Cheng 2020

Why do customers intend to continue
using internet-based sharing economy

service platforms? Roles of network
externality and service quality
Yung-Ming Cheng
Abstract Yung-Ming Cheng is based

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to integrate network externality and service quality as at the Department of
antecedents to the synthesis of expectation–confirmation model (ECM) and perceived ease of use Business Administration,
(PEOU) in explaining customers’ continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service Chaoyang University of
platforms. Technology, Taichung City,
Design/methodology/approach – Sample data for this study were collected from students enrolled in a Taiwan.
comprehensive university in Taipei, Taiwan. A total of 600 questionnaires were distributed in various
campus locations, and 510 usable questionnaires were analyzed in this study, with a usable response
rate of 85.0%. Collected data were analyzed using structural equation modeling.
Findings – The primary findings are as follows. First, service enablers’ online service quality positively
affected customers’ perceived usefulness (PU), confirmation and PEOU of internet-based sharing
economy service platforms, which directly or indirectly explained customers’ satisfaction and
continuance intention of the platforms. Next, service providers’ offline service quality positively influenced
customers’ PU of internet-based sharing economy service platforms, which in turn caused customers’
satisfaction and continuance intention of the platforms. Finally, network externality from customers’ side
and service providers’ side all positively affected customers’ PU of internet-based sharing economy
service platforms, which in turn led to customers’ continuance intention of the platforms.
Originality/value – First, this study contributes to the identification of network externality and service
quality that may reveal deep insights to the understanding of customers’ continuance intention of internet-
based sharing economy service platforms greatly driven by their confirmation of expectations and
satisfaction with the platforms. Next, the empirical evidence on capturing ECM and PEOU for completely
explaining the antecedents of customers’ continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy
service platforms is well documented. Hence, this study’s findings have significantly shed light on the
possible formulation of a richer post-adoption model.
Keywords Continuance intention, Service quality, Perceived ease of use,
Expectation–confirmation model, Network externality, Internet-based sharing economy service platforms
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Nowadays, led by the shift in customer needs and technological advances, the sharing
economy has been growing exponentially over the past decade, and it has led to tremendous Received 8 May 2019
Revised 22 December 2019
changes in many industries (Zhu et al., 2017; Kumar et al., 2018). Hence, firms need to adapt Accepted 13 June 2020
their business models and resource allocation to meet customer expectations in a more
The author would like to thank
convenient and efficient way (Zhu et al., 2017; Ganapati and Reddick, 2018; Kumar et al., the Editor and anonymous
reviewers for their insightful
2018). Essentially, the sharing economy is broadly characterized by peer-to-peer exchanges comments and valuable
for renting goods or services using internet-based platforms, and the platforms are explicitly suggestions.
DOI 10.1108/JABS-05-2019-0142 © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1558-7894 j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j
oriented toward the mobile device users (Wu et al., 2017; Ganapati and Reddick, 2018; Kumar
et al., 2018). Such internet-based sharing economy service platforms are distinctive from other
electronic commerce (e-commerce) platforms which are oriented toward peer-to-peer
economic transactions respectively (Wu et al., 2017; Zhu et al., 2017; Ganapati and Reddick,
2018). The proliferation of sharing economy platforms focuses on peer-to-peer transactions by
facilitating the sharing or renting of space, assets and labor in real time; and users can request
the sharing economy services from any place at any time with mobile applications at a
reasonably low transaction cost (Chang and Wang, 2018; Ganapati and Reddick, 2018).
Unquestionably, there is increasing attention to the internet-based sharing economy service
platform as a flexible way of developing the sharing economy services for users, and it has
been accepted by its intended users (Chang and Wang, 2018; Ganapati and Reddick,
2018; Kumar et al., 2018). Noteworthily, while users’ initial acceptance of the information
system (IS)/information technology (IT) is the first step toward its success, the eventual
success of the IS/IT depends on its continued usage (Wu, 2013). That is, while users’ initial
acceptance of the internet-based sharing economy service platform is the first step toward
achieving its success, its eventual success may still depend on continued usage. However,
far less emphasis has been placed on understanding whether users intend to continue
using the internet-based sharing economy service platform after having initially accepted it.
Thus, what drives users’ continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service
platforms? Obviously, network externality can increase users’ usage of internet-based
services and their economic benefits (Lin and Lu, 2011). Essentially, network externality
refers to an increase in the utility/value of a product/service for a user as the number of other
users of that product/service increases (Katz and Shapiro, 1985; Van den Ende et al.,
2003); once the scale of users reaches a critical number, external benefit will emerge and
attract more users to use the product/service (Lin and Bhattacherjee, 2008; Lin and Lu,
2011). Besides, providing users with an excellent service quality has increasingly become a
critical concern for their IS/IT usage decisions (Ahn et al., 2004; Tam and Oliveira, 2016).
Hence, the success of internet-based sharing economy service platforms may depend on
building a critical mass of users including customers and service providers, as well as the
service quality provided by service enablers and service providers (Rochet and Tirole,
2003; Kumar et al., 2018).
While prior studies have explained the booming growth of the sharing economy services
usage from organizers’ or peer providers’ views (Martin et al., 2015; Yang et al., 2017), it
can absolutely not be neglected that network externality and service quality are crucial in
forming a better understanding for users’ continuance intention of internet-based sharing
economy service platforms from customers’ views. Essentially, the early adopters of sharing
economy services are mainly young people in large cities who are familiar with mobile
devices (PwC, 2015; Zhu et al., 2017). Thus, this study’s sampling frame was taken from
among students enrolled in a comprehensive university with over 15,000 enrolled students
in Taipei, Taiwan, and the unit of analysis was individual students with experience in using
sharing economy services (e.g. Uber, Airbnb, etc.) via internet-based sharing economy
service platforms. Presently, while the expectation–confirmation model (ECM), proposed by
Bhattacherjee (2001), is one of the most widely applied models in a variety of domains on
continued IS/IT usage (Lee, 2010), integrating ECM and perceived ease of use (PEOU) into
a hybrid framework can provide a better base for understanding users’ IS/IT continuance
intention with enhanced explanatory power (Hong et al., 2006; Thong et al., 2006; Liao et al.,
2007). The reason is that PEOU is one of the major cognitive beliefs in determining users’ IS/
IT continuance intention that is difficult to explain with the narrower scope of post-adoption
beliefs (Hong et al., 2006; Thong et al., 2006). Hence, the synthesis of ECM and PEOU can
be used as the base for this study’s research model. Accordingly, this study’s purpose is to
integrate network externality and service quality as antecedents to the synthesis of ECM
and PEOU in explaining customers’ continuance intention of internet-based sharing
economy service platforms.
j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Theoretical background, hypotheses and research model
Outline of the sharing economy
The sharing economy is called the collaborative consumption which not only involves
individuals’ sharing resources, but also expressions of willingness by individuals (Felson
and Spaeth, 1978; Chang and Wang, 2018). Theoretically, the sharing economy usually
uses a model of renting instead of buying; the emphasis of sharing is on creating exchange
value via sharing assets, rather than owning assets (Chang and Wang, 2018; Ganapati and
Reddick, 2018); and the assets are often rented rather than shared, as the exchanges are
economic rather than being free or collaborative (Sundararajan, 2016; Ganapati and
Reddick, 2018; Kumar et al., 2018). Hence, the sharing economy is a business model which
mainly uses internet-based platforms to enable the peer-to-peer exchanges for the
monetization of underused assets that are owned by service providers via short-term rental
(Ganapati and Reddick, 2018; Kumar et al., 2018).
Platform ecosystems continue to expand economic and social importance (Teubner, 2018).
In the sharing economy context, three participants create a triadic platform-based
business-to-business relationship including service enablers, customers and service
providers (Kumar et al., 2018, p. 147). Essentially, the strength of interactions between
customers and service providers determines whether service enablers continuously
succeed, that is, retaining the power balance between customers and service providers is
extremely critical for service enablers to sustain success (Hagiu, 2014; Kumar et al., 2018).
Hence, the sharing economy platform is a business based on enabling value creation and
interactions among service enablers, customers and service providers (Ganapati and
Reddick, 2018; Kumar et al., 2018).
The sharing economy is estimated to be worth $15bn in 2013 and is expected to rise to
$335bn by 2025 (PwC, 2015); thus, this trend is hot around the world, including Taiwan. To
date, while Taiwan’s regulators have shown deeper conservatism for either Airbnb or Uber,
the two largest foreign sharing-economy companies are active in Taiwan (Fulco, 2016a;
Fulco, 2016b), and Taiwan has still great potential for the development of the sharing
economy in some of its cities because of its well-developed infrastructure.
Synthesis of expectation–confirmation model and perceived ease of use

ECM, proposed by Bhattacherjee (2001), clarifies the impact of users’ cognitive belief on
their continued IS/IT usage intention. ECM is grounded on the expectation–confirmation
theory (ECT) introduced by Oliver (1980), and makes changes to the ECT by transforming
the difference between pre-consumption expectation and experienced performance into a
pure post-acceptance model for continued IS/IT usage. ECM posits that users’ continuance
intention of the IS/IT is dependent on their perceived usefulness (PU) (i.e. post-adoption
expectation), the extent of their confirmation and their satisfaction with the IS/IT
(Bhattacherjee, 2001; Lee, 2010). PU is defined as “the degree to which a person believes
that using a particular system would enhance his/her job performance” (Davis, 1989,
p. 320), and it is also one of the primary beliefs for explaining user acceptance of specific
type of system in technology acceptance model (TAM; Davis et al., 1989). Confirmation
refers to the degree of users’ perception of the congruence between expectation of IS/IT
use and its actual performance (Bhattacherjee, 2001). Satisfaction refers to a psychological
or affective state related to and resulting from a cognitive appraisal of the
expectation–performance discrepancy (Bhattacherjee, 2001, p. 354). Continuance intention
is defined as users’ intention to continue using the IS/IT after accepting it (Bhattacherjee,
2001). The resulting relationships, synthesized in ECM (Bhattacherjee, 2001) and shown in
Figure 1, indicated that users’ confirmation of the IS/IT has an impact on their PU of the IS/
IT; their confirmation and PU of the IS/IT influence their satisfaction with the IS/IT; and their
PU and satisfaction with the IS/IT further lead to their continuance intention of the IS/IT.

