Full Picture

Extension usage examples:

Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
Appears strongly imbalanced

Article summary:

1. Online impulse buying is a behavior characterized by unplanned and sudden purchases made in response to stimulating cues, often associated with strong desire and pleasure.

2. More than 50% of online shopping is classified as impulse buying, making it an important area of research for understanding consumer behavior.

3. The shopping process of online impulse buying can be defined as three phases: evaluation of e-store risk, system use, and unplanned purchase. Perceived risk, expectation-confirmation model, and flow theory are key factors that influence this process.

Article analysis:

The article titled "Defining the determinants of online impulse buying through a shopping process of integrating perceived risk, expectation-confirmation model, and flow theory issues" provides an overview of the factors that contribute to online impulse buying. While the article offers valuable insights into this consumer behavior, there are several areas where it falls short in terms of providing a comprehensive analysis.

One potential bias in the article is its focus on the positive aspects of online impulse buying, such as the pleasure and desire associated with these purchases. The article fails to address the negative consequences of impulse buying, such as financial strain or buyer's remorse. By only presenting one side of the argument, the article may be promoting online impulse buying without fully considering its potential risks.

Additionally, the article relies heavily on previous studies and theories without providing sufficient evidence or empirical data to support its claims. For example, it mentions that more than 50% of online shopping has been classified as impulse buying but does not provide any specific research findings or sources to back up this claim. This lack of evidence weakens the credibility of the article's arguments.

Furthermore, there are several missing points of consideration in the article. It does not discuss how external factors, such as advertising or social media influence, can contribute to online impulse buying. Additionally, it does not explore potential counterarguments or alternative explanations for this consumer behavior. By neglecting these important considerations, the article presents a limited perspective on online impulse buying.

Another issue with the article is its promotional tone towards e-stores and their design features. It suggests that well-designed e-stores can motivate customers for impulse buying without critically examining whether this is ethical or beneficial for consumers. This promotional content raises questions about potential conflicts of interest or biases in favor of e-store owners.

Overall, while the article provides some valuable insights into online impulse buying, it suffers from biases and limitations that undermine its credibility and comprehensiveness. A more balanced and evidence-based analysis would be necessary to fully understand the determinants of online impulse buying and its potential risks.