Affiliate Marketing in Tourism: Determinants of Consumers’ Trust

http://jtr.sagepub.com/Journal of Travel Research

http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/53/2/196The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0047287513491333

2014 53: 196 originally published online 18 June 2013Journal of Travel ResearchNicolas Gregori, Roberto Daniele and Levent Altinay

Affiliate Marketing in Tourism: Determinants of Consumer Trust

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Travel and Tourism Research Association

can be found at:Journal of Travel ResearchAdditional services and information for

http://jtr.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jtr.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/53/2/196.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Jun 18, 2013OnlineFirst Version of Record

- Jan 29, 2014Version of Record >>

at Oxford Brookes University on November 8, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Oxford Brookes University on November 8, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://jtr.sagepub.com/

http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/53/2/196

http://www.sagepublications.com

http://www.ttra.com

http://jtr.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jtr.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/53/2/196.refs.html

http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/53/2/196.full.pdf

http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/06/12/0047287513491333.full.pdf

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml



Journal of Travel Research2014, Vol. 53(2) 196 –210© 2013 SAGE PublicationsReprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navDOI: 10.1177/0047287513491333jtr.sagepub.com

Research Article

Introduction

During the past decade, the Internet has gained vital impor-tance for the promotion and distribution of tourism services. Accordingly, online sales volumes exceed offline sales in the U.S. market (MarketingVox 2008). Against this background, numerous “traffic-building approaches” have been imple-mented by tourism businesses in order to increase website visits and revenue levels. In this context, affiliate marketing (AM) has emerged as one of the fastest growing methods to increase sales (Fox and Wareham 2010).

AM is defined as “the online act of promoting someone else’s goods and services to earn commissions from sales leads provided” (Hofmann and Novak 2000, p. 44). Thus, an affiliate (or advertiser) signs an agreement with a company (so-called merchant or publisher) to promote the merchant’s products on the affiliate’s website in return for a commission provided by the merchant. The primary objectives of AM are therefore to promote and sell products or services through traditional distribution outlets, by driving web traffic to affil-iates and generating transactions from online users in return for a commission (Malaga 2007). Recent research (Mariussen, Daniele, and Bowie 2010; Daniele et al. 2009) indicated an increased relevance of AM for the travel and tourism indus-try, and demonstrated its major strategic importance for cus-tomer acquisition and revenue generation.

Academic research on AM has been conducted across dif-ferent industry sectors, mainly adopting the merchant’s per-spective (e.g., Fox and Wareham 2010; Libai, Biyalogorski,

and Gerstner 2003). More recently, studies on affiliates’ per-spectives have also been undertaken (Benedictova and Nevosad 2008). However, the third crucial element of the AM value chain—the consumer’s perspective—has received little attention. The importance of online information sources for consumers’ perceptions of tourism products has been highlighted (Li et al. 2009). Thus, given the importance of AM in tourism distribution, Daniele et al. (2009) contended that the tourism industry in particular needs to gain a deeper understanding of consumers’ acceptance of AM activities, and their attraction to different types of affiliate websites (AWs). The latter represents a crucial issue for the effective-ness of AM activities, as success ultimately depends on the number of generated leads, and thus consumers’ acceptance of affiliates (Goldschmidt, Junghagen, and Harris 2003; Hofmann and Novak 2000). Thus, it is critical for tourism providers to gain a substantial understanding of the dynam-ics of all players involved in the information search phase (Pan et al. 2011), including AWs and their visitors.

In e-commerce research, the role of consumers as final decision makers and, therefore, as the determining factor of commercial success is widely acknowledged. Given that the

491333 JTRXXX10.1177/0047287513491333Journal of Travel ResearchGregori et al.research-article2013

1Bournemouth University, Poole, United Kingdom2Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, United Kingdom

Corresponding Author:Nicolas Gregori, BU eTourism Lab, School of Tourism, Bournemouth University, Fern Barrow, BH12 5BB, Poole, United Kingdom. Email: [email protected]

Affiliate Marketing in Tourism: Determinants of Consumer Trust

Nicolas Gregori1, Roberto Daniele2, and Levent Altinay2

AbstractAffiliate marketing is a prominent, contemporary type of performance-based Internet marketing whereby a company compensates affiliates for each customer referred through the affiliate’s marketing efforts. It is regarded as one of the most promising customer acquisition tools in eTourism. The present study aims to identify the key variables affecting consumer trust in tourism-related affiliate websites. A mixed method approach was adopted to explore both the consumers’ perspective, via focus-group interviews, and that of tourism affiliate practitioners via an online questionnaire. The main findings suggest that there is a distinction between pivotal determinants of trust and trust-enhancing factors. It is suggested that affiliates need to expose their competence and integrity to consumers. Affiliates that feature integrated booking engines need to reduce consumer’s uncertainty by structural assurances and by providing background information on their websites.

Keywordsconsumer trust, e-commerce, affiliate marketing, online trust, affiliate website

at Oxford Brookes University on November 8, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from


Gregori et al. 197

vacation decision-making process is a complex, multidimen-sional construct (Choi et al. 2012), it has been addressed from diverse angles. In this regard, the lens of trust has gained considerable attention. Trust has been identified as a key factor in relationship building between consumers and commercial websites (McKnight, Choudhury, and Kacmar 2002) and, therefore, the determinants and outcomes of trust have been studied widely (cf. Beldad, de Jong, and Steehouder 2010). However, consumer trust in the context of AM is largely underresearched. Therefore, this research aims to explore determinants of trust in travel-related AWs from a dual perspective of consumers and AM practitioners.

Theory

Principles of Affiliate Marketing

AM programs have emerged as one of the fastest-growing methods to acquire customers and increase sales on the web (Mariussen, Daniele, and Bowie 2010; Fox and Wareham 2010) and have, therefore, gained importance in the strategic marketing considerations of tourism businesses (Daniele et al. 2009). Although precise estimates of the global AM market size are difficult to obtain, it has been growing con-tinuously over recent years (e.g., IAB 2012).

In essence, AM comprises an agreement between a firm—or merchant—and an affiliate for which the affiliate is com-pensated by the merchant for a specified action carried out by a visitor to the affiliate’s website. This includes remu-neration of affiliates for every initiated sale (cost-per-action); for particular actions carried out by a visitor, such as news-letter subscription (cost-per-lead); for every customer that clicks a specific link (cost-per-click); and for every 1000 advertisement impressions (cost-per-mille).

A large variety of AWs has been developed over the last decade (IAB 2012). They differ according to size, level of commercialization, and revenue model. Goldschmidt, Junghagen, and Harris (2003) proposed to differentiate affiliates by capacity to generate traffic (i.e., number of visi-tors), and level of commercialization, resulting in three main categories: namely hobby sites, vertical sites, and super-affiliates. In contrast, The Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB 2008) proposed a qualitative classification based on traffic-generating strategy. In total, five types of AWs are suggested:

Niche content and personal interest websites, devoted to specific niche topics (e.g., specific hobbies, activities, destinations), drive high-quality traffic and provide high conversion rates, by offering rich and relevant content to audiences with interest in specific products or services.

Loyalty and reward websites attract visitors by sharing commissions with their users via cash reimbursement or loyalty point schemes. These affiliates usually have

a loyal and recurring customer base, by rewarded their customers for carrying out transactions through them.

Search affiliates (or pay-per-click affiliates) attract visi-tors by bidding on keywords for sponsored links in search engines or major Internet portals, and subse-quently drive traffic to merchants’ websites.

Email marketers distribute email advertisements to well-selected lists of target customers. Through comprehen-sive customer databases, these affiliates are enabled to target specific niche segments.

Coregistration affiliates provide subscribers special offers from third-party merchants. Reimbursement is based on providing contact details of subscribers that fall into the target market for the promoted product.

Although IAB (2008) suggests that the strategy of gener-ating traffic is suited as a differentiation-criterion for AWs, many affiliates adopt more than one strategy. Therefore, the IAB categories should not be regarded as mutually exclusive but rather as a dynamic amendment to Goldschmidt’s static typology.