Because these associations are well known and have been extensively validated, this study
did not include them as formal hypotheses depicted in Figure 1.
PEOU is one of the most important beliefs in TAM for explaining user acceptance of a
specific type of system (Davis et al., 1989). TAM, introduced by Davis (1989), is a widely
studied model from social psychology that used extensively for explaining the determinants
of intended behaviors in a variety of IS/IT domains (Larsen et al., 2009; Lee, 2010). PEOU is
defined as “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would be
free of physical and mental effort” (Davis, 1989, p. 320). Empirically, an expanded ECM with
the inclusion of PEOU, which has been widely used to explain IS/IT usage behavior in
previous literature, can contribute to the development of a more comprehensive explanation
of user behavior in the context of continued IS/IT usage intention (Hong et al., 2006; Thong
et al., 2006; Lee, 2010), because PEOU is one of the major cognitive beliefs in determining
users’ satisfaction and continuance intention of the IS/IT that are difficult to explain with
the narrower scope of post-adoption beliefs (Hong et al., 2006; Thong et al., 2006). Hence,
the inclusion of users’ PEOU in understanding their IS/IT continuance intention provides the
base for integrating PEOU and ECM into a hybrid framework with enhanced explanatory
power (Hong et al., 2006; Thong et al., 2006; Liao et al., 2007). Accordingly, the synthesis
subsuming PEOU into ECM can be used as the base for this study’s research model.
The empirical results for the synthesis of ECM and PEOU in the context of internet-based
services are addressed as follows. First, when users acquire confirmation experience of
internet-based services, their PEOU of such services will become more concrete, and thus
users’ level of confirmation of expectations toward internet-based services can positively
affect their PEOU of such services (Hong et al., 2006; Thong et al., 2006; Cheng, 2014b;
Cho, 2016; Chen et al., 2018; Huang, 2019). Next, if users perceive that it is easy to use
internet-based services while putting in the least amount of time and effort possible, they will
be more likely to believe that advantages result from such services (Hong et al., 2006;
Thong et al., 2006; Lee, 2010). Thus, the lower the level of complexity of internet-based
services and the easier it is for users to interact with such services, the more likely the users
Figure 1 Research model
H5b
Network Externality from

the Customer's Side H5a
Perceived Usefulness
H6a
Network Externality from

H6b
the Service Provider's Side
(+) H2 (+) (+)
Confirmation (+) Satisfaction (+) Continuance Intention
H7a
H7b H1 H3 H4
Online Service Quality

H7c
H8
Perceived Ease of Use
Offline Service Quality

will find such services useful (Hong et al., 2006; Thong et al., 2006; Lee, 2010; Cheng,
2014b; Cho, 2016; Chen et al., 2018; Cheng and Yuen, 2018; Huang, 2019). Third, internet-
based services which are easier to use may be less threatening to users (Hong et al., 2006;
Thong et al., 2006). That is, internet-based services that are perceived as easier to use will
be more likely to be perceived as more satisfactory, just because PEOU is one of the major
cognitive beliefs in determining users’ affect (i.e. satisfaction is a type of affect) toward the
adoption of internet-based services (Hong et al., 2006; Thong et al., 2006; Cheng, 2014b;
Cho, 2016; Chen et al., 2018; Cheng and Yuen, 2018; Huang, 2019). Finally, if users
perceive that internet-based services are easy to use for performing and functioning
effectively with the minimum waste of time and effort, and their interaction with such
services is relatively free of cognitive burden, they will intend to continue using it (Hong
et al., 2006; Thong et al., 2006). Thus, users’ PEOU of internet-based services can affect
their continuance intention of such services (Hong et al., 2006; Thong et al., 2006; Cheng,
2014b; Cho, 2016; Cheng and Yuen, 2018). Thus, this study posits that customers’
confirmation of expectations toward internet-based sharing economy service platforms can
influence their PEOU, which in turn leads to their PU, satisfaction and continuance intention
of internet-based sharing economy service platforms. Hence, this study hypothesizes the
following:
H1. Confirmation will positively affect PEOU of internet-based sharing economy service
platforms.
H2. PEOU will positively affect PU of internet-based sharing economy service platforms.
H3. PEOU will positively affect satisfaction with internet-based sharing economy service
platforms.
H4. PEOU will positively affect continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy
service platforms.
Incorporating network externality into the synthesis integrating

expectation–confirmation model and perceived ease of use
Network externality refers to an increase in the utility/value of a product/service for a user as
the number of other users of that product/service increases (Katz and Shapiro, 1985; Van
den Ende et al., 2003). Essentially, network externality plays a key role in driving users’
continuance intention of products/services (Bao, 2016), because benefits are related to the
number of existing users (Zhu and Bao, 2018). Hence, the development of IS/IT is along
with users’ perceptions of increasing numbers of others supporting that IS/IT; this will
continuously add value to the IS/IT and further lead to increases in the number of other
users’ IS/IT usage (Nault and Dexter, 1994; Wang and Seidmann, 1995; Lee, 2006). Hence,
when consumers use the services and service providers provide consumers with the
services form a two-sided market around the sharing economy platform, consumers and
service providers can interact across the platform within the two-sided market, and the
value of the platform can further increase with the size of the network (Rysman, 2009; Kumar
et al., 2018).
Essentially, if users perceive that increasing numbers of other users are using the IS/IT, they
will think the IS/IT must be useful in its purpose and try out the IS/IT (Lee, 2006; Cheng,
2014a; Zhou, 2015). In the sharing economy context, the customer’s decision to accept the
special types of internet-based sharing economy service platforms may be influenced by
other users, and such effects from user network can be classified into the demand side (i.e.
customers) and the supply side (i.e. service providers) of sharing economy services
(Rochet and Tirole, 2003; Kumar et al., 2018). Thus, this study posits that demand-side and
supply-side network externalities can influence customers’ PU and continuance intention of
internet-based sharing economy service platforms. Hence, this study hypothesizes the
following:

H5a. Network externality from the customer’s side will positively affect PU of internet-
based sharing economy service platforms.
H5b. Network externality from the customer’s side will positively affect continuance
intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms.
H6a. Network externality from the service provider’s side will positively affect PU of
internet-based sharing economy service platforms.
H6b. Network externality from the service provider’s side will positively affect
continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms.
Embedding service quality into the synthesis integrating expectation–confirmation

model and perceived ease of use
Service quality is a measure of how well the delivered service level meets customers’
expectation; a high level of service quality means that the service is consistent with
consumer expectations (Parasuraman et al., 1985; Parasuraman et al., 1991; Oh, 1999).
Previous research has studied the service quality using established measurement scales
(Orel and Kara, 2014; Shi et al., 2014). With the rapid development of the e-commerce, an
increasing number of both practitioners and academics have focused on service quality in
the online market.
Online service quality and user belief. Online service quality is defined as the degree to
which a user perceives that the overall quality of online services from the IS/IT (Baroudi and
Orlikowski, 1988; Kim et al., 2008), and it refers to availability of multiple communication
mechanisms for timely assisting users in solving the IS/IT usage problems (Bhattacherjee,
2001; Ahn et al., 2004; Ahn et al., 2007; Lin et al., 2017). Online service quality is a useful
predictor of PU and PEOU in IS/IT usage (Ahn et al., 2004; Ahn et al., 2007; Lin, 2007; Park
et al., 2009; Pai and Huang, 2011; Choi and Park, 2015; Xu and Du, 2018). Next, if users’
perception of online service quality of the IS/IT exceeds their expectations, it causes higher
confirmation toward the IS/IT (Roca et al., 2006; Cheng, 2014b).
Offline service quality and user belief. Offline service quality refers to a customer’s
perception of confirmation of expectations about an offline service received (Yap et al.,
2010; Yang et al., 2011; Yang et al., 2013). Essentially, both online quality and offline quality
are all critical because they have greater effects on PU of the IS/IT than online quality alone.
That is, if service providers can also provide customers with good offline services,
customers will be more likely to believe that online services are useful (Ahn et al., 2004).
Basically, if service providers can provide customers with good offline services, customers
will have more confidence in online services (Yap et al., 2010; Yang et al., 2011; Yang et al.,
2013). Further, customers can be satisfied with online services (Chen et al., 2019), and
customers will be more likely to believe that advantages result from such online services
(Yang et al., 2013). Hence, offline service quality is a useful predictor of PU in IS/IT usage.
In the sharing economy context, three participants create a triadic platform-based
relationship including service enablers, customers and service providers (Kumar et al.,
2018, p. 147); essentially, service enablers provide consumers and service providers with
online services, service providers provide consumers with offline services and consumers
use online and offline services form a three-sided market around internet-based sharing
economy service platforms (Rochet and Tirole, 2003; Kumar et al., 2018). Thus, according
to foregoing inferences for service quality (including online and offline) and user belief, this
study posits that service enablers’ online service quality is a key antecedent of customers’
PU, PEOU and confirmation of expectations toward internet-based sharing economy
service platforms, and service providers’ offline service quality can affect customers’ PU of
internet-based sharing economy service platforms. Hence, this study hypothesizes the
following:

