Thus in some retail situations the mere presence of

This preview shows page 12 - 14 out of 29 pages.

environment (Kinard, Capella, and Kinard 2009). Thus, in some retail situations, the mere presence of others who do not have high social importance and are not in close proximity to the consumer should not increase consumers’ perceptions of social risk. In applying the precepts of Social Impact Theory to the context of consumers’ risk perceptions and their relationship to attitudes toward co-producing a self-checkout scanning service in grocery stores, consumers’ perceptions of social risk are predicted to be uniformly weak in self-scanning environments in which several of the conditions of close proximity, numbers of others, and importance of others are absent or weak. In the US, self-service scanners are most typically located in big box stores and large- scale supermarkets (Anand 2011). In these environments, consumers in shopping areas of the store and in the full-service checkout areas are not situated in close proximity (e.g. within 2 feet) of the self-scanner area. These types of facilities are also designed with multiple architectural barriers (e.g. aisles, counters, displays, etc.) to separate major shopping and checkout areas. Self-scanning areas are also designed with space around each scanner (e.g. architectural posts that support equipment; space on either side of the equipment for shopping carts and bagging purchased merchandise). Thus, even when the scanning area is visible to others and occupied by several people, the areas are designed to limit overcrowding in close proximity to the scanner. In addition, other customers in the self-scanning area are often non- interactive strangers who have low importance to the self-scanner consumer. Thus, all three conditions specified by Social Impact Theory, i.e. close proximity, numbers, and strength, are not always in play at the same time. Kinard, Capella, and Kinard’s (2009) findings that shoppers experience lower perceived risk in using SSTs in the presence of other shoppers who are not known and with whom they do not interact also supports this supposition due to the absence of strength and close proximity conditions. Based on the aforementioned, the following hypothesis is advanced. H10: Consumers’ perceptions of social risk in using the SST will not influence their attitude toward co-producing their scanning service. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 347
Perceived performance risk refers to uncertainty that a scanning system may not operate as expected. This can be due to system failure or incorrect use by a consumer (Walker et al. 2002). Empirical findings show that perceived performance risk is negatively associated with willingness to use SSTs offered by retail and service establishments (Walker et al. 2002). In addition, Dabholkar et al. (2003) reveals that willingness to use scanning SSTs in a grocery store setting increases if the store provides assistance in using the SST from a knowledgeable employee. This finding suggests that a present other who is a knowledgeable assistant may alleviate possible perceived risks associated with not being able to correctly use the SST (i.e.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture