Editorial Board

A Refereed Monthly International Journal of Management

 A Systematic Exploration of Key Antecedents of Showrooming Behavior in the age of Omnichannel

Neha Gahlawat

Research Scholar

Dept of Commerce, M D University Rohtak

Email: neha.rs.comm@mdurohtak.ac.in

Dr Manoj Kumar

Assistant Professor

Dept of Commerce, M D University Rohtak

Email: manoj.commerce@mdurohtak.ac.in

 (Corresponding Author)

Abstract

The study aims to conduct a systematic literature review of research studies in the domain of showrooming focused on identifying major antecedents of showrooming behavior. The literature search is carried out using Scopus database and further articles are screened and analyzed using PRISMA framework. The results of the study give information about production trend, significant contributors, geographical coverage, theoretical framework adopted and methodologies used. The study highlights that hedonic motivation and lower prices in online stores are top most reasons for the consumers to engage in showrooming. The implications of this study extend to offline retailers. The retailers can use the results of this research to combat instances of showrooming in the offline stores in order to prevent themselves from the negative outcomes of showrooming.

Keywords – Showrooming, Omnichannel shopping, Systematic literature review, Drivers

Introduction

The emergence of internet has resulted into shift into consumption pattern of consumers moving from offline shopping to online shopping and further to “Omnichannel Shopping” (Shankar et al. 2010; Verhoef et al. 2015; Lim et al. 2023) where consumers use both already existing offline channels and newly introduced online channels simultaneously to complete a single purchase journey (Bruggen et al. 2010; Verhoef et al. 2015; Mishra et al. 2021). There are two most popular shopping approaches within the domain of omnichannel shopping i.e., webrooming and showrooming (Verhoef et al. 2015; Flavian et al. 2016). This study extends its scope to showrooming only which means collecting information about the products via physical stores and later on using online channels for actually making the purchase transaction (Klyanam and Tsay, 2013; Verhoef et al. 2015; Mehra et al. 2012; Herhausen et al. 2015; Rapp et al. 2015; Gensler et al. 2017; Schneider & Zielke,2020). In showrooming, consumers use offline outlets just as checkout platforms to examine and experience the products (Gensler et al. 2017).

Multiple eevidences suggest that showrooming has gained tremendous popularity among consumers. As per findings of a recent survey conducted by an e-commerce agency- PushOn in 2021 - 70% of consumers checks out a product in stores to later purchase them online (PushOn, 2021). Similarly, Shopify’s Future of Commerce report published in 2022 stated that more than half of consumers are engaged into showrooming behavior confirming its popularity among people. Keeping into consideration both sides of the coin, on one hand, showrooming has turned out as a favorable approach for consumers but on the other hand, it has emerged as a significant threat for offline retailers (Rejon-Guardia and Luna Nevarez, 2017; Rajkumar et al. 2021; Jo et al. 2020; Boden et al. 2020; Faaschnat et al. 2019). It creates sunk cost offline retailers as showroomers takes the service of sales staff present in offline retail stores but rightful revenue gets transferred to online competitors (Rapp et al. 2015; D’Angelo, 2023).  As a result, showrooming has resulted into a form of value co-destruction for offline retailers (Daunt and Harris, 2017; Zhang & Wen, 2023). Hence, there is need to reduce the instances of showrooming which is possible via understanding the forces which drives consumers to engage in showrooming (Verhoef et al. 2015; Rapp et al. 2015).

In addition to this, there have been multiple calls from leading scholars also for investigating the antecedents of showrooming (Rapp et al. 2015; Astari et al. 2017; Gensler et al. 2017). Recently, Frasquet et al. (2023) confirmed the lack of enough literature drivers of showrooming. A comprehensive and integrated synthesis of factors driving showrooming decision making is missing, creating a fundamental void. To the authors best knowledge, there are only 2 studies sharing common research domain but dissimilar in terms of the timeliness and theme focused. A study conducted by Sahu et al. in 2021, discusses the similar theme, but owing to growing practice of showrooming, there is good likelihood that new antecedents may have been emerged, as the said study reviews articles published till the end of 2020 only. Recently, one more study by Sharma et al. in 2023 delved into systematic findings in respect of showrooming phenomena unlike the dimension of current study, further creating a void of current and updated study. To mitigate this gap and cater to the defined need of hour, a systematic literature review in the present study is conducted using PRISMA framework proposed by Moher et al. in 2009 to identify and classify various drivers of showrooming. This systematic review will help in finding out what factors are largely contributing to showrooming and needs to be accounted by retailers.