H7a. Online service quality will positively affect PU of internet-based sharing economy
service platforms.
H7b. Online service quality will positively affect confirmation of internet-based sharing
economy service platforms.
H7c. Online service quality will positively affect PEOU of internet-based sharing economy
service platforms.
H8. Offline service quality will positively affect PU of internet-based sharing economy
service platforms.
Research model
This study integrates network externality and service quality as antecedents to the synthesis
of ECM and PEOU in explaining customers’ continuance intention of internet-based sharing
economy service platforms. The research model used in this study is depicted in Figure 1.
Methodology
Measures and pre-test
In this study, responses to the items in network externality from the customer’s side, network
externality from the service provider’s side, online service quality, offline service quality, PU,
PEOU, confirmation, satisfaction and continuance intention were measured on a seven-
point Likert scale from 1 (= “strongly disagree”) to 7 (= “strongly agree”) with 4 labeled as
neutral. Seven-point Likert scale was selected for the questionnaire scoring in this study,
because Bollen (1989) indicated that the seven-point Likert scale in structural equation
modeling (SEM) approach practically reveals the best performance. Essentially, content
validity ensures that construct items are drawn from a review of relevant literature
(Cronbach, 1951). In this study, items chosen for the constructs were adapted and revised
from previous research, where they had been shown to exhibit strong content validity.
Besides, the questionnaire was pre-tested on 50 students who had experience using
sharing economy services (e.g. Uber, Airbnb, etc.) via internet-based sharing economy
service platforms at a comprehensive university in Taipei, Taiwan in the voluntary and
anonymous way. Participants were asked to identify any ambiguities in the meanings, and
the questionnaire was revised based on their comments. Basically, face validity refers to
whether respondents perceive the construct items to be applicable and credible
(Cronbach, 1971). Hence, items chosen for the constructs in this study had strong face
validity. The instrument’s reliability was evaluated, and the Cronbach’s a values (ranging
from 0.82 to 0.96) exceeded common requirements for exploratory research, indicating a
satisfactory reliability level (Nunnally, 1978; Hair et al., 1998). The subjects who had
participated in the pre-test were excluded from the final data collection and subsequent
study. The final items are listed in Table 1 along with their sources.
Sampling process
The early adopters of sharing economy services are mainly young people in large cities who
are familiar with mobile devices (PwC, 2015; Zhu et al., 2017). Thus, this study’s sampling
frame was taken from among students enrolled in a comprehensive university with over
15,000 enrolled students in Taipei, Taiwan, and the unit of analysis was individual students
with experience in using sharing economy services (e.g. Uber, Airbnb, etc.) via internet-
based sharing economy service platforms. Questionnaires were distributed in various
campus locations, and the invited participants were selected based on their experience in
using sharing economy services via internet-based sharing economy service platforms.
Initial inquiry was made to each student agreed to participate in this study to confirm

Table 1 Construct measurement and sources
Construct Item Measure Source
Online service quality OnSQ1 When I use internet-based sharing economy service platforms, Cho et al. (2009)
(OnSQ) service enablers can provide me with prompt responses
OnSQ2 When I use internet-based sharing economy service platforms, Lin et al. (2017)
service enablers can provide me with on-time services
OnSQ3 When I use internet-based sharing economy service platforms,
service enablers can provide me with right responses to my requests
OnSQ4 Overall, sharing economy service enablers’ online services is
satisfactory
Offline service quality OffSQ1 When I use internet-based sharing economy service platforms, Orel and Kara (2014)
(OffSQ) service providers can provide me with prompt services
OffSQ2 When I use internet-based sharing economy service platforms, Shi et al. (2014)
service providers can provide me with services right at the first time
OffSQ3 When I use internet-based sharing economy service platforms,
service providers can provide me with individual attention
OffSQ4 Overall, sharing economy service providers’ offline services is
satisfactory
Network externality from the NEC1 Most of my friends use sharing economy services via internet-based Zhou (2015)
customer’s side (NEC) sharing economy service platforms
NEC2 Most of my peers use sharing economy services via internet-based Zhang et al. (2017)
sharing economy service platforms
NEC3 Most of the people in my personal circle use sharing economy
services via internet-based sharing economy service platforms
Network externality from the NEP1 I think that many people provide sharing economy services via Zhou (2015)
service provider’s side internet-based sharing economy service platforms
(NEP) NEP2 I think the number of people providing sharing economy services via Zhang et al. (2017)
internet-based sharing economy service platforms has increased
rapidly
NEP3 I believe that many people will continue to provide sharing economy
services via internet-based sharing economy service platforms in the
future
Perceived usefulness (PU) PU1 Using internet-based sharing economy service platforms can Davis (1989)
enhance the effectiveness of using related services
PU2 Using internet-based sharing economy service platforms can Thong et al. (2006)
improve the performance of using related services
PU3 Using internet-based sharing economy service platforms can give Lee (2010)
me greater control over the usage of related services
PU4 I find internet-based sharing economy service platforms to be useful
in using related services
Perceived ease of use PEOU1 Interacting with internet-based sharing economy service platforms Davis (1989)
(PEOU) does not require a lot of my mental effort
PEOU2 I find internet-based sharing economy service platforms easy to use Thong et al. (2006)
PEOU3 My interaction with internet-based sharing economy service Lee (2010)
platforms is clear and understandable
PEOU4 It is easy to get internet-based sharing economy service platforms to
do what I want them to do
Confirmation (Conf) Conf1 My experience with using internet-based sharing economy service Bhattacherjee (2001)
platforms was better than what I expected
Conf2 The service level provided by internet-based sharing economy Larsen et al. (2009)
service platforms was better than what I expected
Conf3 My expectations from using internet-based sharing economy service
platforms were confirmed
Satisfaction (Satisf) Satisf1 I am content with the performance of using internet-based sharing Bhattacherjee (2001)
economy service platforms
Satisf2 I am pleased with the experience of using internet-based sharing Lee (2010)
Satisf3 I am happy with the functions provided by internet-based sharing Lin et al. (2017)
(continued)

Table 1
Construct Item Measure Source
Satisf4 I am satisfied with the overall experience of using internet-based

sharing economy service platforms
Continuance intention (CI) CI1 I intend to continue using internet-based sharing economy service Bhattacherjee (2001)
platforms in the future
CI2 I will use internet-based sharing economy service platforms on a Larsen et al. (2009)
regular basis in the future
CI3 I will frequently use internet-based sharing economy service Lin and Wang (2012)
platforms in the future
CI4 My intentions are to continue using internet-based sharing economy
service platforms than use any alternative means (traditional service
platforms)
whether they matched this study’s selection criterion; if they matched the selection criterion,
then this study would further explain the study’s purpose and invite their participation.
Data collection
The data for this study were gathered by means of a paper-and-pencil survey, and the
questionnaires were distributed to students who had experience using sharing
economy services via internet-based sharing economy service platforms. To minimize
data variation, the data collection occurred during limited periods (Lin et al., 2010), and
the data for students were collected over a period of one month during a semester.
Overall, a total of 600 questionnaires were distributed in various campus locations.
Finally, 546 (91.0%) questionnaires were returned. A total of 36 of these received
questionnaires were discarded because of partial portions of missing values.
Consequently, 510 usable questionnaires were analyzed in this study, with a usable
response rate of 85.0%. Furthermore, using a x 2-test, no significant differences were
seen in the distribution by number of students between the sample and the population
( x 2 = 3.661, p > 0.05). Hence, the sample is representative of the population. The
results of the x 2-test and distribution by number of students between population and
sample are depicted in Table 2.
Ethical considerations
Based on ethical considerations, respondents’ rights and common method bias concerns
recommended by Podsakoff et al. (2003), respondents were asked to read the
Table 2 x 2-test and distribution by number of students between population and sample
Population Sample
Types of major N (%) N (%) x2
Engineering 4,380 21.8 116 22.7 3.661

Liberal arts 3,178 15.8 78 15.3 df = 5
Management 6,827 34.0 160 31.4
Sciences 2,795 13.9 80 15.7
Social sciences 2,370 11.8 66 12.9
Others 506 2.5 10 2.0
Total 20,056 100.0 510 100.0
Notes: df = degree of freedom; x 2>11.070, p<0.05

questionnaire cover letter that stated this study’s purpose and respondents’ rights before
answering the questionnaire. In this study, respondents were assured that their participation
and responses would be completely anonymous, confidential and voluntary; they were
notified the right to withdraw from their participation at any time; and they were informed that
there were no right or wrong answers to the items and were requested to reflect their true
opinions on each item as objectively as possible. Return of the respondents’ completed
questionnaire and their permission implied consent to participate in this study, and the
obtained data from the respondents were used only for this study.
Data analysis
This study’s data analysis followed a two-step method for SEM approach recommended by
Anderson and Gerbing (1988). First, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to
develop the measurement model. Second, to explore the causal relationships among all
constructs, the structural model for the research model was tested using SEM. The
statistical analysis software packages used to perform these analyses were AMOS 5.0
(SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) and SPSS 8.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).
Results
Descriptive characteristics of the usable responses
A total of 510 usable responses were collected. Among them, 235 respondents (46.1%)
were males, and 275 respondents (53.9%) were females, with most of these respondents
(61.8%, n = 315) being undergraduate students. Most respondents, 68.6%, were
21–30 years old, and 25.7% were under 21 years old. Next, the respondents were enrolled
in a variety of majors; among them, 22.9% respondents majored in engineering (n = 117),
liberal arts (15.7%, n = 80), management (27.1%, n = 138), sciences (18.6%, n = 95), social
sciences (12.2%, n = 62) and others (3.5%, n = 18). Additionally, in terms of experience in
using sharing economy services via internet-based sharing economy service platforms,
most respondents reported that they had less than two years’ experience (62.3%, n = 318).
Descriptive characteristics of the usable responses are depicted in Table 3.
Test of normality
The sample size of 510 is more than the minimum size of 200 required for SEM analysis
(Kline, 2005); thus, the statistical method of skewness and kurtosis was used to assess the
normality of the data distribution. The absolute values of the skewness and kurtosis of all the
items should be less than 3 and 10, respectively (Kline, 2005; Teo et al., 2015). In this study,
the absolute values of the skewness and kurtosis of all the items are within 0.063–0.518 and
0.168–0.889, respectively, thus confirming that the data are normally distributed.
Results of structural modeling analysis
Measurement model. To assess the measurement model, three types of analyses were
conducted in this study. First, with regard to reliability, according to the views of previous
studies (Nunnally, 1978; Hair et al., 1998; Holmes-Smith, 2001), squared multiple correlation
(SMC) for each item, and composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE)
for each construct were used in this study to test the reliability of all constructs. The results
of CFA showed that the SMC values for all items were greater than 0.5, which indicated a
good reliability level (Holmes-Smith, 2001). The values of CR and AVE for all constructs
exceeded the minimum acceptable values of 0.7 and 0.5 (Nunnally, 1978; Hair et al., 1998;
Holmes-Smith, 2001), indicating a good reliability level and subsequently yielding very
consistent results. Hence, the results of CFA demonstrated an acceptable level of reliability
for all constructs. Moreover, the reliability coefficients of all constructs assessed by the