The empirical and formal study of AM, in particular in tourism, is in its infancy. This is partially attributable to the poor reputation of AM (e.g., intrusive mass advertising, commission fraud) (Mariussen, Daniele, and Bowie 2010). Only recently have first attempts been undertaken to explore the strategic role of AM in a tourism context (Mariussen, Daniele, and Bowie 2010; Daniele et al. 2009). This is sur-prising, as the tourism sector has traditionally been at the forefront of adopting information technologies to tackle industry-specific distribution problems (e.g., distressed inventories, seasonality) (Buhalis and Law 2008). In particu-lar, online affiliation strategies have shaped the nature of tourism distribution—traditionally through affiliations in global distribution systems and more recently through the emergence of tourism e-mediaries, collective distribution channels, and info-mediaries (Buhalis 2003). Consequently, AM assumes a significant role in the (online) marketing strategies and tactics of tourism businesses.

The rise of AM is attributable to a number of advantages over both traditional and other online marketing tools. First, affiliates are highly efficient in reaching specific target seg-ments (Chatterjee, Grewal, and Sambamurthy 2002), as they have a strong understanding of their average visitor profile and an interest in successfully promoting relevant products to maximize revenues from customer referral. From a cost perspective, AM is associated with low administrative costs regarding the purchase of advertising (Gallaugher, Auger, and Bar Nir 2001). Moreover, costs are dynamic and perfor-mance related (Hofmann and Novak 2000), leading to con-siderably lower wastages. In addition, merchants can quantify the contribution of each affiliate to generated sales volumes through tracking solutions at no extra cost. This not only allows the calculation of the return on investment of specific marketing expenses but also provides valuable data



198 Journal of Travel Research 53(2)

about consumer trends and purchasing behavior in near real time (Brear and Barnes 2008; Fox and Wareham 2010).

Nevertheless, AM is also associated with a number of risks. From a merchant’s perspective, this mainly includes deceptive behavior by affiliates in order to obtain commis-sions by fraud (Payton 2006) and issues of brand control (Daniele et al. 2009). AWs are often the first touch point with potential customers, and online information has a significant effect on images and representation of tourism providers (Li et al. 2009). Therefore, any activities of affiliates that are negatively perceived by consumers may impact on the mer-chant’s image.

The main risk for affiliates lies in yielding sufficient rev-enue to cover the running costs of generating traffic, such as ongoing search-engine-marketing costs, and providing a sophisticated and appealing web infrastructure to gain visi-tors’ trust. Therefore, a deep understanding of how consum-ers trust AWs represents a crucial prerequisite for operating AM efficiently and profitably.

Online Trust in E-commerce

The concept of trust has been identified as a key ingredient for successful business-to-customer relationships in online environments, as it significantly influences consumers’ online behavior (Chen 2006), and is critical for customer loyalty (e.g., Koufaris and Hampton-Sousa 2004). Moreover, trust is considered to reduce the perception of risk, to increase the reliability of perceived information (Lee and Lin 2005), to increase website traffic (Shankar, Urban, and Sultan 2002) and lead to positive word-of-mouth (Chen 2006). There is a common agreement on the importance of trust in e-commerce, and the formal study of its determinants has been addressed in several studies (Beldad, de Jong, and Steehouder 2010). However, research on determinants of trust in an AM context has not been addressed in the aca-demic literature.

Trusting beliefs. Research on online trust in commercial web-sites has revealed a range of factors that support the develop-ment of consumer trust. The concept of trusting beliefs is widely used in this regard (Grabner-Kräuter and Kaluscha 2003; McKnight, Choudhury, and Kacmar 2002). Trusting beliefs represent an individual’s impression about attributes and characteristics of the trusted party that are critical for the formation of trust relationships. Several studies in online trust research have clustered the variety of proposed trusting beliefs into frequently recurring themes (McKnight, Choud-hury, and Kacmar 2002; Papadopoulou, Kanellis, and Marta-kos 2001). The most frequently adopted trusting beliefs refer to benevolence, integrity, openness, and competence.

Benevolence in the context of commercial trust relation-ships is defined as the probability that the trustee places the interests of the trusting party ahead of its own (Chen and Dhillon 2003). This has particular importance in the context

of handling personally sensitive information (Corbitt 2003), such as credit card and other personal payment details. However, for affiliates who only refer customers to mer-chants and, therefore, do not handle such information, benevolence might be regarded as less important. In contrast for AWs with built-in booking facilities, benevolence is assumed to play a pivotal role for inducing trusting relationships.

Competence refers to the trustee’s ability to fulfill the promise as communicated initially to the trustor (Chen and Dhillon 2003; Tschannen-Moran and Hoy 2000). In contrast to benevolence, which refers to a moral intention, compe-tence reflects rather the necessary skills to fulfill an expecta-tion. Hence, it reflects consumers’ confidence that the delivered results will meet an adequate quality. Affiliates that are engaged solely in referring customers to merchants (e.g., search affiliates, email marketers) are less likely to be dependent on proving their competence to visitors than con-tent providers, who add value to the customer by providing reliable information. Thus the risk that derives from inade-quate “performance” is especially important for content-based AWs.

Integrity—often referred to as reliability, honesty or credibility—reflects the ethical traits of the trustee, similar to benevolence, and is considered critical for establishing trust (Mcknight, Choudhury, and Kacmar 2002). However, integ-rity and the keeping of agreements and commitments reflect rather altruistic motives, in some contrast to benevolence. Integrity is critical for trust in e-commerce, as consumers rely on the truthfulness and honesty of presented informa-tion, and the promises contained therein (Corbitt 2003; Tschannen-Moran and Hoy 2000). It is assumed to hold for the context of AWs as well.

Openness is defined as the extent to which relevant information is kept back from the trustor (Papadopoulou, Kanellis, and Martakos 2001). Guarding and/or withhold-ing information deliberately might cause suspicion on behalf of the trusting party and, moreover, sharing infor-mation openly can establish confidence in the trusted party (Tschannen-Moran and Hoy 2000). In e-com-merce, and particularly in a tourism-specific context, openness represents clear communication of all purchase-related information, such as prices, taxes, and other fees (McCole 2002), and it is regarded to influence choice of products positively as it reduces uncertainty (Tanford, Baloglu, and Erdem 2012). Thus, providing as much detailed information as possible contributes toward estab-lishing trust with consumers. In AM, openness might refer to the revenue-generating aspects of the business model (i.e., earning commission by generating leads). However, communicating openly the affiliate business model to consumers might contradict an affiliate’s benevolence. It bears the risk of transmitting the perception that the inter-est of earning commission is placed ahead of the consum-er’s interests.



Gregori et al. 199

In conclusion, identifying the crucial trusting beliefs for AWs is essential, in order to explain the formation of visitors’ trust. However, the formation of trust is a complex and multi-dimensional construct, which is determined by a wide variety of different factors. Therefore, the remainder of this section reviews trust-determining factors from research in multiple disciplines that bear a relevancy for the context of AM.

Determinants of trust. Research from the fields of sociology and economics suggests that trust in abstract social systems (e.g., the Internet) fosters cooperation between people (Pav-lou and Gefen 2004; Corbitt 2003). This so-called construct of institution-based trust suggests that trust of potential online buyers is fueled by the perceived trustworthiness in the Internet as an appropriate system to carry out economic transactions (Pavlou and Gefen 2004). In particular, struc-tural assurances (e.g., credit-card guarantees, verification seals, escrow services) facilitate the formation of institution-based trust in commercial online environments (McKnight, Choudhury, and Kacmar 2002). Nevertheless, unlike online marketplaces, not all AWs are designed to carry out eco-nomic transactions. Therefore, third-party structures seem partly improper in order to explain institution-based trust for all AWs, but can be drawn on as a possible determinant of trust for those that handle private information.