Research Questions

Following research questions are stated to guide the review-

1. To synthesize the research regarding drivers of showrooming.
2. To provide descriptive information of such studies including, publication trend, prominent contributors, theories used and mostly followed methodologies.
3. To identify future opportunities regarding showrooming research.

The structure of this study is as follows: 

Research Methodology

This study follows a systematic literature review approach owing to growing popularity of showrooming phenomena and its wide research scope. SLR has been defined as “a review in which there is a comprehensive search for relevant studies on a specific topic, and those identified are then appraised and synthesized according to a pre-determined explicit method” (Jadad et al. 1998). It helps to determine the overall information by combining results from individual studies (Davis et al. 2014). This type of review helps in establishing the link between studies and identify new knowledge that is not possible to be inferred from individual studies (Denyer and Tranfield, 2009) and so is underlying purpose of our study. To aid in the process of carrying out systematic literature review, PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Reviews and Meta-analyses) framework developed by Moher et al. (2009) is used. This protocol involves 5 steps which are as follows-

1. Formulation of research question- The first step of the study deals with shaping the focus of the study (Denyer and Tranfield, 2009). This helps in giving direction and identifying the need which specifies what does the researcher wants to contribute by conducting this study.

Following research questions were formulated for the present study:

• To synthesize the research regarding antecedents of showrooming
• To provide descriptive information of such studies including, publication trend, prominent contributors, theories used, mostly follows methodologies etc.
• To identify future opportunities regarding showrooming research.

2. Localization of manuscripts – The second step involves locating the relevant studies to answer the above mentioned research questions. For this, we searched for the similar, related and relevant terms in thesaurus, dictionaries and already existing literature and proceeded on including terms like omnichannel shopping, omnichannel commerce and research shopping in the search string as showrooming is a one of the popular form of them. The literature search was conducted in December 2024, hence articles till 2024 are covered in the scope of review. The details of the search string used is mentioned in Table 1 to ensure transparency and reproducibility of the work. The next step involves selection of sources of information from which relevant literature can be retrieved. Scopus has more than 50 million records, covering 21,500 peer reviewed journals from 5000 international publication houses. It is known for mitigating risk of missing documents during search and extraction of data (Teran-Yepez et al. 2020). Hence, we opted Scopus database because of its high quality standards, wide coverage and ease in data downloading (Harzing and Alakangas, 2016). Then, search was conducted with maximum possible related keywords using “Abstract, Title, Keywords” which resulted in 307 documents in the initial search. Then, a series of filters were applied to select the most relevant documents for this study.

Firstly, the documents were restricted to journal articles only. Resultantly, conference proceedings, reviews, meta-analysis, books etc. were excluded. Applying filter restricting documents to articles only led to exclusion of 62 documents. To avoid any type of translation and understanding difficulties, only articles published in ENGLISH language were included for further analysis as a result of which 7 articles published in non-English language were excluded. Lastly, to obtain the maximum possible relevant studies, no filter was imposed subject to subject category.