Table 3 Descriptive characteristics of the usable responses
Demographics Number (n = 510) (%)
Gender
Female 275 53.9
Male 235 46.1
Age
<21 131 25.7
21–30 350 68.6
31–40 23 4.5
41–50 6 1.2
>50 0 0.0
Educational level
Undergraduate students 315 61.8
Graduate students 195 38.2
Major
Engineering 117 22.9
Liberal arts 80 15.7
Management 138 27.1
Sciences 95 18.6
Social sciences 62 12.2
Others 18 3.5
Experience in using sharing economy services via internet-based sharing economy service platforms
(UExp)
0 year < UExp < 1 year 120 23.5
1 year UExp < 2 years 198 38.8
2 years UExp < 3 years 192 37.7
Cronbach’s a coefficient exceeded the 0.7 cut-off value as recommended by Nunnally

(1978) and Hair et al. (1998). The results of reliability test are shown in Table 4.
Second, convergent validity and discriminant validity were used in this study to assess the
validity of all constructs. As for convergent validity, based on Anderson and Gerbing’s
(1988) rule, the results of CFA showed that the t-value of every item exceeded the 1.96
value (p < 0.05), so the evidence of good convergent validity was obtained as the items
represented their constructs significantly (see Table 4). Next, to test for discriminant validity,
the procedure described by Fornell and Larcker (1981) was used in this study. The results
of CFA showed that the AVE of each construct was greater than the squared correlation for
each pair of constructs, indicating that each construct was distinct (see Table 4, Table 5).
Moreover, the convergent and discriminant validity of the measures were also conducted
using principal components analysis with varimax rotation. As shown in Table 6, nine
components were extracted, accounting for 86.8% of the total variance. Based on the rules
of prior studies (Churchill, 1979; Hair et al., 1998), convergent and discriminant validity can
be established by the high factor loadings (over 0.7) and low cross-loadings (under 0.4).
Table 6 shows item loadings and cross-loadings by construct. The results showed that all
loadings were greater than 0.7, and the cross-loading scores were all lower than 0.4. Thus,
the results indicated that the measures exhibited strong convergent and discriminant
validity.
Third, the most common rules used in performing the CFA for measurement model and
testing the structural model include stipulating that the goodness-of-fit index (GFI)
should be greater than 0.9, the adjusted GFI (AGFI) should be greater than 0.8, the
incremental fix index (IFI) should be greater than 0.9, the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI)
should be greater than 0.9, the comparative fit index (CFI) should be greater than 0.9,
the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) should be less than 0.08 and the

Table 4 Results of conﬁrmatory factor analysis, validity analysis and reliability test
Standardized path
Construct item Estimate t-value coefficients SMC CR AVE Cronbach’s a
OnSQ 0.913 0.724 0.950

OnSQ1 1.000 –a 0.888 0.789
OnSQ2 1.026 25.373 0.895 0.801
OnSQ3 1.043 27.494 0.925 0.856
OnSQ4 1.107 27.577 0.926 0.858
OffSQ 0.928 0.764 0.949
OffSQ1 1.000 –a 0.917 0.842
OffSQ2 0.960 28.897 0.908 0.824
OffSQ3 1.017 28.254 0.901 0.812
OffSQ4 1.009 28.324 0.902 0.813
NEC 0.904 0.759 0.931
NEC1 1.000 –a 0.868 0.753
NEC2 1.013 24.907 0.912 0.830
NEC3 1.125 26.272 0.934 0.873
NEP 0.936 0.830 0.955
NEP1 1.000 –a 0.930 0.865
NEP2 1.024 33.841 0.943 0.889
NEP3 1.027 32.754 0.934 0.872
PU 0.907 0.709 0.940
PU1 1.000 –a 0.886 0.786
PU2 1.056 25.562 0.901 0.812
PU3 1.102 24.523 0.885 0.783
PU4 1.091 25.116 0.894 0.800
PEOU 0.935 0.783 0.957
PEOU1 1.000 –a 0.875 0.765
PEOU2 1.040 28.148 0.945 0.894
PEOU3 1.041 27.020 0.930 0.865
PEOU4 1.084 27.830 0.941 0.886
Conf 0.925 0.804 0.948
Conf1 1.000 –a 0.926 0.858
Conf2 1.018 31.951 0.929 0.862
Conf3 1.042 31.609 0.926 0.857
Satisf 0.930 0.767 0.951
Satisf1 1.000 –a 0.919 0.844
Satisf2 0.980 30.860 0.926 0.857
Satisf3 0.922 27.071 0.886 0.785
Satisf4 0.988 29.024 0.908 0.824
CI 0.943 0.805 0.961
CI1 1.000 –a 0.926 0.859
CI2 1.021 33.209 0.936 0.875
CI3 1.046 31.129 0.918 0.843
CI4 1.048 32.566 0.930 0.866
Notes: OnSQ = Online service quality; OffSQ = Offline service quality; NEC = Network externality
from the customer’s side; NEP = Network externality from the service provider’s side; PU = Perceived
usefulness; PEOU = Perceived ease of use; Conf = Confirmation; Satisf = Satisfaction; CI =
Continuance intention. aThe loading was fixed
x 2/df should be less than 3 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988; Hair et al., 1998). The overall fit
indices of measurement model were x 2 = 1,285.863, df = 584, x 2/df = 2.202, p < 0.001,
GFI = 0.931, AGFI = 0.917, IFI = 0.963, TLI = 0.958, CFI = 0.963 and RMSEA = 0.049.
Thus, the results of CFA showed that the indices were over their respective common
acceptance levels.
Common method bias. When the research data collected from the same source with self-
reported questionnaires, there is a concern that a common method bias may occur
(Malhotra et al., 2006). That is, common method bias may affect the empirical results.

Table 5 Discriminant validity for the measurement model
Variance
Construct OnSQ OffSQ NEC NEP PU PEOU Conf Satisf CI
OnSQ 0.724
OffSQ 0.017 0.764
NEC 0.010 0.069 0.759
NEP 0.050 0.021 0.067 0.830
PU 0.187 0.141 0.217 0.168 0.709
PEOU 0.181 0.189 0.042 0.162 0.213 0.783
Conf 0.145 0.147 0.225 0.156 0.212 0.196 0.804
Satisf 0.164 0.175 0.248 0.168 0.210 0.186 0.259 0.767
CI 0.142 0.167 0.196 0.152 0.243 0.206 0.315 0.282 0.805
Continuance intention; the italic values along the diagonal line are the AVE values for the constructs,
and the other values are the squared correlations for each pair of constructs
According to the views recommended by Podsakoff et al. (2003), to prevent the threat of
common method bias, in this study, respondents were assured that their participation and
responses would be completely anonymous, confidential and voluntary; they were notified
the right to withdraw from their participation at any time; and they were informed that there
were no right or wrong answers to the items and were requested to reflect their true
opinions on each item as objectively as possible. Besides, common method bias test
should be conducted, and Harman’s single-factor test was used to examine the common
method bias (Harman, 1976; Podsakoff and Organ, 1986; Podsakoff et al., 2003).
Essentially, two analyses were used in this study. First, this study entered all the self-
reported variables in an exploratory factor analysis with principal components analysis and
unrotated factor solution. The result indicated that nine factors emerged with eigenvalues
greater than 1 and 86.8% of the variance explained, and no single factor was dominant with
the first factor accounting for 28.2% of the variance. Hence, no one factor accounts for the
majority of the variance in the variables; thus, it seems that the common method bias is not
a problem for this study (Podsakoff and Organ, 1986; Podsakoff et al., 2003). Next, a CFA
approach to Harman’s single-factor test was used to assess the common method bias
(Sanchez et al., 1995). This study used CFA to test the fit of a single-factor model (where all
items were loaded on a single factor) and a nine-factor model. The results showed that the
fit indices of the single-factor model ( x 2 = 3,380.741, df = 629, x 2/df = 5.375, p < 0.001,
GFI = 0.774, AGFI = 0.747, IFI = 0.855, TLI = 0.847, CFI = 0.855 and RMSEA = 0.093) were
worse than those of the nine-factor model ( x 2 = 1,285.863, df = 584, x 2/df = 2.202, p <
0.001, GFI = 0.931, AGFI = 0.917, IFI = 0.963, TLI = 0.958, CFI = 0.963 and RMSEA =
0.049). Based on the views recommended by Sanchez et al. (1995), the fit is considerably
worse for the single-factor model than it is for the multi-factor model, which indicates that
common method bias is not a serious threat in this study.
Structural model. The further step is to test the structural model for the research model
depicted in Figure 1. The overall fit indices for the structural model were as follows: x 2 =
1,639.568, df = 605, x 2/df = 2.710, p < 0.001, GFI = 0.901, AGFI = 0.885, IFI = 0.941, TLI =
0.935, CFI = 0.941 and RMSEA = 0.058. Based on the rules of prior studies (Bagozzi and
Yi, 1988; Hair et al., 1998), the results of CFA showed that the fit indices for this structural
model were quite acceptable.
Hypothesis testing. Properties of the causal paths, including standardized path coefficients
( b ), t-values and explained variances (R2), are shown in Figure 2. As to ECM, confirmation
had significant effects on PU ( b = 0.296, p < 0.001) and satisfaction ( b = 0.623, p <
0.001); PU had significant effects on satisfaction ( b = 0.188, p < 0.001) and continuance