In addition, an important basis of online trust is knowl-edge-based trust. That is, knowledge about and predictabil-ity of the trustee’s competencies, motives, and goals. The ability to predict a partner’s behaviors and intentions enables the trustor to evaluate the expected quality of per-formance and, therefore, to assess trustworthiness (Ralnasingam and Phan 2003). However, the capacity to predict requires comprehension, which can be created by providing clear information about the structure and compo-sition of the business, and increasing consumers’ back-ground knowledge about a website (e.g., through newsletters) (Chen 2006; Ralnasingam and Phan 2003). AWs, however, commonly pursue the aim of profit maxi-mization through generating leads. Those that generate rev-enue by providing independent product-related information (e.g., content providers) may not have an interest in openly informing visitors about their main business model and goals. This is assumed, because visitors might have the feeling that the selection of products and provision of infor-mation is driven by revenue maximization. In contrast, loy-alty and reward websites may have an elevated interest in proactively communicating their business model, as con-sumers get the feeling of being rewarded by carrying out transactions through such websites (IAB 2008).

Increasingly, social networks are playing an important role in creating trust (or mistrust) for a particular brand/company. The customer-to-customer conversations that take place in such platforms are increasingly informing the attitudes, beliefs, and levels of trust towards a company (Guo, Wang, and Leskovec 2011; Munar and Steen Jacobsen 2013).

In off-line business environments, it is undisputed that physical appearance of business facilities and direct contact between customers and company employees exerts significant influence on consumer trust (Chen 2006). However, in online environments, these conventional trust-inducing features are missing. Hence online stores are dependent on their website to engage with customers. Against this background, the cru-cial role of website interface designs has been acknowledged widely in the e-commerce literature (Beldad, de Jong, and Steehouder 2010; Koufaris and Hampton-Sousa 2004; Jarvenpaa, Tractinsky, and Vitale 2000). A website that fea-tures a trust-enhancing interface can act similar to a salesper-son for a company and partly reduces the disadvantages of impersonality (Jarvenpaa, Tractinsky, and Vitale 2000). The inducement of trust through website interface design factors takes place on different levels, including the graphical lay-out, the structure design, and the content design (Wang and Emurian 2005).

Similar to the design of the “electronic storefront” of online vendors, the consumer’s perception of the company’s size can positively impact consumer online trust. Customers often associate large companies with an elevated capability to deliver the desired services more adequately than smaller players (Lee and Turban 2001). Furthermore, it is assumed that large companies are more willing to offer compensation in case of product failure. This is because they usually invest large effort in building a good reputation and are, therefore, interested in its maintenance (Jarvenpaa, Tractinsky, and Vitale 2000). Although the role of company size as a trust-enhancing factor for online vendors is disputed (Koufaris and Hampton-Sousa 2004), it was found to be significantly important when selling high-risk and high-involvement products (Jarvenpaa, Tractinsky, and Vitale 2000). This also holds for tourism and travel products. Hence, it is assumed that the perceived size of an affiliate has a positive impact on the formation of consumer trust.

Purpose of the study. Given the growing importance of online-based distribution for tourism businesses, AM is regarded to be one of the promising channels of the future. As outlined previously, its efficiency and cost advantages bring about a wide variety of benefits for both affiliates and merchants. However, literature on AM is relatively sparse, and has failed to address consumers’ attitudes towards and acceptance of this distribution channel. This prompts a num-ber of interesting research questions.

Trust is a critical influencing factor in consumer purchase decision making. Studies over the past decade explored and identified determinants of trust in online shopping environ-ments. However, there resides a substantial gap in the litera-ture with regards to trust in AWs.

Research question 1: Are AM websites for consumers of tourism products an acceptable and trustable distribu-tion channel?




Given the potential for tourism suppliers to generate revenue through AM channels as well as the high complexity and involvement in the purchasing decision-making process of tourism products, it is of vital importance for both marketing managers and AW owners to gain a deep understanding of the factors that influence consumer trust in this context.

Research question 2: What specific factors determine consumers’ perspective of the trustworthiness of tourism-related AWs?

Given the scarcity of research adopting an affiliate perspec-tive, the identification of affiliates’ perception of consumers’ trust in their own websites is important in order to identify the pertinent issues and to gain a deep and nuanced picture of the status quo of online trust in tourism-related AWs.

Research question 3: What are the trust-determining fac-tors for tourism-related AM websites from the view-point of AM practitioners?

The identification of gaps between consumers’ and practitio-ners’ perceptions of elements of trust is important in order to provide recommendations for meaningful managerial impli-cations and ultimately contribute toward enhanced consumer trust in tourism-related AWs.

Research question 4: What are the differences between the viewpoints of practitioners’ and consumers’ per-ceptions of trust in AWs?

Methodology

Various research designs have been applied in online com-merce trust studies. The vast majority have made use of quantitative methodologies by conducting questionnaires after participants were asked to carry out specific tasks on websites (e.g., Chen 2006; Koufaris and Hampton-Sousa 2002; Gefen and Staub 2000). A smaller number of studies, however, made use of qualitative–exploratory research approaches, such as computer/lab experiments, observations and/ or focus group interviews (e.g., Sillence et al. 2004; McCole 2002). Qualitative data are particularly useful when trying to glean a more nuanced and accurate picture of con-sumers’ perceptions of trust (e.g., Hargittai et al. 2010). This study adopted a mixed-method approach to research because it is deemed to be more appropriate when the collection of just one type of data is insufficient (Bregoli 2012). Confirming this view, Banyai and Glover (2012), in their evaluation of research methods on travel blogs, stated that quantitative methods can be used to find out general infor-mation about the bloggers, such as the demographic and geo-graphic profile, or make comparisons between different sample blogs. However, Banyai and Glover (2012) add that it is the qualitative methods that enable the researchers to

understand the meanings people assign to their experiences. In line with these arguments, this study utilized two different approaches to research with two distinct, but yet complimen-tary purposes. The first phase of the study involved under-taking a quantitative approach in order to determine the perceptions of affiliate practitioners on the issue of consumer trust. This enabled the identification of those factors that are deemed to be influential on consumer trust. The second phase of the study involved a qualitative approach in order to cross-check the views of practitioners with those of consum-ers. Furthermore, it allowed more in-depth exploration of emerging factors and their influence on trust.

Online Survey

The study first undertook a web-based survey in the tourism-specific subsections of five of the largest English-speaking affiliate online forums. The questionnaire comprised a set of 16 questions, addressing both frequently recurring trust determinants from previous studies on online trust in e-commerce, and issues on the influence of the affiliate busi-ness model on consumers’ trust. In addition, a number of general questions for classification purposes were included. Questions, where appropriate, were measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree/not important at all; 5 = strongly agree/extremely important). Please see Appendix A for a sample of survey questions and the scales used.

Experiential Focus Group Interviews

The second phase of the study involved conducting experi-ential focus group interviews in order to obtain insights into perceptions and opinions of consumers with regard to trust in AWs. Experiential focus group interviews were chosen as one of the main data collection techniques for the following reasons: they have been applied on numerous occasions in previous online trust studies that have an exploratory nature (Roussos and Moussouri 2004; Sillence et al. 2004; McCole 2002), and they offer the possibility to capture perceptions, feelings, and attitudes much more in depth (Stewart and Shamdasani 2007). This is particularly important for studies involving trust, which is largely related to emotions and sub-jective assessment of consumers.

Three experiential focus-group interviews were con-ducted in a computer lab in the United Kingdom. At the beginning of the focus group sessions, participants were pre-sented a task. The task comprised designing within 45 min-utes an itinerary for a one-week trip, containing at least four elements (accommodation, flight, restaurant, sightseeing activity). Participants were asked to exclusively make use of four specific websites (purposefully selected to represent dif-ferent types of AWs) and to carry out the booking process for each element up until the stage of entering the payment details. The latter was of particular importance, as the selected AWs comprised both websites with integrated



Gregori et al. 201

Table 1. Results of Descriptive Statistics.

Item Mean Value

Integrity item 1 4.1Integrity item 2 4.2Competence item 1 4.0Competence item 2 4.1Benevolence item 1 4.1Benevolence item 2 4.1Structural assurance item 1 2.4Content design Item 2 (feedback mechanisms) 4.4Website design factors Graphic design factors Use of high-quality pictures 4.3 Use of decent colour schemes 4.1 Structure design factors Ease of use 4.3 Simple design and navigation 4.1 Hygiene factors 4.5

booking and payment systems as well as websites that refer to merchants. The destination and the dates of the trip were predefined to ensure that the selected AWs deliver meaning-ful results and that the task could be completed appropriately in the given time frame. Participants were told at the begin-ning of the session that the research set out, among other things, to explore the trustworthiness of the websites. They were encouraged to take notes. However, to avoid potential bias, they were not informed about the affiliate nature and commission-based business model of the websites.

The participants were then asked questions in relation to the task, but with a particular focus on the determinants of trust. Please see Appendix B for a set of sample questions. The focus group discussions were recorded on tape and video camera and later transcribed and coded for further analysis.

Sampling and Composition of Sample

Self-selection as sampling technique was employed for the online survey in order to select the research sample. Self-selection sampling is also a nonprobability technique, in which potential participants agree to take part in the research. This method is associated with a minimized effort in recruit-ing participants. Moreover, individuals who contact the researcher by themselves are likely to be more committed. To ensure that only relevant individuals are targeted, the authors formulated clear exclusion criteria in the invitation. It was stated that only affiliate practitioners with consider-able experience in promoting travel and tourism products were invited to fill out questionnaires. In order to encourage participation, invitations were posted in relevant affiliate marketing forums, explaining the background of the study and linking to the online survey (abestweb.com; affiliatebot.com; affiliatewebmasterforum.com; associateprograms.com; affiliates4u.com). In addition, webmasters of the forums were contacted with a request to stick the thread on the top of respective forum pages (e.g., subsections for travel and tourism–related AM), in order to increase the response rate. As an incentive, participants were offered an executive summary of the study. In total, 86 questionnaires were collected, of which only 63 were suitable for further analysis.

Regarding the composition of the research sample for the online survey, 43% of respondents belonged to hobby sites (<10,000 visitors per month), 33% were superaffiliates (>50,000 visitors per month), and 24% belonged to medium-sized affili-ates (10,000–50,000 visitors per month). Respondents covered a wide range of different types of AM (IAB 2008), including loyalty and reward sites, content providers, search affiliates, and coregistration affiliates; 10% of respondents claimed to be involved into more than one type of AM.

A purposive sampling technique was employed to select the informants for the experiential focus group sessions. Although this sampling technique is not entirely objective and could lead to research bias, it provides access to the

“most appropriate” group of people who could provide the relevant information due to their knowledge and back-ground (Altinay and Paraskevas 2008). To ensure a valuable contribution to the topic, the main selection criteria were affinity for traveling and familiarity with online environ-ments. The research sample of this study included individu-als who had prior experiences with purchasing tourism services online and command of basic operational Internet skills, which were defined as the ability to operate web browsers as well as Internet-based search engines and forums.

It was also ensured that the composition of the sample featured a mix of different age groups, and different cultural and professional backgrounds. In total, opinions from 18 dif-ferent respondents (13 female, five male) were collected, including e-commerce experts, travel consultants, organiza-tional behavior researchers, and leisure travelers (students), all of whom book their holidays online. The average age of the respondents was 26, with the oldest participant being 35 and the youngest 23. Thirty-three percent of the participants had heard the term AM before, but only two participants claimed to be fully aware of its concept and principles.

Analysis of the Data

The data set retrieved from the online questionnaire was ana-lyzed using SPSS. A measurement of mean values of poten-tially important factors for trust was conducted to identify the pertinent issues from the affiliate practitioners’ perspec-tive. As items were primarily measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale, it was assumed that items scoring on average 4.0 or higher (“agree” and “strongly agree”) were regarded by respondents as highly relevant to the formation of trust.




The analysis of means revealed (see Table 1) that in par-ticular competence, integrity and benevolence beliefs, cus-tomer review and feedback mechanisms, as well as a variety of website design factors were regarded by AM practitioners as highly important. In contrast to the assumptions derived from reviewing trust-related literature, structural assurances such as credit card and trust seals and perceived company size were not considered relevant by AM practitioners. The issues that emerged from the online questionnaire were explored in depth through the qualitative research. In line with the suggestions of Bregoli (2012), the results of the quantitative data analysis were merged by comparison, inter-pretation, and discussion of how they diverged, converged, and related to the qualitative data.

The qualitative data were analyzed first by using NVivo 8 software according to the “three concurrent flows of activ-ity” (Miles and Huberman 1999, p. 16): data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing. Data reduction took place through both descriptive and interpretive coding (Gibbs 2004). The data reduction stage involved coding the data according to the theoretical framework of the study and using the theoretical framework as a set of lens to group and cate-gorize data according to the predetermined themes (in this case, determinants of trust). Data were displayed for each informant participating in the focus group discussion in order to allow comparisons between the views of the informants. The extant literature was then used to draw conclusions from the study (Perry 1998) and also to enhance the reliability and validity of the findings. The findings and the discussion of findings are presented in the following section.

Results and Discussion

Classification of Determinants of Trust

The results of the present study revealed a number of trust-influencing factors. A number of these were identified as critical factors that represent a prerequisite for the formation of consumer trust, whereas the remaining factors were found to exert only moderate influence on consumers’ perception of trust. Similar to previous studies (e.g., Chen 2006; McKnight, Choudhury, and Kacmar 2002) that differentiate the degree of significance of specific determinants of con-sumer trust, the present study revealed that the factors lead-ing to the formation of trust need to be divided. While some authors suggest a multilevel grading (Chen 2006), it was found that determinants of consumer trust in AM are under-pinned by a dyadic differentiation into core determinants and additional trust-enhancing features. Core determinants of trust are regarded by consumers as pivotal for entering a trust relationship. This is in line with findings from previous stud-ies (McKnight, Choudhury, and Kacmar 2002) which sug-gested that specific determinants are essential for consumers’ decision to trust, and that their absence entails the failure of the trust relationship. Additional trust-enhancing factors

represent antecedents of trust, which enhance the degree of perceived trustworthiness. However, unlike core determi-nants, they are not regarded as indispensable.

Trusting Beliefs

Trusting beliefs in the context of AM refer to beneficial char-acteristics that are ascribed in the visitor’s perception to an AW. The findings suggest that two trusting beliefs (compe-tence and integrity) represent core determinants.

Competence of an AW was regarded by consumers as possessing the expertise to give useful recommendations and/or to handle bookings professionally. Competence beliefs were found to be a core determinant for trusting an affiliate, as the majority of respondents made statements with regard to the importance of this trust-determining fac-tor. This included both positive statements, “I can entrust this website my money, because they actually give me the impression that they know their business and know what they are doing,” and negative ones, “I would not trust this website. They didn’t seem professional to me.” Moreover it was found that AWs with a specific thematic area or product range were perceived considerably more competent. Also affiliate practitioners advanced the view that competence beliefs represent an essential trusting belief for consumers (cf. Table 1).

Similar to competence beliefs, integrity was also found to be a core determinant of trust. Integrity referred to the per-ceived truthfulness and reliability of presented information, which in turn provided consumers assurance that his or her expectations will be met. The data suggested that integrity beliefs are enhanced by adding independent information to product descriptions: “What made [the website] more trust-worthy to me was the fact that they were critical and honest in their reviews and not only tried to talk me in to buying something at any cost.” In this regard, some participants indi-cated that pop-up advertisements and random cross-selling attempts raised doubts about affiliates’ integrity: “That gave me the impression they just want to sell me as much as pos-sible, but not actually . . . what I have asked for.”

Affiliate practitioners also considered the perception of integrity as important for building consumer trust (cf. Table 1). In contrast to the overall sample of AM practitio-ners, all content provider affiliates agreed (4) or strongly agreed (5) with the importance of integrity beliefs for con-sumer trust. As content providers are mainly characterized by providing independently produced information and/or carefully curated content (IAB 2008), this finding reflects consumers’ perception that providing independent product information enhances integrity beliefs.

