The mediation effect of the urge to buy impulsively on grocery online impulse buying decisions

Figures & data

Figure 1. Research Model.

Figure 2. Path analysis results of Smart-PLS.

Table 1. Respondent profile.

Demographics	Frequency (%)
Age (years)
15–25	84 (27.1%)
26–35	74 (23.9%)
36–45	83 (26.8%)
> 46	69 (22.3%)
Sex
Male	100 (32%)
Female	210 (68%)
Occupation
Student	3 (1%)
College student	67 (22%)
Housewife	57 (18%)
Entrepreneur	68 (22%)
Employee	115 (37%)
Income
< Rp 2.000.000	48 (15%)
Rp 2.000.001–Rp 4.000.000	40 (13%)
Rp 4.000.001–Rp 6.000.000	67 (22%)
Rp 6.000.001–Rp 8.000.000	57 (18%)
> Rp 8.000.000	98 (32%)
Marital Status
Married	163 (53%)
Single	147 (47%)
Number of Children
0	147 (47.4%)
1–2	104 (33.5%)
3–4	45 (14.5%)
> 4	14 (4.5%)

Source: Primary Data.

Table 2. Items descriptive and reliability test results.

Item	Factor Loading	AVE	Composite Reliability
Popularity claims		0.772	0.839
I would be more interested in buying the product shown in Figure 2 than that in Figure 1. Figure 1 is a wholesale product image without any persuasion claims. Figure 2 is a wholesale product image with the “User Favorite” claims.	0.857
I would be more interested in buying the product shown in Figure 2 than that in Figure 1. Figure 1 is a wholesale product image without any persuasion claims. Figure 2 is a wholesale product image with the “ 98% of people buy this product” claims.	0.843
Scarcity claims		0.801	0.890
I would be more interested in buying the product shown in Figure 2 than that in Figure 1. Figure 1 is a wholesale product image without any persuasion claims. Figure 2 is an image of a wholesale product with an “Available Only Now” claims.	0.894
I would be more interested in buying the product shown in Figure 2 than that in Figure 1. Figure 1 is a wholesale product image without any persuasion claims. Figure 2 is an image of a wholesale product with a “3 of 10 Left” claims.	0.897
Urge to buy impulsively		0.646	0.846
I often feel excited when I see the targeted online grocery item	0.836
I often see good online grocery items and feel happy when I visit online grocery platforms	0.767
I often feel interested in buying when there are new items in online grocery.	0.807
Impulse buying decisions		0.808	0.894
When buying online groceries, the money spent is often more than previously allocated.	0.871
When buying groceries online, I often buy more products than previously planned	0.925

Source: Primary Data and Smart-PLS Analysis.

Note. PC: Popularity Claim; SC: Scarcity Claim; UTBI: Urge to Buy Impulsively; IBD: Impulse Buying Decision.

Table 3. Cross Loading.

	IBD	PC	SC	UTBI
PC_1	0.320	0.857	0.538	0.466
PC_2	0.304	0.843	0.598	0.448
SC _1	0.395	0.583	0.894	0.441
SC _2	0.391	0.613	0.897	0.456
IBD_1	0.871	0.269	0.316	0.385
IBD_2	0.925	0.379	0.458	0.468
UTBI_1	0.350	0.492	0.460	0.836
UTBI_2	0.227	0.404	0.334	0.767
UTBI_3	0.526	0.402	0.401	0.807

Source: Primary Data and Smart-PLS Analysis.

Note. PC: Popularity Claim; SC: Scarcity Claim; UTBI: Urge to Buy Impulsively; IBD: Impulse Buying Decision.

Table 4. HTMT Ratio.

	Age	Gender	IBD	PC	SC	UTBI
Age
Gender	0.000
IBD	0.226	0.067
PC	0.185	0.053	0.524
SC	0.194	0.042	0.566	0.983
UTBI	0.221	0.033	0.603	0.799	0.666

Source: Primary Data and Smart-PLS Analysis.

Note. PC: Popularity Claim; SC: Scarcity Claim; UTBI: Urge to Buy Impulsively; IBD: Impulse Buying Decision.

Table 5. Mean, Standard Deviation, and Fornell-Larcker.

Variable	Mean	Std. Deviation	Impulse Buying Decision	Popularity Claim	Scarcity Claim	UTBI
Impulse Buying Decision	4.16	1.13	0.899
Popularity Claim	4.56	0.78	0.367	0.850
Scarcity Claim	4.5	0.86	0.439	0.668	0.895
UTBI	4.25	0.87	0.479	0.538	0.501	0.804

Source: Primary Data and Smart-PLS Analysis.

Table 6. Results of hypotheses testing.

Hypotheses	Direct relationship	β	P-value	Description
H1	UTBI → IBD	0.326	0.000	Supported
H2a	PC→ IBD	0.005	0.950	Not supported
H2b	PC → UTBI	0.368	0.000	Supported
H3a	SC→ IBD	0.258	0.002	Supported
H3b	SC → UTBI	0.255	0.000	Supported
	Age → UTBI	0.105	0.040	Supported
	Age → IBD	0.093	0.045	Supported
	Gender → UTBI	−0.018	0.699	Not supported
	Gender → IBD	−0.048	0.259	Not supported
	Indirect relationship
H4a	PC→UTBI→IBD	0.120	0.000	Supported
H4b	SC→UTBI→IBD	0.083	0.003	Supported

Source: Primary Data and Smart-PLS Analysis.

Note. PC: Popularity Claim; SC: Scarcity Claim; UTBI: Urge to Buy Impulsively; IBD: Impulse Buying Decision.