Table 6 Results of factor structure matrix of loadings and cross-loadings
Construct Component
Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
OnSQ
OnSQ1 0.309 0.337 0.177 0.828 0.089 0.066 0.038 0.033 0.045
OnSQ2 0.327 0.331 0.175 0.835 0.066 0.116 0.041 0.082 0.038
OnSQ3 0.318 0.295 0.205 0.862 0.071 0.074 0.045 0.038 0.059
OnSQ4 0.362 0.287 0.155 0.868 0.079 0.098 0.073 0.063 0.051
OffSQ
OffSQ1 0.295 0.331 0.203 0.089 0.861 0.051 0.068 0.033 0.037
OffSQ2 0.328 0.353 0.161 0.129 0.851 0.102 0.045 0.045 0.075
OffSQ3 0.355 0.268 0.182 0.088 0.825 0.125 0.055 0.071 0.081
OffSQ4 0.325 0.277 0.175 0.138 0.829 0.073 0.041 0.086 0.045
NEC
NEC1 0.293 0.338 0.225 0.081 0.066 0.045 0.088 0.034 0.768
NEC2 0.315 0.282 0.251 0.097 0.091 0.077 0.071 0.075 0.856
NEC3 0.351 0.318 0.206 0.079 0.079 0.105 0.079 0.061 0.888
NEP
NEP1 0.330 0.335 0.202 0.091 0.066 0.086 0.878 0.038 0.059
NEP2 0.348 0.296 0.235 0.095 0.105 0.102 0.906 0.071 0.047
NEP3 0.315 0.322 0.223 0.083 0.063 0.059 0.891 0.081 0.038
PU
PU1 0.354 0.338 0.275 0.105 0.069 0.806 0.071 0.045 0.035
PU2 0.368 0.335 0.285 0.088 0.045 0.833 0.049 0.078 0.081
PU3 0.325 0.295 0.273 0.118 0.075 0.803 0.068 0.035 0.043
PU4 0.298 0.305 0.281 0.131 0.056 0.822 0.102 0.055 0.038
PEOU
PEOU1 0.295 0.838 0.231 0.135 0.068 0.056 0.109 0.031 0.029
PEOU2 0.351 0.915 0.216 0.125 0.087 0.073 0.074 0.056 0.037
PEOU3 0.358 0.898 0.195 0.115 0.045 0.091 0.071 0.071 0.082
PEOU4 0.379 0.908 0.185 0.111 0.061 0.085 0.066 0.075 0.074
Conf
Conf1 0.356 0.373 0.168 0.118 0.055 0.056 0.059 0.868 0.056
Conf2 0.355 0.325 0.251 0.085 0.066 0.051 0.051 0.879 0.075
Conf3 0.375 0.315 0.182 0.116 0.103 0.085 0.082 0.861 0.059
Satisf
Satisf1 0.356 0.355 0.891 0.115 0.046 0.051 0.041 0.051 0.039
Satisf2 0.369 0.345 0.901 0.045 0.068 0.105 0.059 0.083 0.031
Satisf3 0.338 0.282 0.851 0.094 0.078 0.071 0.098 0.033 0.056
Satisf4 0.355 0.293 0.875 0.062 0.071 0.095 0.083 0.082 0.079
CI
CI1 0.908 0.357 0.255 0.155 0.061 0.066 0.056 0.029 0.035
CI2 0.928 0.322 0.218 0.151 0.046 0.086 0.043 0.051 0.041
CI3 0.905 0.355 0.266 0.106 0.075 0.059 0.046 0.073 0.061
CI4 0.923 0.328 0.235 0.125 0.049 0.098 0.089 0.061 0.045
Continuance intention; the italic values are factor loadings that are significant and greater than 0.7
intention ( b = 0.220, p < 0.001); and satisfaction significantly affected continuance

intention ( b = 0.543, p < 0.001); hence, these associations within ECM are validated. As for
the synthesis of ECM and PEOU, confirmation had a significant effect on PEOU ( b = 0.483,
p < 0.001); hence, H1 is supported; and PEOU had significant effects on PU ( b = 0.196,
p < 0.01), satisfaction ( b = 0.138, p < 0.01) and continuance intention ( b = 0.150, p <

Figure 2 Results of structural modeling analysis
0.055
(1.415)
Network Externality from 0.222

the Customer's Side (6.552)
Perceived Usefulness
[R 2 = 0.671]
0.125
(3.816)
Network Externality from 0.038

the Service Provider's Side (0.993)
0.296 0.196 0.188 0.220
(4.411) (2.825) (4.123) (4.234)
Confirmation 0.623 Satisfaction 0.543 Continuance Intention

[R 2 = 0.632] (10.813)
[R 2 = 0.775] (9.189)
[R2 = 0.815]
0.348
(5.348)
0.785
0.483 0.138 0.150
(20.057)
(9.562) (2.587) (2.801)
Online Service Quality 0.425

(8.464)
0.118
(2.822) Perceived Ease of Use
[R 2 = 0.731]
Offline Service Quality
Notes: 1. Standardized path coefficients are reported (t-values in parentheses); 2. Absolute

t-value > 1.96, p < 0.05; absolute t-value > 2.58, p < 0.01; absolute t-value > 3.29, p < 0.001
0.01); hence, H2, H3 and H4 are supported. With regard to the antecedents of customer
beliefs, first, network externality from the customer’s side had a significant effect on PU ( b =
0.222, p < 0.001), but network externality from the customer’s side had an insignificant
effect on continuance intention ( b = 0.055, p > 0.05); hence, H5a is supported, but H5b is
rejected. Next, network externality from the service provider’s side had a significant effect
on PU ( b = 0.125, p < 0.001), but network externality from the service provider’s side had
an insignificant effect on continuance intention ( b = 0.038, p > 0.05); hence, H6a is
supported, but H6b is rejected. Third, online service quality had significant effects on PU
( b = 0.348, p < 0.001), confirmation ( b = 0.785, p < 0.001) and PEOU ( b = 0.425, p <
0.001); hence, H7a, H7b and H7c are supported. Finally, offline service quality had a
significant effect on PU ( b = 0.118, p < 0.01); hence, H8 is supported. In the following, the
explained variances (R2) of PU, confirmation, PEOU, satisfaction and continuance intention
were 0.671, 0.632, 0.731, 0.775 and 0.815, respectively. Further, using the empirical results
above, the direct and indirect effects between the constructs are shown in Table 7.
Discussions
Based on the synthesis integrating ECM and PEOU, this study’s results verified that network
externality and service quality, as antecedents to customer beliefs, could lead to customers’
continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms. Detailed
discussions are proposed below.

This study confirmed that customers’ confirmation of expectations toward internet-
based sharing economy service platforms had positive impacts on their PU and PEOU

Table 7 Direct and indirect effects between the constructs
PU PEOU Conf Satisf CI
Construct DE InDE TE DE InDE TE DE InDE TE DE InDE TE DE InDE TE
OnSQ 0.348 0.390 0.738 0.425 0.380 0.805 0.785 – 0.785 – 0.739 0.739 – 0.685 0.685
OffSQ 0.118 – 0.118 – – – – – – – 0.022 0.022 – 0.038 0.038
NEC 0.222 – 0.222 – – – – – – – 0.042 0.042 – 0.072 0.072
NEP 0.125 – 0.125 – – – – – – – 0.024 0.024 – 0.040 0.040
PU – – – – – – – – – 0.188 – 0.188 0.220 0.102 0.322
PEOU 0.196 – 0.196 – – – – – – 0.138 0.037 0.175 0.150 0.138 0.288
Conf 0.296 0.095 0.391 0.483 – 0.483 – – – 0.623 0.140 0.763 – 0.573 0.573
Satisf – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.543 – 0.543
Notes: OnSQ = Online service quality; OffSQ = Offline service quality; NEC = Network externality from the customer’s side; NEP =
Network externality from the service provider’s side; PU = Perceived usefulness; PEOU = Perceived ease of use; Conf = Confirmation;
Satisf = Satisfaction; CI = Continuance intention; DE = Direct effect; InDE = Indirect effects; TE = Total effects
of the platforms; customers’ PEOU of internet-based sharing economy service

platforms positively influenced their PU of the platforms; customers’ confirmation, PU
and PEOU of internet-based sharing economy service platforms caused their
satisfaction with the platforms; and customers’ PU, PEOU and satisfaction with internet-
based sharing economy service platforms led to their continuance intention of the
platforms. As expected, the results are consistent with previous studies (Hong et al.,
2006; Thong et al., 2006; Cheng, 2014b; Cho, 2016; Chen et al., 2018; Cheng and
Yuen, 2018; Huang, 2019) that have found that synthesizing ECM and PEOU can
definitely increase the accuracy of the hybrid model to predict users’ IS/IT continuance
intention. The results first reveal the saliency of the conjunction of ECM and PEOU in
understanding customers’ continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy
service platforms. Next, the results reveal that customers’ confirmation of expectations
toward internet-based sharing economy service platforms overwhelmingly indirectly
affects their continuance intention of the platforms (InDE = 0.573) mainly via their PEOU
of the platforms (see Table 7). Finally, customers place more emphasis on their
confirmation of expectations toward internet-based sharing economy service platforms
in forming their satisfaction with the platforms, which is the most crucial direct driver of
their continuance intention of the platforms [direct effect (DE) = 0.543] (see Table 7),
thereby ensuring the key roles of confirmation and satisfaction in determining their
continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms.