The detected importance of competence beliefs and integ-rity beliefs about an affiliate is in line with various studies from other fields of e-commerce (Corbitt 2003; McKnight, Choudhury, and Kacmar 2002; Papadopoulou, Kanellis, and



Gregori et al. 203

Martakos 2001). If consumers perceive an affiliate as com-petent but lacking integrity (or vice versa), trust between the two parties will not be established. However, in contrast to online trust literature (McKnight, Choudhury, and Kacmar 2002) as well as the survey results (cf. Table 1), consumers do not support the view that benevolence plays a role in the formation of trust. This finding was surprising, as both integ-rity and benevolence reflect ethical traits (Tschannen-Moran and Hoy 2000). However, unlike integrity (acting in compli-ance with reached agreements), benevolence is rather based on altruism (the “goodwill” of the company). This moral dis-tinction between the two trusting beliefs could serve as an explanation why benevolence was not found to be important to consumers in the context of AM. In fact, affiliates assume only a mediating position in the process of value creation of tourism services. Thus, consumers do not expect an affiliate to explicitly subordinate its interests to theirs (benevolence), as long as the promises made will be kept (integrity) and the affiliate possesses the necessary skills and expertise to fulfill its mediating function in the value chain (competence).

Institution-Based Trust: Structural Assurances

From the range of structural assurances, consumers consid-ered tourism-specific certifications and verification seals for secure credit card processing as crucial for trust in AWs. The latter were regarded as a strong indicator for the perceived trustworthiness of an AW. Some respondents claimed that the absence of such seals represents a reason not to trust an AW: “I couldn’t find certificates. . . . I would never book through a non-secure website.” in addition, tourism-specific labels and certifications, such as “ABTA Protection” or “IATA,” were found to be enhancing the perceived trustwor-thiness among consumers “When I saw the ABTA logo, I knew that there is nothing dodgy about the site.” It is note-worthy that participants were mainly unaware of the specific meaning behind these seals. Nevertheless, it is concluded that whereas a credit card seal represents a core determinant, tourism labels are not regarded as pivotal for trust but rather as trust-enhancing factors.

AM practitioners suggested that neither credit card verifi-cations nor trust seals, nor tourism labels impact consumers’ trust. While this result in general indicates that the impor-tance of structural assurances is partly underestimated by AM practitioners, it reflects the findings from earlier studies on online trust (Chen 2006; Pavlou and Gefen 2004), which suggested that trust seals bear no importance because of a lack of consumers’ awareness of their validity.

Further trust-influencing structural assurances were found to be customer reviews and feedback mechanisms. While a large group of respondents regarded reviews and feedback as trust-enhancing—“if someone has commented on a product I will trust the website more”—some respondents raised strong concerns about their truthfulness. On the other side, affiliate practitioners did attach considerable importance to it (4.4 on a 5-item scale).

Taking these concerns into consideration, it is concluded that feedback and customer reviews do not represent a core determinant of trust, but are certainly a trust-enhancing fea-ture. This finding is partly supported by Pavlou and Gefen (2004), who contend that market-driven approaches, such as user-generated reviews and ratings, are used by consumers to judge an e-vendor’s trustworthiness.

Knowledge-Based Trust

The construct of knowledge-based trust suggests that knowl-edge about a company’s structure, motivations, and goals enables its customers to predict its behaviors and intentions more accurately. Thus, it helps customers to evaluate the expected quality of performance and, therefore, increases their trust. The present study sought to explore, in particular, whether the awareness of the affiliate business model, and thus the fact that AWs receive commissions for generating sales, influences consumers’ trust. After the focus group respondents had been fully briefed about the basic con-cepts of AM, respondents unequivocally stated that the commission-based model of affiliates did not affect their decision to trust, as it is the nature of every business to gener-ate profit: “They have to exist on something,” “No matter where you go, there is going to be a commission on every-thing.” Moreover, commissions in online environments are perceived in general as relatively low: “the commissions on the Internet are lower anyway.”

In contrast, affiliate practitioners were more sensitive, advancing the view that awareness of the affiliate business model among consumers does exert influence on their deci-sion to trust. Furthermore, they suggested that making con-sumers proactively aware of the underlying business model of AWs would not enhance the overall trust. However, respondents engaged in loyalty and reward sites regarded it as unanimously important to educate consumers about their business model. In essence, affiliate practitioners’ concerns about consumers’ awareness of the business model are unfounded. Against the background of the strategic role of AM as a distribution tool, it shows that AM represents, con-sciously or unconsciously, an accepted distribution channel in the tourism sector.

Some evidence was found that background knowledge about an AW increases consumers’ trust, particularly in AWs with integrated booking engines. Some consumers argued that when AWs handle sensitive data, uncertainty is reduced by having access to different communication channels with the company: “Different contact details (hotline, e-mail, etc.) make you feel more secure about a website, especially with these affiliates . . . because you never know who they are and what to expect”; “I want to know, whom I am giving my money and my credit card details.” Hence, providing company-related information, in particular a wide variety of contact details and interpersonal communication channels for emergency purposes, is considered to be a trust-enhancing factor for affiliates that handle sensitive customer data.




Company Size

Previous studies indicated that consumers place more trust in supposedly larger companies rather than smaller ones. However, focus group responses showed that consumers’ views on the influence of company size on trust differ. One group advanced the view that it does not impact their percep-tion of trust: “It doesn’t really influence my perception of trust whether they are big or small, . . . other things [are] more important in this regard.” Also online survey results affirmed the above-mentioned findings. The majority of respondents were either neutral about or disagreed with the statement that the size of a company behind a website influ-ences visitors’ opinion about AW trustworthiness.

A second view that was advanced during the focus groups argued that company size in fact influences the formation of trust. For instance, if “there aren’t some big companies behind the websites . . . I don’t trust them at all, and I would never give them my credit-card details.” However, when par-ticipants claimed to take company size into consideration for their trust decision, it was rather equated with high reputa-tion: “when I book something I always go automatically through . . . established and well-known websites.” In sum-mary, it is concluded that the size of a company does not represent a significant determinant of trust in the context of AM. However, the following section elaborates on the importance of reputation for consumer-trust.

Website Reputation

Website reputation was found to be a major trust-determining factor, particularly for AWs that deal with personal informa-tion and payment details. Reputation was foremost associ-ated with an increased probability that customers will be supported in case of service failures and amendments of existing bookings. However, some respondents also regarded an AW’s reputation as an indicator of its integrity, “I feel assured that I won’t be screwed, because . . . the company has some kind of reputation,” and competence, “Reputation is for me that the company has proven that it is able to rec-ommend places that are good.”

The strong influence of reputation on the perceived integ-rity beliefs about the affiliate is partly supported by Jarvenpaa, Tractinsky, and Vitale (2000), who argued that reputation is associated among consumers with elevated investments of the company in building positive customer relationships. Hence, the higher the reputation of a company, the greater its penalty will be for violating customers’ trust by breaking commitments. Therefore, it is concluded that reputation is not only a core determinant for overall trust but also impacts on consumers’ competence and integrity beliefs.

Search Engine Search Results

Some consumers regard natural search results of major search engines as an independent and objective judgment

infrastructure that delivers credible results in terms of trust-worthiness. In general, it was found that search engine results are used as an indicator of trust in two different ways: The first approach is centered on a website’s posi-tion in the ranking of natural search results. More pre-cisely, being ranked among the top three to five results represents an indication for its trustworthiness: “If the site is on the top three search results, I know that it’s trustwor-thy, because Google wouldn’t push dubious sites.” The sec-ond approach bases the perception of affiliates’ trustworthiness on the frequency by which they are listed within search results of different keyword searches: “The sites that Google suggests me at almost every enquiry are the trustworthy ones.”