The inclusion and exclusion criteria is mentioned below-

Table 1 Selection criteria of articles

3. Selection and evaluation of manuscripts – At this stage screening was done to check the eligibility of the documents retained after all necessary filters. Initially, a set of 238 documents were exported in a file with all required information for further analysis. Firstly, all the exported articles were processed by a preliminary screening where title of the articles were read to ensure that selected documents are within the scope of our study which resulted into exclusion of 123 documents focusing on such dimensions which are not relevant to the objective of present study like impact of showrooming on retailers and their strategic decisions (Su et al. 2023; Wei et al. 2023; Zeng and Hou, 2022), relationship of profits and showrooming (Spaid et al. 2019;- Zhang et al. 2018), effect of showrooming on performance of sales staff (Rapp et al. 2015; Astari et al. 2017; Fassnacht et al. 2019) etc. Later on, abstract screening was done which led to removal of 92 articles as they were not helping in answering our research question. The screening on the basis of titles and abstracts was done by 2 authors separately to judge whether they address the theme taken into consideration and to ensure the reliability of article selection process (Tranfield et al. 2003). Hence, a final set of 23 articles was taken further for full reading. Later on 4 more articles were removed as their full content was not available (Khoshtaria et al. 2021; Jain and Shankar, 2023; Nguyuen and Tran, 2023) leading to a final set of 19 articles which included only such articles which were directly delving on drivers, motivators, determinants and antecedents of showrooming.
4. Analysis and Synthesis- Here in the 4^th step, a refined set of 19 documents were analyzed in more detail to extract descriptive information which was classified into several categories, such as sources of publications, publishing houses, spread across countries, prolific authors, methodology followed, theoretical framework used, tools and techniques employed etc. The purpose of this synthesis was to reconstruct information and develop new knowledge which is not evident in isolated reading of the individual studies.
5. Reports and Discussion – The last and 5^th step deals with reporting results and discusses about the findings of the study in light of the question of present SLR. This step is explained in detail in Section 3 and 4 of this paper while diagrammatic representation of methodology followed is given in Fig. 1.

Results and Discussion

 In this section, the details extracted after rigorous synthesis of 19 research articles are presented. The first subset of results section gives general information like trend of publications, sources in which these documents are published, countries from which corresponding authors of the country belongs, research methodologies adopted in the respective studies, the theoretical framework followed etc. The next sub set deals with the antecedents of showrooming further classified into consumer and retailers’ side.

Production Trend/ Temporal view of publications

Showrooming is a recently grown shopping pattern among consumers. As shown in Fig. 1 timeline of production of the articles in this research domain suggests that all of the articles focused on antecedents of showrooming are published in recent decade only indicating increasing interest of researchers in finding the reasons behind showrooming practice. We found no research matching theme of this study published before 2017. Most number of articles on the concerned theme have been published in 2017 and later on the production graph showed a downward trend as literature review suggests that most of the articles pertaining to next 2 years inclined either towards the effects of showrooming on retailers (Zhang et al. 2018; Spaid et al. 2019) or strategies to reduce the negative effects of showrooming (Moorthy et al. 2018; Mehra et al. 2018; Fassnacht et al. 2019). Surprisingly, authors did not find any study delving on drivers of showrooming behavior published in 2019. But again after 2019, research studies gained momentum. Though the summary of related research publications indicates that there is only one research article published in 2023, but is important to consider this study relies on data extracted till August, 2023 leaving prospects of more articles being published towards the end of 2023.

Fig. 1 Production Trend

Sources of Publications –

Table 2 Journal’s Information

As shown in Table 3, total articles taken into consideration for thorough reading are published in 13 different sources. These journals include, but are not limited to, “International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer Research”, “Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics”. Compared to other journals, “International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management” has most publications on showrooming which corresponds to 21% of total articles. One noteworthy finding is that most of the journals in which articles selected for present study are published belongs to A category as per ABDC ranking, indicating that the theme is active in good quality journals.

Author’s Information -

The total corpus retained after systematic screening is contributed by 49 authors belonging to 9 different countries. As shown in Fig. 2, a total of 15 authors are from India, 13 from Spain, 9 from USA, 4 from Brazil, 3 from Japan, 2 from UK and only 1 each author from Germany, Italy and Netherlands.