With regard to network externality and customers’ continuance intention of internet-based
sharing economy service platforms, this study showed that network externality from
customers’ side and service providers’ side all positively affected customers’ PU of internet-
based sharing economy service platforms, which in turn resulted in customers’ continuance
intention of the platforms. The results are consistent with prior studies (Lee, 2006; Cheng,
2014a; Zhou, 2015) that have found that network externality can definitely increase the
accuracy for predicting users’ IS/IT adoption. The results further reveal that network externality
from customers’ side can exhibit more indirect impacts on customers’ satisfaction and
continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms via customers’ PU
of the platforms than network externality from service providers’ side (see Table 7).

With regard to service quality and customers’ continuance intention of internet-based
sharing economy service platforms, first, this study proved that service enablers’ online

service quality positively affected customers’ PU, confirmation and PEOU of internet-based
sharing economy service platforms, which directly or indirectly explained customers’
satisfaction and continuance intention of the platforms. The results just support prior studies
(Ahn et al., 2004; Ahn et al., 2007; Lin, 2007; Park et al., 2009; Pai and Huang, 2011; Choi
and Park, 2015; Xu and Du, 2018) that have found that service enablers’ online service
quality can play the most critical role as a driver to users’ IS/IT adoption. The results reveal
that service enablers’ online service quality can exhibit the strongest indirect impacts on
customers’ satisfaction (InDE = 0.739) and continuance intention (InDE = 0.685) of internet-
based sharing economy service platforms via customers’ PU, confirmation and PEOU of the
platform (see Table 7). Next, this study certified that service providers’ offline service quality
positively influenced customers’ PU of internet-based sharing economy service platforms,
which in turn caused customers’ satisfaction and continuance intention of the platforms. As
advocated by Ahn et al. (2004), service providers’ offline service quality is a direct
antecedent of users’ PU of the IS/IT, and it is also an indirect antecedent of users’ adoption
of the IS/IT. The results reveal that service providers’ offline service quality can exhibit less
indirect impacts on customers’ satisfaction and continuance intention of internet-based
sharing economy service platforms than service enablers’ online service quality; the reason
is that service enablers’ online service quality has significant and evidently greater effects
on PU than service providers’ offline service quality (see Table 7).
Theoretical implications
This study’s results strongly supported the research model integrating ECM and PEOU via
using network externality and service quality as the drivers with all hypothesized links being
significant, and this model accounted for 77.5% and 81.5% of the variance in satisfaction
and continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms,
respectively. Hence, this study’s research model has good explanatory power and provides
practitioners and academics with an in-depth understanding of customers’ satisfaction and
continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms. Detailed
theoretical implications are proposed below.

Obviously, this study’s results strongly supported the synthesis integrating ECM and PEOU
with all hypothesized links being significant. This study’s results reveal three implications.
First, the results reveal that satisfaction is the strongest direct determinant of continuance
intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms relative to the other
determinants (see Table 7). The results imply that having satisfied users is the key driver of
continued IS/IT usage intention because they place more emphasis on their confirmation of
expectations in forming their levels of satisfaction toward using the IS/IT than on their post-
adoption beliefs (Bhattacherjee, 2001; Thong et al., 2006). Namely, in this study,
satisfaction can be the key to explaining the so-called Bhattacherjee’s (2001) IS
acceptance–discontinuance anomaly phenomenon, which occurs when customers
discontinue using internet-based sharing economy service platforms after initially accepting
it. Hence, the inclusion of users’ satisfaction in understanding their continuance intention of
the IS/IT is strongly warranted (Larsen et al., 2009; Lin and Wang, 2012). Next, the results
reveal that customers’ PEOU of internet-based sharing economy service platforms has
positive effects on their satisfaction and continuance intention of the platforms both in a
direct way and in an indirect way via their PU, while customers’ PU has stronger total effects
than their PEOU on their satisfaction and continuance intention of internet-based sharing
economy service platforms (see Table 7). Hence, the results imply that while ECM chooses
PU to be the surrogate for post-adoption expectation, PEOU is also one of the major
cognitive beliefs in determining users’ continuance intention of the IS/IT that is difficult to
explain with the narrower scope of post-adoption beliefs (Hong et al., 2006; Thong et al.,

2006). Thus, it should be noted that incorporating PEOU into ECM can enhance better
understanding of the complex nature for customers’ continuance intention of internet-based
sharing economy service platforms. Third, the results reveal that customers’ confirmation
of expectations toward internet-based sharing economy service platforms is a
stronger predictor of their satisfaction and continuance intention than post-adoption
expectations (i.e. PU and PEOU; see Table 7). The results imply that users’ perceptions of
the IS/IT instrumentality may be adjusted by their extent of confirmation in forming
satisfaction and continuance intention of the IS/IT, while the ECM still highlights the
importance of post-adoption expectations (Bhattacherjee, 2001; Thong et al., 2006).

First, this study’s results reveal that customers’ continuance intention of internet-based
sharing economy service platforms via their PU of the platforms can be affected by other
customers and service providers. Thus, the results imply that users’ IS/IT continuance
intention via their PU of the IS/IT by other users can create bandwagon effects; that is,
network externality can just be the typical driver of bandwagon effects among users (Hsu
and Lu, 2004; Lee, 2006; Pontiggia and Virili, 2010). Next, this study’s results reveal that
network externality from customers’ side can exhibit more indirect impacts on customers’
satisfaction and continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms
than network externality from service providers’ side; the reason is that network externality
from service providers’ side has significant but evidently lesser effects on PU than network
externality from customers’ side (see Table 7). Hence, the results imply that bandwagon
effects will be more rapidly strengthened as the number of customers participating in
sharing economy activities increases than the condition of increases in number of service
providers.

This study’s results reveal that service enablers’ online service quality can exhibit more
sharing economy service platforms via customers’ PU, confirmation and PEOU of the
platforms than service providers’ offline service quality, because service providers’ offline
service quality has significant but evidently lesser effects on PU than service enablers’
online service quality (see Table 7). The results first imply that online service quality can
play a key role in the processes using the internet-based platform (Ahn et al., 2004; Park
et al., 2009). To be more precisely, if service enablers can provide customers with more
sophisticated and satisfied online services to solve any problems customers encounter in
using internet-based sharing economy service platforms, this will make customers perceive
effectiveness and effortless of the platforms, and facilitate them to confirm their
expectations from using the platforms. Next, the results imply that the role of offline service
quality is also important because it is under full control of service providers, and it can
influence customers’ PU of internet-based sharing economy service platforms to encourage
customers’ continuance intention of the platforms. Accordingly, the dual nature of the online
consumer as a traditional customer and an internet-based platform user implies that the
offline quality is just as critical to retain customers as a key quality factor (Ahn et al., 2004).
Practical implications
This study enhances the understanding for the impacts of customers’ perceived network
externality and service quality on their satisfaction and continuance intention of internet-
based sharing economy service platforms, and thus provides organizations wishing to

successfully facilitate customers’ satisfaction and continuance intention of the platforms with
implications. Detailed practical implications are proposed next.

This study’s results reveal that confirmation and satisfaction can play critical roles in driving
customers’ continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms.
Hence, the results imply that it cannot be overemphasized that firms should first pay
attention to identify sources of user disconfirmation and strive to reduce the gap between
themselves and users (Bhattacherjee, 2001; Hsu et al., 2006). To enhance customers’
continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms, this study
suggests that service enablers should rethink how to facilitate customers’ effective and
effortless usage of internet-based sharing economy service platforms to maximize their
satisfaction via confirming their expectations with such methods, e.g. building a critical
mass of customers and service providers, and providing customers with higher service
quality via internet-based sharing economy service platforms and service providers.

This study’s results reveal that when customers perceive that increasing numbers of other
customers and service providers are using the internet-based sharing economy service
platforms, they will think the platforms are useful and further enhance their continuance
intention of the platforms. Hence, the results imply that service enablers should be
conscious of the benefits for the phenomenon of network externality and further utilize such
a phenomenon to entice a critical mass of customers and service providers to try out the
internet-based sharing economy service platforms from the demand side and the supply
side of sharing economy services. Hence, to boost customers’ satisfaction and continuance
intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms, this study suggests that
service enablers may strive to encourage opinion leaders among customers and service
providers, who have already participated in sharing economy activities, to have some
influences on customers’ belief, and make these customers believe internet-based sharing
economy service platforms must be useful in its purpose. However, as compared to the size
of the network for service providers participating in sharing economy activities, bandwagon
effects should be more rapidly strengthened as the number of customers participating in
such activities increases.