A study by Pan et al. (2007) on online search behavior supports these results to some extent. The study revealed that search engines’ page ranking impacts on the path of informa-tion search behavior substantially, because people have strong faith in search engines’ ability to rank results accord-ing to their true relevancy.

Web Interface Design

Web interface design factors were found to be a core deter-minant of consumer trust in AWs. AM practitioners strongly acknowledged the importance of ease of use for establishing consumer trust (cf. Table 1).

With regards to consumers, the issue was raised exten-sively at the very beginning of each focus group discussion and represented the most recurring theme. Confirming pre-vious studies (Wang and Emurian 2005; Koufaris and Hampton-Sousa 2004), the structure design of AWs is essential to both AM practitioners (cf. Table 1) and con-sumers. Consumers emphasized the ease of use (i.e., intu-itiveness of handling the website) as an indicator for an affiliate’s trustworthiness: “If I use a website for the first time I should be able to handle it, otherwise how can I trust it, if I don’t understand what is going on.” In addition, structure design was also found to shape competence and integrity beliefs. With regard to competence beliefs, respondents argued that an unclear and confusing structure of the content was associated with a lack of professional-ism: “It was so confusing. . . . I had the feeling that it was run by amateurs.” Regarding integrity beliefs, evidence was found that complicated navigation raises concerns about a website’s honesty: “When it gets complicated, I get suspicious and ask myself for what reasons they try to overcomplicate it.”

The second major determinant of trust concerning the web interface was AW graphic design and overall layout. Similar to previous studies (Chen 2006; Wang and Emurian 2005), both consumers and AM practitioners (cf. Table 1) attached great importance to layout and design factors. Two main themes surfaced from both data sets, namely, pictures and decent color schemes. Graphical representa-tions bear a particular importance, as they help visualizing



Gregori et al. 205

the product. Because of the intangible nature of tourism products, a professional visualization is particularly sig-nificant for consumer trust. In terms of color schemes, it was found that “simple and clear color schemes that are calm and not varied” provide consumers a sense of trustworthiness.

Consumers use graphic design as an indicator for both competence beliefs: “They don’t look decent. It’s that the colors and the fonts they use make them look very unprofes-sional”; and integrity beliefs: “Good pictures and videos give you the confidence that the product is good.” The influence of graphic design and also the above-mentioned structure design factors on integrity and competence beliefs is par-tially confirmed by McKnight, Choudhury, and Kacmar (2002), who found that general website quality correlates highly with trusting beliefs. In essence, similar to a salesper-son in offline commerce, customers see an AW as a repre-sentation of a company’s resources and capabilities.

Conclusions and Future Research

This article set out to achieve four main objectives: first, to explore whether AWs represent an acceptable and trustwor-thy distribution channel for tourism products; second, to identify determinants of trust in tourism-related AWs from an affiliate marketers’ perspective; third, to explore the con-sumers’ perspective on the above-mentioned issues; and finally, to identify gaps between the two viewpoints in order to provide recommendations for enhancing consumer trust in tourism-related AWs.

From a consumer’s perspective, it was found that, in gen-eral, AWs are an accepted and trustable distribution channel. The commission-based nature of the affiliate business models does not hold off consumers from trusting such websites. An important finding of this paper was the distinction between core determinants of trust (whose presence is essential to the transaction actually being made) and additional trust-enhancing factors that while not essential to the transaction were seen as having a positive influence.

Core determinants were found to be consumers’ compe-tence and integrity beliefs about the affiliate, the affiliate’s reputation, and consumers’ perceptions on the web interface design (cf. Figure 1). In addition, an affiliate’s web interface design and reputation not only determines overall trust but also shapes the competence and integrity beliefs about the affiliate. Trust-enhancing factors were found to be tourism-specific labels, user-generated feedback and reviews, as well as the affiliate’s appearance in search engine results (cf. Figure 1). Moreover, in the particular case of AWs that fea-ture integrated booking systems, traditional structural assur-ances, namely, credit card seals, are a further core determinant of trust.

From the AM’s point of view, the paper identified many converging views with the customer’s perspective but also several areas of divergence. Unlike consumers, AM practi-tioners have shown a high sensitivity toward demonstrating benevolence beliefs. Consumers, however, are primarily concerned with tangible indications of an affiliate’s compe-tence and integrity, as they perceive affiliates exclusively as an intermediary. In light of this finding, it is surprising

WebInterface

TrustingBeliefs Reputation Credit Card

Seals*

Tourism SpecificLabels

Company RelatedInformation*

Search EngineSearch Results

Feedback &Reviews

Consumer Trust

CORE DETERMINANTS OF TRUST

ADDITIONAL TRUST-ENHANCING FACTORS

Figure 1. Determinants of consumer trust.*Only applicable to affiliate websites with integrated booking engines.




that, unlike consumers, AM practitioners perceive verifica-tion seals for payment transactions as well as tourism-spe-cific labels as insignificant to the formation of trust. Verification seals are important for trust building as they ultimately represent independent, tangible clues for the integrity of AW.

From the AM practitioners’ viewpoint, the study identi-fied many converging views with the customer’s perspective but also several areas of divergence, in particular, with regards to the lower importance attributed to structural assur-ance issues (such as credit card verification, trust seals) and excessive sensitivity toward transparency of business models (seen as a nonissue by consumers).

Because of the exploratory nature of this study, some lim-itations have to be taken into account. Even though internal validity is provided, external validity and thus generalization of the findings could not be achieved, because of the limited size of the samples. Therefore, this study provides a starting point for future research into the topic, and it provides an opportunity for researchers to validate and amend the frame-work developed in this research across different service industry sectors. The second major limitation can be seen in the way in which trust was constructed in the present study. The proposed framework is more static than dynamic. Previous research on trust suggests that trust is distinguished into initial trust (first-time visitors), stabilized trust (estab-lished customers), and dissolution trust (when trust declines). This also provides an interesting starting point for further investigation.

Managerial Implications

In order to gain consumers’ trust and bring about a pur-chase decision, AM practitioners have to take determinants of trust into consideration when designing AWs. Competence and integrity are suggested to be the most important trusting beliefs, which implies that affiliates need to put emphasis on illustrating them to their custom-ers. Against this background, it is particularly important for content-based affiliates to be critical with recommen-dations and to prevent the impression that up-selling prod-ucts is the main business goal. In this context, the authors suggest to lower attempts of cross-selling and pop-up ads to an absolute minimum, and to introduce deep links that bring the customer directly to the merchant’s specific product or service. Fostering customers to leave feedback and reviews shows further visitors that the AW is able to provide competent advice. The ability for AWs to also tap into existing customer reviews from the merchant website would also increase cross links and credibility between the merchant and affiliate sites. Moreover, the authors advise that having a specific area of focus, thus serving a well-defined market segment, increases the perception of com-petence beliefs. Hence, affiliate marketers should consider carefully whether an affiliate program fits into the targeted

segment of consumers. The quality of the promoted prod-ucts should be the decisive factor, rather than quantity or potential sales commissions.

Creation of unique content in addition to content and data feeds provided by the merchant also plays a key role in enhancing customers’ competence beliefs.

Trust is also brought about by repeat visitors who are often those that drive further traffic to the affiliate’s website through link-backs, eWoM (electronic Word of Mouth). Therefore, affiliate marketers should find ways to incentivize and reward repeat visitors to their website through promo-tions and/or loyalty schemes.

In addition, affiliate marketers are increasingly turning to social media to drive traffic to their websites, but social media can and should also be used by practitioners to create a community around the product/service of interest, thus increasing the levels of trust.

Also of paramount importance is the need to adopt a professional layout (high-quality graphics), a simple and clear structure of the homepage, and clear and easily com-prehensible site navigation. This prevents integrity con-cerns and encourages consumers to make use of the respective AW. Consumers are increasingly concerned about privacy and fraud issues in online environments. AM practitioners underestimate this issue and are, there-fore, strongly advised to explicitly inform their consumers about the utilization of personal data. In this regard, AWs are advised to incorporate trust seals for credit card infor-mation, make them visible to the customer, and proactively communicate statements about privacy and confidential-ity. In order to further reduce consumers’ uncertainty, affiliates should provide contact details in order to give customers an access point in case of problems occurring during the booking process.

