Effects of Background Fitting of e-Commerce Live Streaming on Consumers’ Purchase Intentions: A Cognitive-Affective Perspective

Figures & data

Figure 1 Conceptual model.

Table 1 Descriptive Statistics of Survey Respondents (N = 424)

Category	Items	Numbers	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	192	45.3
	Female	232	54.7
Age	<18	13	3.1
	18–24	347	81.8
	25–29	30	7.1
	30–39	9	2.1
	40–49	13	3.1
	>50	12	2.8
Education	High school and below	28	6.6
	Specialty	13	3.1
	Undergraduate	321	75.7
	Graduate and above	62	14.6
Purchase experience	Less than 6 months	20	4.7
	6 months–1 year	32	7.5
	1–1.5 years	38	9
	1.5–2 years	47	11.1
	More than 2 years	287	67.7
Monthly consumption (RMB)	Less than 1000	36	8.5
	1000–2000	240	56.6
	2000–3000	86	20.3
	3000–4000	27	6.4
	4000–5000	17	4
	More than 5000	18	4.2

Table 2 KMO and Bartlett Test

Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin	Measure of Sampling Adequacy.	0.967
Bartlett test of sphericity	~χ²	10,384.014
	df	190
	Sig	0.000

Table 3 Measurement Model

Variables	Items	Loadings	CA	CR	AVE
Product-background fit (PF)	PF1 PF2 PF3	0.933 0.942 0.952	0.937	0.959	0.887
Anchor-background fit (AF)	AF1 AF2 AF3	0.942 0.965 0.960	0.953	0.969	0.914
Perceived Trust (PT)	PT1 PT2 PT3	0.939 0.932 0.935	0.929	0.955	0.875
Perceived Value (PV)	PV1 PV2 PV3 PV4 PV5	0.889 0.835 0.894 0.922 0.913	0.935	0.951	0.794
Perceived Pleasure (PP)	PP1 PP2 PP3	0.933 0.951 0.939	0.935	0.959	0.886
Purchase intention (PI)	PI1 PI2 PI3	0.935 0.937 0.946	0.933	0.958	0.883

Table 4 Discriminant Validity

Constructs		1	2	3	4	5	6
PF	1	0.942
AF	2	0.873	0.956
PT	3	0.761	0.789	0.935
PV	4	0.775	0.786	0.856	0.891
PP	5	0.716	0.755	0.789	0.828	0.941
PI	6	0.684	0.710	0.767	0.839	0.795	0.939

Notes: Diagonal elements (in bold) are the square root values of the average variance extracted (AVE). Off-diagonal elements are the correlations among constructs.

Table 5 Strength of the Model

Constructs	Cross-Validated Redundancy			Coefficient of Determination
	SSO	SSE	Q² (=1–SSE/SSO)	R²	Adjusted R²
PT	1272	559.927	0.560	0.645	0.643
PV	2120	830.871	0.608	0.773	0.772
PP	1272	479.786	0.623	0.710	0.709
PI	1272	569.200	0.553	0.632	0.631

Table 6 The F² Values

Path	f² values	P values
PF→PT	0.063	0.050
PF→PV	0.038	0.159
AF→PT	0.184	0.002
AF→PV	0.021	0.205
PT→PP	0.083	0.021
PT→PV	0.539	0.000
PV→PP	0.302	0.001
PP →PI	1.716	0.000

Figure 2 Result of the structural equation model (**p<0.01, ***p<0.001).

Table 7 Results of Path and Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis	Path	Path Coefficient	SD	t-value	Result
H1	PF—>PT	0.305	0.073	4.157***	Supported
H2	AF—>PT	0.523	0.071	7.329***	Supported
H3	PF—>PV	0.195	0.062	3.156**	Supported
H4	AF—>PV	0.153	0.058	2.629**	Supported
H5	PT—>PV	0.587	0.043	13.669***	Supported
H6	PT—> PP	0.300	0.065	4.624***	Supported
H7	PV—> PP	0.571	0.067	8.478***	Supported
H8	PP—> PI	0.795	0.025	31.601***	Supported

Notes: Path coefficient significance level **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001.