This study’s results reveal that service enablers’ online service quality can exhibit more
sharing economy service platforms via customers’ PU, confirmation and PEOU of the
platforms than service providers’ offline service quality. Hence, the results imply that service
enablers’ online service quality is the most crucial concern for customers’ satisfaction and
continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms mainly via
affecting customers’ levels of confirmation toward the platforms, while service providers’
offline service quality also plays a key role in enhancing customers’ satisfaction and
continuance intention of the platforms via affecting customers’ PU of the platforms. Hence,
to boost customers’ satisfaction and continuance intention of internet-based sharing
economy service platforms, this study suggests that service enablers may enhance online
services with tailored instructions to deliver usability and simplicity via stimulating
customers’ confirmation based on a set of their initial expectations to the platforms, and
provide help desk engineers and services administrators with adequate technical support

training for assisting customers in using the platforms effectively and effortlessly. Besides, if
customers are happy with service providers’ offline service quality, this situation will earn the
trust of customers to intend to continue using internet-based sharing economy service
platforms.
Conclusions
This study’s research model incorporates ECM and PEOU by positioning key constructs
(i.e. network externality and service quality) as the drivers of customers’ continuance
intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms, and the results confirm
that the research model is strongly supported by the empirical evidence. Hence, this
study provides a more complementary understanding of customers’ continuance
intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms than either theory
considered alone. The following contributions are particularly worth mentioning. First,
previous studies in the adoption of internet-based sharing economy service platforms do
not consider focusing more on exploring the effects of network externality from
customers’ side and service providers’ side, not only on customers’ initial usage, but also
on the second phase of the process leading to their continuance. Thus, the application of
network externality in the field of customers’ continuance intention of internet-based
sharing economy service platforms reveals deep insights when facing the phenomenon
of bandwagon effects among customers and service providers. Next, it is especially
worth mentioning that this study contributes to the application of service enablers’ online
service quality in understanding customers’ continuance intention of internet-based
sharing economy service platforms is greatly driven by their confirmation of expectations,
and the application of service providers’ offline service quality is just as critical to retain
customers continuously using the platforms. Third, while ECM is shown to have good
predictive validity for the IS/IT continuance intention, simply focusing on the effects of
users’ single utilitarian perception (i.e. PU) on their continued IS/IT usage intention may
not be enough (Hong et al., 2006; Thong et al., 2006). It should be noted that the
constructs of ECM can be combined with other synergistic variables (i.e. PEOU) in
predicting continued IS/IT usage intention (Hong et al., 2006). In this study, the empirical
evidence on capturing both ECM and PEOU for explaining customers’ continuance
intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms is well documented.
Hence, this study’s empirical evidence has significantly shed light on the possible
formulation of a richer post-adoption model.
Three limitations should be noted in this study, and the following suggestions for further
research will be worth future efforts in this field. First, a major limitation of this study is that
findings are based only on a population of Taiwanese students who have experience in
using sharing economy services via internet-based sharing economy service platforms.
Given this study’s limited scope, further research may generalize this study’s sample to the
respondents of other national cultural backgrounds. Next, this study integrates network
externality and service quality as antecedents to the synthesis of ECM and PEOU in
explaining customers’ continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service
platforms. Further research may explore other theoretical models to explain more variance
of users’ continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms, while
this study’s research model has significantly shed light on this research topic. Finally, a
cross-sectional design was used to this study as data were collected at one point in time. It
may be desirable to understand customers’ continuance intention of internet-based sharing
economy service platforms with increasing their usage experience. Further research may
use a longitudinal analysis by taking into consideration the evolution of customers’
continuance intention of internet-based sharing economy service platforms over time.

References
Ahn, T., Ryu, S. and Han, I. (2004), “The impact of the online and offline features on the user acceptance
of internet shopping malls”, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 405-420.
Ahn, T., Ryu, S. and Han, I. (2007), “The impact of web quality and playfulness on user acceptance of
online retailing”, Information & Management, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 263-275.
Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), “Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and
recommended two-step approach”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-423.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of structural equation models”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 74-94.
Bao, Z. (2016), “Exploring continuance intention of social networking sites: an empirical study integrating
social support and network externalities”, Aslib Journal of Information Management, Vol. 68 No. 6,
pp. 736-755.
Baroudi, J.J. and Orlikowski, W.J. (1988), “A short-form measure of user information satisfaction: a
psychometric evaluation and notes on use”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 4 No. 4,
pp. 44-59.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001), “Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation–confirmation

model”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 351-370.
Bollen, K.A. (1989), Structural Equations with Latent Variables, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY.
Chang, W.-L. and Wang, J.-Y. (2018), “Mine is yours? Using sentiment analysis to explore the degree of
risk in the sharing economy”, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 28, pp. 141-158.
Cheng, Y.-M. (2014a), “What drives nurses’ blended e-learning continuance intention?”, Educational
Technology & Society, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 203-215.
Cheng, Y.-M. (2014b), “Why do users intend to continue using the digital library? An integrated
perspective”, Aslib Journal of Information Management, Vol. 66 No. 6, pp. 640-662.
Cheng, M. and Yuen, A.H.K. (2018), “Student continuance of learning management system use: a
longitudinal exploration”, Computers & Education, Vol. 120, pp. 241-253.
Chen, C.-C., Hsiao, K.-L. and Hsieh, C.-H. (2019), “Understanding usage transfer behavior of two way
O2O services”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 100, pp. 184-191.
Chen, S.-C., Yen, D.C. and Peng, S.-C. (2018), “Assessing the impact of determinants in e-magazines
acceptance: an empirical study”, Computer Standards & Interfaces, Vol. 57, pp. 49-58.
Cho, J. (2016), “The impact of post-adoption beliefs on the continued use of health apps”, International
Journal of Medical Informatics, Vol. 87, pp. 75-83.
Cho, V., Cheng, T.C.E. and Lai, W.M.J. (2009), “The role of perceived user-interface design in continued
usage intention of self-paced e-learning tools”, Computers & Education, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 216-227.
Choi, J.-H. and Park, J.-W. (2015), “A study on factors influencing ‘CyberAirport’ usage intention: an
Incheon International Airport case study”, Journal of Air Transport Management, Vol. 42, pp. 21-26.
Churchill, G.A. (1979), “A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs”, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 64-73.
Cronbach, L.J. (1951), “Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests”, Psychometrika, Vol. 16
No. 3, pp. 297-334.
Cronbach, L.J. (1971), “Test validation”, in Thorndike, R.L. (Ed.), Educational Measurement, 2nd ed.,
American Council on Education, Washington, DC, pp. 443-507.
Davis, F.D. (1989), “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information
technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 319-340.
Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1989), “User acceptance of computer technology: a
comparison of two theoretical models”, Management Science, Vol. 35 No. 8, pp. 982-1003.
Felson, M. and Spaeth, J.L. (1978), “Community structure and collaborative consumption: a routine
activity approach”, American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 614-624.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable and
measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.

Fulco, M. (2016a), “The continuing Uber controversy”, Taiwan Business Topics, Vol. 46 No. 12, pp. 17-22.
Fulco, M. (2016b), “Airbnb faces uncertain future in Taiwan”, Taiwan Business Topics, Vol. 46 No. 12,
pp. 23-26.
Ganapati, S. and Reddick, C.G. (2018), “Prospects and challenges of sharing economy for the public
sector”, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 77-87.
Hagiu, A. (2014), “Strategic decisions for multisided platforms”, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 55
No. 2, pp. 71-80.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis with
Readings, 5th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Harman, H.H. (1976), Modern Factor Analysis, 3rd ed. revised, The University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, IL.
Holmes-Smith, P. (2001), Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling Using LISREL, ACSPRI-Winter
Training Program, Western Australia, Perth.
Hong, S.-J., Thong, J.Y.L. and Tam, K.Y. (2006), “Understanding continued information technology
usage behavior: a comparison of three models in the context of mobile internet”, Decision Support
Systems, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 1819-1834.
Hsu, C.-L. and Lu, H.-P. (2004), “Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social
influences and flow experience”, Information & Management, Vol. 41 No. 7, pp. 853-868.
Hsu, M.-H., Yen, C.-H., Chiu, C.-M. and Chang, C.-M. (2006), “A longitudinal investigation of continued
online shopping behavior: an extension of the theory of planned behavior”, International Journal of
Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 64 No. 9, pp. 889-904.
Huang, Y.-M. (2019), “Examining students’ continued use of desktop services: perspectives
from expectation-confirmation and social influence”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 96,
pp. 23-31.
Katz, M.L. and Shapiro, C. (1985), “Network externalities, competition and compatibility”, The American
Economic Review, Vol. 75 No. 3, pp. 424-440.
Kim, T.G., Lee, J.H. and Law, R. (2008), “An empirical examination of the acceptance behaviour of
hotel front office systems: an extended technology acceptance model”, Tourism Management, Vol. 29
No. 3, pp. 500-513.
Kline, R.B. (2005), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 2nd ed., Guilford Press,
New York, NY.
Kumar, V., Lahiri, A. and Dogan, O.B. (2018), “A strategic framework for a profitable business model in
the sharing economy”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 69, pp. 147-160.
Larsen, T.J., Sørebø, A.M. and Sørebø, Ø. (2009), “The role of task-technology fit as users’ motivation to
continue information system use”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 778-784.
Lee, M.-C. (2010), “Explaining and predicting users’ continuance intention toward e-learning: an
extension of the expectation–confirmation model”, Computers & Education, Vol. 54 No. 2,
pp. 506-516.
Lee, Y.-C. (2006), “An empirical investigation into factors influencing the adoption of an e-learning
system”, Online Information Review, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 517-541.
Liao, C., Chen, J.-L. and Yen, D.C. (2007), “Theory of planning behavior (TPB) and customer satisfaction
in the continued use of e-service: an integrated model”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 23 No. 6,
pp. 2804-2822.
Lin, H.-F. (2007), “The role of online and offline features in sustaining virtual communities: an empirical
study”, Internet Research, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 119-138.
Lin, C.-P. and Bhattacherjee, A. (2008), “Elucidating individual intention to use interactive information
technologies: the role of network externalities”, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 13
No. 1, pp. 85-108.
Lin, K.-Y. and Lu, H.-P. (2011), “Why people use social networking sites: an empirical study integrating
network externalities and motivation theory”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 3,
pp. 1152-1161.