Finally, affiliate practitioners should ensure that their partnership arrangements with the merchant of choice also address issues surrounding consumers’ trust: this can be done by ensuring that there is a shared understanding and affinity of respective target markets and a transparent approach to sharing data, which is likely to enhance the cus-tomer journey. Although transparency in displaying associ-ations between AWs and the merchant was not ranked as a strong determinant for trust in the findings of this study, this is an issue that is increasingly being raised in both consumer and AM forums. In the case of the United States, it is now also a legal requirement and, therefore, should be defini-tively addressed.

Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

FundingThe author(s) received no financial support for the research, author-ship, and/or publication of this article.



Gregori et al. 207

Appendix A

Online Survey: Themes and Questions

Theme Survey Question Adapted from/Answering Options

Trusting beliefs A visitor is more likely to trust my affiliate website if he or she has the perception that . . .

5-point Likert-type scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree)

Benevolence 1. the website will act in his or her best interest.2. the website owner/business behind the website is interested

in his well-being, not just in his or its own.

McKnight, Choudhury, and Kacmar 2002

Integrity 1. the promises made on the website will be kept (e.g., with regard to provided information, product delivery).

2. the website in general and its content in particular are reliable and truthful.


Competence 1. the provided recommendations/ information/advice is accurate and competent.

2. the provided links to merchants are good recommendations.


Disposition to trust From your own point of view, how much do you agree with the following statements?


1. People that are more open to trust an unknown person are more likely to trust affiliate websites.

2. The readiness to trust persons and things (e.g., newspaper, governments, businesses) in general has a significant influence on the level of trust in an affiliate website.

Teo and Liu 2007; Cheung and Lee 2002

Institution-based trust A visitor is more likely to trust my affiliate website if he or she has the perception that . . .


General 1. online shopping is more risky than traditional methods of shopping.

2. the Internet in general is convenient and easy.

Chen, 2006

Structural Assurance From a consumer’s point of view, how important do you think are symbols and logos of third party providers such as “TRUSTe,” “BBBOnLine,” or “VeriSign”?

From a consumer’s point of view, how important do you think are statements about privacy and security, in order to develop trust in an affiliate website?

Chen 20065-point Likert-type scale (extremely important

to not important at all)

Knowledge-based trust How important do you think is keeping in touch with visitors through newsletters or e-mail advertising for increasing their perception about the trustworthiness of your affiliate website?

Chen (2006)5-point Likert-type scale (extremely important

to not important at all) Awareness of affiliate

business modelDo you think that consumers’ awareness of the fact that affiliates

receive commissions for generating sales exerts significant influence on the perceived trustworthiness of the website?

New itemYes + No + N/A

How important do you think is communicating clearly the fact that affiliates receive commissions for generating sales for increasing the perceived trustworthiness?

New item5-point Likert-type scale (extremely important

to not important at all)Website interface A visitor is more likely to trust my affiliate website, if the website . . . 5-point Likert-type scale (strongly agree to

strongly disagree) Graphic design 1. makes use of relevant high-quality photos and clip arts.

2. is composed of moderate color schemes (e.g., low brightness, cool tones).

Wang and Emurian (2005)

Structure design 1. is easy to use.2. a simple and consistent design and layout.3. has no technical errors (e.g., dead links, errors with displaying

pictures).


Content design 1. provides information about the company background/ owner.2. features references and feedback from past visitors.


Perceived size A visitor is more likely to trust my affiliate website if he or she has the perception of . . .

1. the business behind the website as a large company.2. the website as a small player in the market.


Koufaris and Hampton-Sousa (2004); Jarvenpaa, Tractinsky, and Vitale (2000)

General questions, in order to classify the sample

Which type of affiliate website do you run? 6 categories according to IAB (2008), multiple responses allowed

What is the average number of monthly visitors on your website? 0–1000; 1001–5000; 5001–10,000; 10,001–50,000; 50,001 and above

Goldschmidt, Junghagen, and Harris. (2003)




Appendix B

Focus Group Question Guide

Theme Question

Introduction Familiarity with shopping (tourism services) online

What products do you typically buy online and when was the last time that you bought a tourism product online? How frequently do you buy tourism products online? (“ice breaker”)

Was there ever a situation where you had the intention to buy a tourism product online, but actually did not do it? If yes, please explain why?

Follow-up to foster discussion

Can you think of any reason why you would prefer buying a tourism product in a store, rather than online?

Transition Understanding and definition of trust

When you think of trust in general, what comes into your mind?

If you think of the person you trust the most, what is it that makes him/her so trustworthy?

Follow-ups to foster discussion

How would you define trust?

Do you think it is possible to have trust in things rather than only in persons? Explain why.Key

questionsDeterminants of trust/

trusting beliefsThink back to the 2 homepages from the beginning of the session. Did you have the feeling

that they were trustworthy?Please specify what made them trustworthy/not trustworthy?

Website interface How do you think did the layout (pictures, color schemes, easiness to use) of the 2 homepages influence your trust in them?

Follow-ups Which of the factors are the most important to you?Is it important for you to see background information and contact details of the company

behind the website, in order to trust the website? Please specify why?Is there anything that you missed on the homepage that would make it more trustworthy

to you? Institution-based trust Is the Internet a trustworthy medium to buy tourism products? Please specify why? Follow-up Is there anything that can help enhancing your trust in the Internet? Knowledge-based trust Are you aware that affiliate sites (like the 3 homepages) receive each time a consumer buys

something money from the selling company?How do you think does the fact that affiliate websites receive commissions for selling

products influence you trust in them? Perceived size Do you think that the 3 homepages are rather big or small players in the market? How

does that affect your trust towards them? Summary question Any further points you want to add?

Brief summary of the most important findings, in order to preclude misinterpretation.

ReferencesAltinay, L., and A. Paraskevas. (2008). Planning Research in

Hospitality and Tourism. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.Banyai, M., and D. T. Glover. (2012). “Evaluating Research Methods

on Travel Blogs.” Journal of Travel Research, 51: 267-77.Beldad, A., M. de Jong, and M. Steehouder. (2010). “How Shall

I Trust the Faceless and the intangible? A Literature Review on the Antecedents of Online Trust.” Computers in Human Behaviour, 26: 857-69.

Benedictova, B., and L. Nevosad. (2008). “Affiliate Marketing—Perspective of Content Providers.” Master’s thesis, Department of Business Administration and Social Sciences, Lulea University of Technology.

Brear, D., and S. Barnes. (2008). “Assessing the Value of Online Affiliate Marketing in the UK Financial Service Industry.” International Journal of Electronic Finance, 2: 1-17.

Bregoli, I. (2012). “Effects of DMO Coordination on Destination Brand Identity: A Mixed-Method Study on the City of Edinburgh.” Journal of Travel Research, 52: 212-24.

Buhalis, D. (2003). eTourism: Information Technology for Strategic Tourism Management. London: Pearson.

Buhalis, D., and R. Law. (2008). “Progress in Information Technology and Tourism Management: 20 Years on and 10 Years after the Internet—The State of eTourism Research.” Tourism Management, 29: 609-23.

Chatterjee, D., R. Grewal, and V. Sambamurthy. (2002). “Shaping up for E-commerce: Institutional Enabler of the Organizational Assimilation of Web Technologies.” MIS Quarterly, 26: 65-89.

Chen, C. (2006). “Identifying Significant Factors Influencing Consumer Trust in an Online Travel Site.” Information Technology and Tourism, 8: 197-214.



Gregori et al. 209

Chen, S. C., and G. S. Dhillon. (2003). “Interpreting Dimensions of Consumer Trust in E-commerce.” Information Technology and Management, 4: 303-18.

Choi, S., X. Y. Lehto, A. M. Morrison, and S. Jang. (2012). “Structure of Travel Planning Processes and Information Use Patterns.” Journal of Travel Research, 51: 26-40.

