Electron. Mark. 2018, 28, 205–217. [CrossRef]
47. Zhang, J.J.; Følstad, A.; Bjørkli, C.A. Organizational factors affecting successful implementation of chatbots for customer service.
J. Internet Commer. 2023, 22, 122–156. [CrossRef]
48. Moriuchi, E.; Landers, V.M.; Colton, D.; Hair, N. Engagement with chatbots versus augmented reality interactive technology in
e-commerce. J. Strateg. Mark. 2020, 29, 375–389. [CrossRef]
49. Trivedi, J. Examining the customer experience of using banking Chatbots and its impact on brand love: The moderating role of
perceived risk. J. Internet Commer. 2019, 18, 91–111. [CrossRef]
50. Brandtzaeg, P.B.; Følstad, A. Why People Use Chatbots. In Proceedings of the Internet Science: 4th International Conference,
Thessaloniki, Greece, 22–24 November 2017; pp. 377–392. [CrossRef]
51. Eren, B.A. Determinants of Customer Satisfaction in Chatbot Use: Evidence from a Banking Application in Turkey. Int. J. Bank
Mark. 2021, 39, 294–311. [CrossRef]
52. Xie, T.; Pentina, I. Attachment Theory as a Framework to Understand Relationships with Social Chatbots: A Case Study of
Replika. In Proceedings of the 55th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Virtual, 4–7 January 2022; University of
Hawaii: Honolulu, HI, USA, 2022; pp. 2046–2055.
53. Skjuve, M.; Følstad, A.; Fostervold, K.I.; Brandtzaeg, P.B. A Longitudinal Study of Human–Chatbot Relationships. Int. J.
Hum.-Comput. Stud. 2022, 168, 102903. [CrossRef]
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2978

54. Chen, J.V.; Thi Le, H.; Tran, S.T.T. Understanding Automated Conversational Agent as a Decision Aid: Matching Agent’s
Conversation with Customer’s Shopping Task. Internet Res. 2021, 31, 1376–1404. [CrossRef]
55. Epley, N.; Waytz, A.; Cacioppo, J.T. On Seeing Human: A Three-Factor Theory of Anthropomorphism. Psychol. Rev. 2007, 114,
864–886. [CrossRef]
56. Crolic, C.; Thomaz, F.; Hadi, R.; Stephen, A.T. Blame the Bot: Anthropomorphism and Anger in Customer–Chatbot Interactions. J.
Mark. 2022, 86, 132–148. [CrossRef]
57. Kim, W.B.; Hur, H.J. What Makes People Feel Empathy for AI Chatbots? Assessing the Role of Competence and Warmth. Int. J.
Hum.–Comput. Interact. 2024, 40, 4674–4687. [CrossRef]
58. Nguyen, M.; Casper Ferm, L.-E.; Quach, S.; Pontes, N.; Thaichon, P. Chatbots in Frontline Services and Customer Experience: An
Anthropomorphism Perspective. Psychol. Mark. 2023, 40, 2201–2225. [CrossRef]
59. Han, M.C. The Impact of Anthropomorphism on Consumers’ Purchase Decision in Chatbot Commerce. J. Internet Commer. 2021,
20, 46–65. [CrossRef]
60. Rietz, T.; Benke, I.; Maedche, A. The impact of anthropomorphic and functional chatbot design features in enterprise collaboration
systems on user acceptance. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, Siegen, Germany,
24–27 February 2019; University of Siegen: Siegen, Germany, 2019; pp. 1642–1656.
61. Sheehan, B.; Jin, H.S.; Gottlieb, U. Customer service chatbots: Anthropomorphism and adoption. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 115, 14–24.
[CrossRef]
62. Mostafa, R.B.; Lages, C.R.; Shaalan, A. The Dark Side of Virtual Agents: Ohhh No! Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2023, 75, 102721. [CrossRef]
63. Ajzen, I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [CrossRef]
64. Moslehpour, M.; Wong, W.-K.; Lin, Y.H.; Le Huyen Nguyen, T. Top Purchase Intention Priorities of Vietnamese Low Cost Carrier
Passengers: Expectations and Satisfaction. Eurasian Bus. Rev. 2018, 8, 371–389. [CrossRef]
65. Dhingra, S.; Gupta, S.; Bhatt, R. A study of relationship among service quality of E-commerce websites, customer satisfaction,
and purchase intention. Int. J. e-Bus. Res. 2020, 16, 42–59. [CrossRef]
66. Hu, Y. Linking Perceived Value, Customer Satisfaction, and Purchase Intention in E-Commerce Settings. In Advances in Computer
Science, Intelligent System and Environment; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 623–628. [CrossRef]
67. Filieri, R.; McLeay, F.; Tsui, B. Antecedents of Travellers’ Satisfaction and Purchase Intention from Social Commerce Websites. In
Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2017; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 517–528. [CrossRef]
68. Roudposhti, V.M.; Nilashi, M.; Mardani, A.; Streimikiene, D.; Samad, S.; Ibrahim, O. A new model for customer purchase
intention in e-commerce recommendation agents. J. Int. Stud. 2018, 11, 237–253. [CrossRef]
69. Hossain, M.S.; Zhou, X. Impact of m-payments on purchase intention and customer satisfaction: Perceived flow as mediator. Int.
J. Sci. Bus. 2018, 2, 503–517.
70. Khatoon, S.; Zhengliang, X.; Hussain, H. The Mediating Effect of Customer Satisfaction on the Relationship Between Electronic
Banking Service Quality and Customer Purchase Intention: Evidence From the Qatar Banking Sector. SAGE Open. 2020, 10, 1–12.
[CrossRef]
71. Harasis, A.A.; Qureshi, M.I.; Rasli, A. Development of research continuous usage intention of e-commerce. A systematic review
of literature from 2009 to 2015. Int. J. Eng. 2018, 7, 73–78. [CrossRef]
72. Bhattacherjee, A. Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Q. 2001, 25, 351–370.
[CrossRef]
73. Oliver, R.L. A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions. J. Mark. Res. 1980, 17, 460–469.
[CrossRef]
74. Liao, C.; Palvia, P.; Chen, J.L. Information technology adoption behavior life cycle: Toward a Technology Continuance Theory
(TCT). Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2009, 29, 309–320. [CrossRef]
75. Tsai, H.-T.; Chien, J.-L.; Tsai, M.-T. The influences of system usability and user satisfaction on continued Internet banking services
usage intention: Empirical evidence from Taiwan. Electron. Commer. Res. 2014, 14, 137–169. [CrossRef]
76. Rieke, T. The Relationship Between Motives for Using a Chatbot and Satisfaction with Chatbot Characteristics in the Portuguese
Millennial Population: An Exploratory Study. Master Thesis, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal, 2018.
77. Hsiao, C.H.; Chang, J.J.; Tang, K.Y. Exploring the influential factors in continuance usage of mobile social Apps: Satisfaction,
habit, and customer value perspectives. Telemat. Inform. 2016, 33, 342–355. [CrossRef]
78. Kim, C.; Mirusmonov, M.; Lee, I. An empirical examination of factors influencing the intention to use mobile payment. Comput.
Hum. Behav. 2010, 26, 310–322. [CrossRef]
79. Boomsma, A.; Hoogland, J.J. The Robustness of LISREL Modeling Revisited; Cudeck, R., Sörbom, D., Toit, S.D., Eds.; Scientific
Software International: Chicago, IL, USA, 2001; pp. 139–168.
80. Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011.
81. Similarweb. Top Websites Ranking. 2023. Available online: https://www.similarweb.com/top-websites/turkey/e-commerce-
and-shopping/ (accessed on 3 October 2024).
82. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis, 8th ed.; Cengage Learning EMEA: Hampshire, UK,
2019.
83. O’Brien, R.M. A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Qual. Quant. 2007, 41, 673–690. [CrossRef]
J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2024, 19 2979

84. Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation
modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [CrossRef]
85. Schumacker, R.E.; Lomax, R.G. A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling, 4th ed.; Psychology Press: Lodi, NJ, USA, 2004.
86. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.-Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of
the Literature and Recommended Remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [CrossRef]
87. Bollen, K.A.; Stine, R. Direct and Indirect Effects: Classical and Bootstrap Estimates of Variability. Sociol. Methodol. 1990, 20,
115–140. [CrossRef]
88. Naqvi, M.H.A.; Hongyu, Z.; Naqvi, M.H.; Kun, L. Impact of Service Agents on Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty: Mediating
Role of Chatbots. J. Model. Manag. 2023, 19, 470–491. [CrossRef]
89. Jiang, H.; Cheng, Y.; Yang, J.; Gao, S. AI-Powered Chatbot Communication with Customers: Dialogic Interactions, Satisfaction,
Engagement, and Customer Behavior. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2022, 134, 107329. [CrossRef]
90. Lee, M.; Park, J.-S. Do Parasocial Relationships and the Quality of Communication with AI Shopping Chatbots Determine
Middle-Aged Women Consumers’ Continuance Usage Intentions? J. Consum. Behav. 2022, 21, 842–854. [CrossRef]
91. Chang, J.Y.-S.; Cheah, J.-H.; Lim, X.-J.; Morrison, A.M. One Pie, Many Recipes: The Role of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots in
Influencing Malaysian Solo Traveler Purchase Intentions. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2023, 49, 101191. [CrossRef]
92. Pereira, T.; Limberger, P.F.; Ardigó, C.M. The Moderating Effect of the Need for Interaction with a Service Employee on Purchase
Intention in Chatbots. Telemat. Inform. Rep. 2021, 1–4, 100003. [CrossRef]
93. Silva, F.A.; Shojaei, A.S.; Barbosa, B. Chatbot-Based Services: A Study on Customers’ Reuse Intention. J. Theor. Appl. Electron.
Commer. Res. 2023, 18, 457–474. [CrossRef]
94. Zhu, Y.; Wang, R.; Pu, C. “I Am Chatbot, Your Virtual Mental Health Adviser.” What Drives Citizens’ Satisfaction and Continuance
Intention toward Mental Health Chatbots during the COVID-19 Pandemic? An Empirical Study in China. Digit. Health 2022, 8,
457–474. [CrossRef]
95. Ashfaq, M.; Yun, J.; Yu, S.; Loureiro, S.M. I, Chatbot: Modeling the determinants of users’ satisfaction and continuance intention
of AI-powered service agents. Telemat. Inform. 2020, 54, 101473. [CrossRef]
96. Wang, C.-H.; Wu, C.-L. Bridging the Digital Divide: The Smart TV as a Platform for Digital Literacy among the Elderly. Behav. Inf.
Technol. 2022, 41, 2546–2559. [CrossRef]
97. Tidio. Chatbot vs. Live Chat Explained: Which Is Better in 2024? 2024. Available online: https://www.tidio.com/blog/chatbot-
vs-live-chat/ (accessed on 11 September 2024).
98. Capgemini. Imagining A New Era of Customer Experience with Generative AI. 2023. Available online: https://prod.ucwe.
capgemini.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/2023-07-27_Gen-AI-for-CX-POV_Opt1_v3_MD-1.pdf (accessed on 16 Decem-
ber 2023).

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.