Lin, C.-S., Tzeng, G.-H., Chin, Y.-C. and Chang, C.-C. (2010), “Recommendation sources on the
intention to use e-books in academic digital libraries”, The Electronic Library, Vol. 28 No. 6,
pp. 844-857.
Lin, W.-S. and Wang, C.-H. (2012), “Antecedences to continued intentions of adopting e-
learning system in blended learning instruction: a contingency framework based on models of
information system success and task-technology fit”, Computers & Education, Vol. 58 No. 1,
pp. 88-99.
Lin, K.-Y., Wang, Y.-T. and Hsu, H.-Y.S. (2017), “Why do people switch mobile platforms? The moderating
role of habit”, Internet Research, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 1170-1189.
Malhotra, N.K., Kim, S.S. and Patil, A. (2006), “Common method variance in is research: a comparison of
alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research”, Management Science, Vol. 52 No. 12,
pp. 1865-1883.
Martin, C.J., Upham, P. and Budd, L. (2015), “Commercial orientation in grassroots social innovation:
insights from the sharing economy”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 118, pp. 240-251.
Nault, B. and Dexter, A. (1994), “Adoption, transfers, and incentives in a franchise network with positive
externalities”, Marketing Science, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 412-423.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Oh, H. (1999), “Service quality, customer satisfaction, and customer value: a holistic perspective”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 67-82.
Oliver, R.L. (1980), “A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 460-469.
Orel, F.D. and Kara, A. (2014), “Supermarket self-checkout service quality, customer satisfaction, and
loyalty: empirical evidence from an emerging market”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 118-129.
Pai, F.-Y. and Huang, K.-I. (2011), “Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of
healthcare information systems”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 78 No. 4,
pp. 650-660.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1991), “Understanding customer expectations of
service”, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 39-48.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1985), “A conceptual model of service quality and its
implications for future research”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 41-50.
Park, N., Roman, R., Lee, S. and Chung, J.E. (2009), “User acceptance of a digital library system in
developing countries: an application of the technology acceptance model”, International Journal of
Information Management, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 196-209.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986), “Self-reports in organizational research: problems and
prospects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 531-544.
Pontiggia, A. and Virili, F. (2010), “Network effects in technology acceptance: laboratory experimental
evidence”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 68-77.
PwC (2015), “The sharing economy”, A report from the consumer Intelligence series, available at: www.
pwc.com/us/en/technology/publications/assets/pwc-consumerintelligence-series-the-sharing-economy.
pdf (accessed 25 February 2018).
Roca, J.C., Chiu, C.-M. and Martı́nez, F.J. (2006), “Understanding e-learning continuance intention: an
extension of the technology acceptance model”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies,
Vol. 64 No. 8, pp. 683-696.
Rochet, J.C. and Tirole, J. (2003), “Platform competition in two-sided markets”, Journal of the European
Economic Association, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 990-1029.
Rysman, M. (2009), “The economics of two-sided markets”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 23
No. 3, pp. 125-143.

Sanchez, J.I., Korbin, W.P. and Viscarra, D.M. (1995), “Corporate support in the aftermath of a
natural disaster: effects on employee strains”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 2,
pp. 504-521.
Shi, Y., Prentice, C. and He, W. (2014), “Linking service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty in
casinos, does membership matter?”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 40,
pp. 81-91.
Sundararajan, A. (2016), The Sharing Economy: The End of Employment and the Rise of Crowdbased
Capitalism, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Tam, C. and Oliveira, T. (2016), “Understanding the impact of m-banking on individual
performance: DeLone & McLean and TTF perspective”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61,
pp. 233-244.
Teo, A.C., Tan, G.W.H., Ooi, K.B., Hew, T.S. and Yew, K.T. (2015), “The effects of convenience and
speed in m-payment”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 115 No. 2, pp. 311-331.
Teubner, T. (2018), “The web of host–guest connections on Airbnb: a network perspective”, Journal of
Systems and Information Technology, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 262-277.
Thong, J.Y.L., Hong, S.-J. and Tam, K.Y. (2006), “The effects of post-adoption beliefs on the expectation-
confirmation model for information technology continuance”, International Journal of Human-Computer
Studies, Vol. 64 No. 9, pp. 799-810.
Van den Ende, J., Wijnberg, N., Vogels, R. and Kerstens, M. (2003), “Organizing innovative projects to
interact with market dynamics: a coevolutionary approach”, European Management Journal, Vol. 21
No. 3, pp. 273-284.
Wang, E. and Seidmann, G. (1995), “Electronic data interchange: competitive externalities and strategic
implementation policies”, Management Science, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 401-418.
Wu, I.-L. (2013), “The antecedents of customer satisfaction and its link to complaint intentions in online
shopping: an integration of justice, technology, and trust”, International Journal of Information
Management, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 166-176.
Wu, J., Ma, P. and Xie, K.L. (2017), “In sharing economy we trust: the effects of host attributes on short-
term rental purchases”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 11,
pp. 2962-2976.
Xu, F. and Du, J.T. (2018), “Factors influencing users’ satisfaction and loyalty to digital libraries in Chinese
universities”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 83, pp. 64-72.
Yang, S., Lu, Y. and Chau, P.Y.K. (2013), “Why do consumers adopt online channel? An empirical
investigation of two channel extension mechanisms”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 54 No. 2,
pp. 858-869.
Yang, S., Lu, Y., Zhao, L. and Gupta, S. (2011), “Empirical investigation of customers’ channel extension
behavior: perceptions shift toward the online channel”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 5,
pp. 1688-1696.
Yang, S., Song, Y., Chen, S. and Xia, X. (2017), “Why are customers loyal in sharing-economy services? A
relational benefits perspective”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 48-62.
Yap, K.B., Wong, D.H., Loh, C. and Bak, R. (2010), “Offline and online banking – where to draw the
line when building trust in e-banking?”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 1,
pp. 27-46.
Zhang, C.-B., Li, Y.-N., Wu, B. and Li, D.-J. (2017), “How WeChat can retain users: roles of network
externalities, social interaction ties, and perceived values in building continuance intention”, Computers
in Human Behavior, Vol. 69, pp. 284-293.
Zhou, T. (2015), “The effect of network externality on mobile social network site continuance”, Program,
Vol. 49 No. 3, pp. 289-304.
Zhu, Y. and Bao, Z. (2018), “The role of negative network externalities in SNS fatigue: an empirical study
based on impression management concern, privacy concern, and social overload”, Data Technologies
and Applications, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 313-328.
Zhu, G., So, K.K.F. and Hudson, S. (2017), “Inside the sharing economy: understanding consumer
motivations behind the adoption of mobile applications”, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 9, pp. 2218-2239.

Further reading
Calisir, F., Gumussoy, C.A. and Bayram, A. (2009), “Predicting the behavioral intention to use enterprise
resource planning systems: an exploratory extension of the technology acceptance model”,
Management Research News, Vol. 32 No. 7, pp. 597-613.
Lee, B.C., Yoon, J.O. and Lee, I. (2009), “Learners’ acceptance of e-learning in South Korea: theories and
results”, Computers & Education, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 1320-1329.
About the author

Yung-Ming Cheng is a Professor in the Department of Business Administration at Chaoyang
University of Technology, Taiwan. He obtained his Bachelor’s degree from National Chiao
Tung University, Taiwan, and he received his Master’s and PhD degrees from National
Cheng Kung University, Taiwan. His research interests include technology acceptance and
adoption, information systems management, international entry mode strategies,
competitive strategies in high-technology industries, electronic commerce, service quality
and service recovery, health-care management, and international human resource
management. His research has been published in journals such as Information Systems
Journal, Internet Research, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Information
Technology & People, Aslib Journal of Information Management, Nurse Education Today,
Kybernetes, Journal of Educational Technology & Society, The Journal of Nursing
Research, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, Education þ Training,
Benchmarking, Journal of Systems and Information Technology, International Journal of
Web Information Systems, Asia Pacific Management Review, International Journal of
Commerce & Management, and others. Yung-Ming Cheng can be contacted at: ymcheng@
mail.cyut.edu.tw
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

Cheng 2020

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cheng 2020

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cheng 2020

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Why do customers intend to continue

using internet-based sharing economy

Abstract Yung-Ming Cheng is based

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Synthesis of expectation–confirmation model and perceived ease of use

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Figure 1 Research model

Network Externality from

Network Externality from

Confirmation (+) Satisfaction (+) Continuance Intention

Online Service Quality

Offline Service Quality

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Incorporating network externality into the synthesis integrating

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Embedding service quality into the synthesis integrating expectation–confirmation

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Satisf4 I am satisfied with the overall experience of using internet-based

Engineering 4,380 21.8 116 22.7 3.661

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Results of structural modeling analysis

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Cronbach’s a coefficient exceeded the 0.7 cut-off value as recommended by Nunnally

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

OnSQ 0.913 0.724 0.950

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

intention ( b = 0.220, p < 0.001); and satisfaction significantly affected continuance

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Network Externality from 0.222

Network Externality from 0.038

Confirmation 0.623 Satisfaction 0.543 Continuance Intention

Online Service Quality 0.425

Offline Service Quality

Notes: 1. Standardized path coefficients are reported (t-values in parentheses); 2. Absolute

Synthesis of expectation–confirmation model and perceived ease of use

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

of the platforms; customers’ PEOU of internet-based sharing economy service

Incorporating network externality into the synthesis integrating

Embedding service quality into the synthesis integrating expectation–confirmation

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Synthesis of expectation–confirmation model and perceived ease of use

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Incorporating network externality into the synthesis integrating

Embedding service quality into the synthesis integrating expectation–confirmation

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Synthesis of expectation–confirmation model and perceived ease of use

Incorporating network externality into the synthesis integrating

Embedding service quality into the synthesis integrating expectation–confirmation

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

Bhattacherjee, A. (2001), “Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation–confirmation

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j

About the author

j JOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES j