The smartphone users in India have been growing up for the past few years, and the research companies have predicted that it would still grow. Due to the advancement of technologies, affordable prices and various applications in the web stores, a large number of people are attracted towards smartphones. The goal of this study is to find out the approach of Indian shoppers towards grocery shopping apps. The Indian shoppers’ attitude towards grocery shopping has still not been analysed by many, and this domain is still largely untapped. The theory of planned behaviour (TPB) and the technology acceptance model (TAM) models have been provided proper factors to analyse the shoppers’ intention. The researcher has collected responses from various respondents with the help of a properly structured questionnaire, and a simple random sampling tool has also been used to select the respondents. Exploratory factor analysis and multiple regression analysis have been used to find out the outcomes. The outcomes of the study inform that attitude, perceived behavioural control, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use have a positive and significant impact on intention. Subjective norms, however, do not have a significant effect on intention.
Ellis-ChadwickF. E-commerce. In: SouthertonD, editor. Encyclopedia of Consumer Culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 2011. pp. 112–126.
2.
SeybertH. Internet use in households and by individuals in 2012. Eurostat: Statistics in Focus; 2012. Available from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3433488/5585460/KS-SF-12-050-EN.PDF/39000dab-e2b7-49b2-bc4b-6aad0bf01279
3.
FishbeinM, AjzenI. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1975.
4.
GrandonEE, NascoSA, MykytynPP. Comparing theories to explain ecommerce adoption. J Bus Res. 2011; 64(3): 292–298.
5.
BoyerKK, HultGT. Extending the supply chain: Integrating operations and marketing in the online grocery industry. J Oper Manage. 2005; 23:642–661.
6.
HandC, RileyFD, HarrisP, SinghJ, RettieR. Online grocery shopping: The influence of situational factors. Eur J Market. 2009; 43(9/10):1205–1219.
7.
Iglesias-PradasS, Pascual-MiguelF, Hernandez-GarciaA, Chaparro-PelaezJ. Barriers and drivers for non-shoppers in B2C e-commerce: A latent class exploratory analysis. Comput Hum Behav. 2013; 29(2):314–322.
8.
AjzenI. Martin Fishbein’s legacy: The reasoned action approach. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci. 2012; 640(1):11–27.
9.
SwinyardW, SmithS. Activities, interests, and opinions of online shoppers and non-shoppers. Int Bus Econ Res J. 2011; 3(4):23–47.
10.
HansenT. Consumer adoption of online grocery buying: A discriminant analysis. Int J Retail Distrib Manage. 2005; 33(2):101–121.
11.
HongW, ThongJY, TamKY. The effects of information format and shopping task on consumers’ online shopping behavior: A cognitive fit perspective. J Manage Inf Syst. 2004; 21(3):149–184.
12.
MilkmanKL, RogersT, BazermanMH. I’ll have the ice cream soon and the vegetables later: A study of online grocery purchases and order lead time. Market Lett. 2011; 21(1):17–35.
13.
AzjenI. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In: KuhlJ, BeckmanJ, editors. Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; 1985. pp. 11–39.
14.
AzjenI. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991; 50:179–211.
15.
AzjenI, FishbeinM. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1980.
16.
MathiesonK. Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behaviour. Inf Syst Res. 1991; 2(3):173–191.
17.
TaylorS, ToddPA. Assessing IT usage: The role of prior experience. MIS Q.1995; 19(4):561–570.
18.
HarrisonDA, MykytynPP, RiemenschneiderCK. Executive decisions about adoption of information technology in small business: Theory and empirical tests. Inf Syst Res. 1997; 8(2):171–195.
19.
BhattacherjeeA. Acceptance of e-commerce services: The case of electronic brokerages. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum. 2000; 30(4):411–420.
20.
GeorgeJF. Influences on the intent to make Internet purchases. Internet Res. 2002; 12(2):165–180.
21.
KhalifaM, LimayemM. Drivers of Internet shopping. Commun ACM. 2003; 46(12):233–239.
22.
LimayemM, KhalifaM, FriniA. What makes consumers buy from internet? A longitudinal study of online shopping. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum. 2000; 30(4):421–432.
23.
SuhB, HanI. The impact of customer trust and perception of security control on the acceptance of electronic commerce. Int J Electron Commer. 2003; 7(3):135–161.
24.
SongJ, ZahediF. Web design in e-commerce: A theory and empirical analysis. Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Information Systems (pp. 205–220). New Orleans: Association for Information Systems; 2001.
25.
TanM, TeoTSH. Factors influencing the adoption of internet banking. J Assoc Inf Syst. 2000; 1(5):1–42.
26.
DavisFD, BagozziRP, WarshawPR. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Manage Sci. 1989; 35(8):982–1003.
27.
MortimerG, NealeL, FazalS, HasanE, DunphyB. Investigating the factors influencing the adoption of m-banking: A cross cultural study. Int J Bank Market. 2015; 33(4):545–570.
28.