Table 3 Author’s Contribution

In terms of articles contributed, Sourabh Arora affiliated to IIT Kharagpur and Sangeeta Sahney from IIT Jodhpur both belonging to India are the most prolific authors in the research domain of showrooming. Each of them have published 3 articles focused on the antecedents of showrooming followed by Rashmi Ranjan Parida of Indian Institute from Jammu with 2 articles. The article contribution depicts that Indian authors have worked more in comparison to other authors. Hence, signifying the active interest of researchers from India in this research domain. Also, it is worth mentioning that there is no single paper with sole authorship. All articles are co-authored including 6 articles with co-authorship of 2 authors, 9 articles with co-authorship of 3 authors and 4 articles with co-authorship of more than 3 authors.

Geographical Coverage –

                        Table 4 Country’s Contribution

It is evident from Table 4 that research on showrooming behavior of consumer has been carried out in various parts of the world.  However, this research area appears to more popular in India. As shown in Fig. 3, 8 studies constituting 42% of total are conducted in India. So, India has shown strong interest in investigating drivers of showrooming behavior. This country is ahead of its counters parts like Spain and USA with 5 and 3 publications respectively.  While this theme has been studied in context of Japan, Brazil and UK one time only. Keeping these statistics into consideration, authors conclude that majority of the studies are concentrated in one country only, making it difficult to generalize the findings of the study. One noteworthy finding is that cross country collaboration is negligible which may be due to the fact that concerned theme is in its nascent stage and yet to result in academic links between researchers around the world. So, looking at the dearth of widespread reach of this domain in varied countries, there is need conduct more studies across the world to get reliable results. Since technology has swiftly altered consumers’ purchasing habits globally, authors might gain intriguing insights by studying and comparing showrooming across various countries and cultures.

Methodologies and methods used –

The selected studies in the present study has been framed using a wide range of methods and methodologies to find out the antecedents of showrooming. There is predominance of quantitative methodology as 17 studies constituting 89.5% were conducting using quantitative methods. But only 1 study is based on qualitative methodologies and 1 on a combination of quantitative and qualitative methodologies. This dispersion of studies across methodologies indicated the need to conduct more qualitative and mixed studies to generate detailed information and better conceptual clarity regarding the antecedents of showrooming. Our study suggests future studies must employ use of these methodologies to enhance and enrich the literature on showrooming phenomena.

As far as data collection methods are concerned, researchers have majorly relied on questionnaires to capture the responses of target population. Most of the times, data has been collected via online platforms. Authors suggest researchers should conduct on-site surveys in the markets, malls and shopping complexes to question showroomers in the actual shopping scenario. Authors also suggest future researchers to use some other data collection techniques like oral histories, design thinking, user testing, experience survey, direct observations, Delphi methods, focus group interviews, projective techniques etc.

Moving to the tools and techniques, Structural Equation Modelling stands out as the mostly used statistical tool for data analysis leaving qualitative research less prevalent. 16 studies have employed PLS-SEM, Covariance based SEM etc. to achieve their research objectives. Some other techniques have also been used namely, Logistic Regression, ZIP model, narrative based examination and thematic analysis. Logistic regression is employed to determine which variables are significantly correlated to consumer’s showrooming decisions (Gensler et al. 2017). Then Dahana et al. (2018) used Zip model to determine showrooming frequency of consumers. Few studies have adopted qualitative approach by using narrative based examination and thematic analysis for analysis of data (Arora et al. 2020; Arora et al. 2022).

Table 5 Methodological Overview

Main theories used –

Table 6 Theoretical Framework

The drivers of showrooming behavior have been examined by adopting different theoretical perspectives. Table 4 presents the models and theories mentioned in more than 1 research articles and the various academic fields to which they belong. From the synthesis of selected articles, Stimulus Organism Response (SOR) frameowork appears to be the dominant theoretical lens. This model is widely used in examining showrooming behavior consumers. It was given by Mehrabian and Russell in 1974 which demonstrates the impact of Stimulus (S) on internal states of an individual (O) which in turn affects the behavior of consumers (R) (Zhang et al. 2018).  Further Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) model are popularly used where TAM is identified as an extension to the Theory of Reasoned Action which states that actual behavior of an individual is determined by his intention towards the behavior and intentions are dependent upon attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control (Aizen, 1991) and TPB is designed to explain the computer usage behavior of consumers by focusing on perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness for predicting the intention of users to adopt a new technology (Davis, 1989) where perceived ease of use refers to the degree to which a consumer believes that using a particular technology will need very less or no efforts while perceived usefulness relates to help in improving the task performance. Authors suggest that exploring the showrooming phenomena following theoretical base of various other theories from disciplines like consumer psychology, sociology, marketing communication etc. can assist in deriving better clarity to the concept. 