Corbitt, B. J. (2003). “Trust and E-commerce: A Study of Consumer Perceptions.” Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 2: 203-15.

Daniele, R., A. Frew, K. Varini, and A. Magakin. (2009). “Affiliate Marketing in Travel and Tourism.” In Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2009, edited by Wolfram Höpken, Ulrike Gretzel, and Rob Law. Wien: Springer, pp. 343-54.

Fox, P., and J. Wareham. (2010). “Governence Mechanisms in Internet-Based Affiliate Marketing Programmes in Spain.” International Journal of eBusiness Research, 6: 1-18.

Gallaugher, J. M., P. Auger, and A. Bar Nir. (2001). “Revenue Streams and Digital Content Providers: An Empirical Investigation.” Information & Management, 38: 473-85.

Gefen, D., and D. W. Staub. (2000). “Managing User Trust in B2C e-Services.” eServices Journal, 2 (2): 7-24.

Gibbs, G. (2004). Qualitative Data Analysis Explorations with NVivo. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Goldschmidt, S., S. Junghagen, and U. Harris. (2003). Strategic Affiliate Marketing. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Grabner-Kräuter, S., and E. Kaluscha. (2003). “Empirical Research in Online Trust: A Review and Critical Assessment. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58: 783-812.

Guo, Stephen, M. Wang, and J. Leskovec. (2011). “The Role of Social Networks in Online Shopping: Information Passing, Price of Trust, and Consumer Choice.” In Proceedings of the 12th ACM Conference on Electronic commerce, pp. 157-66. ACM.

Hargittai, E., L. Fullerton, E. Menchen-Trevino, and K. Thomas. (2010). “Trust Online: Young Adults’ Evaluation of Web Content.” International Journal of Communication, 4: 468-94.

Hofmann, D., and T. Novak. (2000). “How to Acquire Customers on the Web.” Harvard Business Review, 78: 179-88.

IAB. (2008). IAB Affiliate Marketing Handbook. Internet Advertising Bureau. http://www.iabuk.net/resources/digital-publications/affiliate-marketing-handbook

IAB. (2012). Affiliate Advertiser Survey 2012. London: IAB.Jarvenpaa, S. L., J. Tractinsky, and M. Vitale. (2000). “Consumer

Trust in an Internet Store.” Information Technology and Management, 1: 45-71.

Koufaris, M., and W. Hampton-Sousa. (2004). “The Development of Initial Trust in an Online Company by New Customers.” Information & Management, 41: 377-97.

Lee, G. G., and H. Lin. (2005). “Customer Perceptions of E-service Quality in Online Shopping.” International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 33: 161-76.

Lee, M., and E. Turban. (2001). “A Trust Model for Consumer Internet Shopping.” International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6: 75-91.

Li, X., B. Pan, L. Zhang, and W. Smith. (2009). “The Effect of Online Information Search on Image Development: Insights from a Mixed-Methods Study.” Journal of Travel Research, 48: 45-57.

Libai, B., E. Biyalogorski, and E. Gerstner. (2003). “Setting Referral Fees in Affiliate Marketing.” Journal of Service Research, 5: 303-15.

Malaga, R. A. (2007). “The New Marketing Intermediaries: A Multiple Case Study of Three New e-Business Models.” Journal of Academy of Business and Economics, 7: 1.

Mariussen, A., R. Daniele, and D. Bowie. (2010). “Unintended Consequences in the Evolution of Affiliate Marketing Networks: A Complexity Approach.” Service Industries Journal, 30: 1707-22.

MarketingVox. (2008). eMarketer: $146 Billion in Online Travel Sales by 2010. Marketing Vox. http://www.market-ingvox.com/emarketer-146-billion-in-online-travel-sales-by-2010-028615/.

McCole, P. (2002). “The Role of Trust for Electronic Commerce in Services.” International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 14: 81-87.

McKnight, D. H., V. Choudhury, and C. Kacmar. (2002). “Developing and Validitating Trust Measures for eCommerce: An Integrative Typology.” Information Systems Research, 13: 334-59.

Miles, M. B., and A. M. Huberman. (1999). Qualitative Data Analysis. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Munar, A. M., and J. Steen Jacobsen. (2013). “Trust and Involvement in Tourism Social Media and Web-Based Travel Information Sources.” Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 13 (1): 1-19.

Pan, B., Z. Xiang, R. Law, and D. Fesenmair. (2011). “The Dynamics of Search Engine Marketing for Tourist Destinations.” Journal of Travel Research, 50: 365-77.

Pan, B., H. Hembrooke, T. Joachims, and L. Lorigo. (2007). “In Google We Trust: Users’ Decisions on Rank, Position, and Relevance.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12: 801-23.

Papadopoulou, P., P. Kanellis, and D. Martakos. (2001). “Investigating Trust in E-commerce: A Literature Review and a Model for Its Formation in Customer Relationships.” AMCIS 2001 Proceedings, Paper 155.

Pavlou, P. A., and D. Gefen. (2004). “Building Effective Online Marketplaces with Institution Based Trust.” Information Systems Research, 15: 37-59.

Payton, A. (2006). “A Review of Spyware Campaigns and Strategies to Combat Them.” In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference on Information Security Curriculum Development. New York: ACM, pp. 136-41.

Perry, C. (1998), “Processes of a Case Study Methodology for Postgraduate Research in Marketing.” European Journal of Marketing, 32: 785-802.

Ralnasingam, P., and D. Phan. (2003). “Trading Partner Trust in B2B E-commerce: A Case Study.” Information Systems Management, 20 (3): 39-50.

Roussos, G., and T. Moussouri. (2004). “Consumer Perceptions of Privacy, Security and Trust in Ubiquitous Commerce.” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 8 (6): 416-429.

Shankar, V., G. L. Urban, and F. Sultan. (2002). “Online Trust: A Stakeholder Perspective, Concepts, Implications, and Future Directions.” Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11: 325-44.

Sillence, E., P. Briggs, L. Fishwick, and P. Harris. (2004). “Trust and Mistrust of On-line Health Sites.” In Proceedings of the SIGCHE Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM, pp. 663-70.




Stewart, D. W., and P. N. Shamdasani. (2007). Focus Groups: Theory and Practice. 2nd edition. London: Sage

Tanford, S., S. Baloglu, and M. Erdem. (2012). “Travel Packaging on the Internet: The Impact of Pricing Information and Perceived Value on Consumer.” Journal of Travel Research, 51: 68-80.

Tschannen-Moran, M., and W. Hoy. (2000). “A Multidisciplinary Analysis of the Nature, Meaning, and Measurement of Trust.” Review of Educational Research, 70: 547-593.

Wang, Y. D., and H. Emurian. (2005). “An Overview of Online Trust: Concepts, Elements, and Implications.” Computers in Human Behavior, 21: 105-25.

Author Biographies

Nicolas Gregori is a doctoral researcher at the eTourism Lab, Bournemouth University, United Kingdom. His research interests lie in the areas of strategic marketing management as well as the applications of ICT in tourism and hospitality, with a particular focus on social media and innovation.

Roberto Daniele is a Senior Lecturer in Entrepreneurship and Marketing with the Oxford School of Hospitality Management, Oxford Brookes University. His teaching, research, and consul-tancy interests focus on entrepreneurship, with particular empha-sis on “Internet entrepreneurs,” social entrepreneurship in devel-oping countries, and new business models for tourism development, the applications of information and communica-tion technology in tourism, and marketing of destinations, with particular regards to the creation of networks of small and medium tourism enterprises and the role of destination market-ing systems in destination promotion. His industry experience includes managerial roles in both the Italian and Australian tour-ism industries.

Levent Altinay’s research interests are in the areas of tourism entrepreneurship, strategic alliances, and international tourism business. Using primarily qualitative methods as well as mixed methods, he is particularly interested in how tourism entrepreneurs start up and develop their businesses and how tourism organizations establish partnerships internationally.



Affiliate Marketing in Tourism: Determinants of Consumers’ Trust

Documents