HoldenRJ, KarshBT. The technology acceptance model: Its past and its future in health care. J Biomed Inform. 2009; 43(1):159–172.
29.
BlackwellRD, PaulWM, JamesFE. Attributes of Attitudes: Consumer Behavior. New York, NY: Thomson Press; 2006. pp. 235–243.
30.
AjzenI. Attitudes, Personality and Behaviour. Milton Keynes: Open University Press; 1988.
31.
FerdousAS. Applying the theory of planned behavior to explain marketing managers’ perspectives on sustainable marketing. J Int Consum Market. 2010; 22(4):313–325.
32.
ArmitageCJ, CornerM. Efficacy of the theory of planned behavior: A meta analytic review. Br J Soc Psychol. 2001; 40(4):471–499.
33.
O’CassA, FenechT. Web retailing adoption: Exploring the nature of internet users, web retailing behaviour. J Retail Consum Serv. 2003; 10(2):81–94.
34.
JongD, WangTS. Student acceptance of web-based learning system. Proceedings of the 2009 International Symposium on Web Information Systems and Applications (WISA’09) (pp. 533–553). Nanchang, China; 2009.
35.
KimE, HamS, YangIS, ChoiJG. The roles of attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control in the formation of consumers’ behavioral intentions to read menu labels in the restaurant industry. Int J Hosp Manage. 2013; 35:203–213.
36.
ManningM. The effects of subjective norms on behavior in the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analysis. Br J Soc Psychol/Br Psychol Soc. 2009; 48(4):649–705.
37.
FusilierM, Durlabhji. An exploration of student use in India: The technology acceptance model and theory of planned behaviour. Campus-Wide Inf Syst. 2005; 22(4):233–246.
38.
HartwickJ, BarkiH. Explaining the role of user participation in information system use. Manage Sci. 1994; 40(4):440–465.
39.
CompeauDR, HigginsCA. Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Q.1995; 19(2):89–211.
40.
HartwickJ, BarkiH. Explaining the role of user participation in information system use. Manage Sci. 1994; 40(4):440–465.
41.
LombardiMM. Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. Educare Learning Initiative; 2007. Available from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3009.pdf
42.
DavisFD. Perceived usefulness, Perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989; 13(3):319–340.
43.
YehRK, TengTC. Extended conceptualisation of perceived usefulness: Empirical test in the context of information system use continuance. Behav Inf Technol. 2012; 31(5):525–540.
44.
DavisFD, BagozziRP, WarshawPR. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Manage Sci.1989; 35(8):982–1003.
45.
AdamsDA, NelsonRR, ToddPA. Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: A replication. MIS Q.1992; 16(2):227–247.
46.
SubramanianGH. A replication of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use measurement. Decis Sci. 1994; 25(5/6):863–874.
47.
ZhuD, LinbCT, HsuY. Using the technology acceptance model to evaluate user attitude and intention of use for online games. Total Qual Manage. 2012; 23(7–8):965–980.
48.
NanthidaJB. Altering user perceptions of applications: How system design can impact playfulness and anxiety; 2011. Available from https://ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/24139/Barranis_Nanthida.pdf?sequence=1
49.
Burton-JonesA, HubonaGS. Individual differences and usage behavior: Revisiting a technology acceptance model assumption. Data Base Adv Inf Syst. 2005; 36(2):58–77.
50.
IgbariaM, ZinatelliN, CraggP, CavayeA. Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: A structural equation model. MIS Q. 1997; 21(3):279–302.
51.
HongW, ThongJY, WongW, TamK. Determinants of user acceptance of digital libraries: An empirical examination of individual differences and system characteristics. J Manage Inf Syst. 2002; 18(3):97–124.
52.
CompeauDR, HigginsCA. Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Q.1995; 19(2):89–211.
53.
VenkaeteshV, DavisFD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci.2000; 46(2):186–204.
54.
KumarR. Research Methodology: A Step by Step Guide for Beginners. Second edition. New Delhi: Pearson; 2014.
55.
ThamilarasanM. Research Methodology for Social Sciences. New Delhi: New Century Publications; 2015.
56.
AakerDA, KumarV, DayGS. Marketing Research. Seventh edition. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.; 2000.
57.
PannerselvamR. Research Methodology. Second edition. Delhi: PHI learning Pvt; 2016.
58.
BajpaiN. Research Methodology. New Delhi: Pearson; 2013.
59.
KothariCR. Research Methodology Methods and Techniques. New Delhi: New Age International Publishers; 2004.
60.
ChawlaD, SondhiN. Research Methodology: Concepts and Cases. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House; 2016.
VerplankenB, AartsH. Habit, Attitude, and Planned Behaviour: Is Habit an Empty Construct or an Interesting Case of Goal-directed Automaticity. Eur Rev Soc Psychol. 1999; 10(1):101–134.
63.
TrafimowD, FinlayKA. The importance of subjective norms for a minority of people: Between-subjects and within-subjects analyses. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1996; 22:820–828.