Classification of antecedents –

Consumer’s Side –

Table 7 Summary of antecedents

The findings of the study suggest that there are 2 major categories of drivers – consumer related and retailer related which are shown in Table 7.  The findings of the study indicate that not only price related but non-price related factors are equally significant in driving showrooming behavior of consumers. Considering the consumer’s side, the need to touch and feel the product before purchasing the product has been the top most driver of showrooming behavior, followed by showrooming self-efficacy, favourable showrooming experience, price consciousness of consumers, value consciousness of consumers etc. It is proven in multiple research studies that showrooming instances are more in situation when product needs to be physically evaluated before purchasing (Arora et al. 2017; Arora and Sahney 2018, Rajkumar et al. 2021), when consumers had a favorable showrooming experience in past (Arora et al. 2020; Rejon luna Nevarez 2017), when consumers are very conscious about the price to be paid (Arora et al. 2017; Dahana et al. 2018; Burns et al. 2018) ) and value to be derived from the product (Daunt and Harris 2017, Chimborazo et al. 2021). Apart from these shopping enjoyment derived from showrooming (Rajkumar et al. 2021; Daunt and Harris, 2017), smart shopping feeling (Rajkumar et al. 2021) generated while showrooming also significantly influences the showrooming behavior of consumers.  Amongst all consumer related drivers, high consumer innovativeness, social influence and young age has been identified as reason behind showrooming behavior in only 1 study each rendering them as less significant drivers.

Considering the retailer’ side, low prices of products offered by online retailers has been identified as the most significant motivating factor for consumers to switch from offline store to online platforms despite of checking out products in the physical outlets (Gensler et al. 2017, Rajkumar et al. 2021; Shankar et al. 2021). Further, enticing promotional deals and discounts in online platforms serves as attractive force to bring in offline to their online platforms (Arora and Sahney 2018, Arora et al. 2020; Arora et al. 2022). Apart from price related factors, consumers also find easy return facilities offered by online retailers (Arora and Sahney 2018; Arora et al. 2022), 24*7 open stores and better stock availability in online stores (Arora et al. 2020; Shankar et al. 2021) to be significant reasons to shift from physical outlets to online platforms in the single shopping journey. Additionally, long waiting time at billing counters (Arora et al. 2020; Arora et al. 2022) is the major drawback of offline shopping which motivates consumers to leave the store without completing the purchase transaction. The human resources present in the store i.e.; sales staff also plays major role in retaining customers. Research studies have noted that sales staff fails to convert the product examination by consumers into actual purchase transaction owing to their lying habits, poor knowledge, unprofessional behavior, unavailability etc. leading to increased instances of showrooming (Frasquet & Ieva 2024; Daunt and Harris 2017; Gensler et al. 2017; Arora et al. 2020; Arora et al. 2022). One noteworthy finding is that none of the factors of different categories did not overlap with each other.

Future Research Directions

In this section, the possible and much needed research avenues are proposed on the basis of limitations and existing gap which can be further explored by future researchers. Our research suggests that majority of empirical studies are centred around electronics and apparels while other industries like jewellery, consumer non-durables etc. are still untouched. Along with this, our research identified no single study on showrooming behavior of consumers in context of service sectors like healthcare, teaching, catering, banking, publishing etc. Similarly, authors did not identify any study shedding light on how consumer’s practice of showrooming differs on the basis of involvement in products. Therefore, studies should be conducted across different product categories, different sectors to inform representatives on how to craft showrooming strategy capturing various industries.

Hence authors suggest

Q1- Explore the drivers of showrooming behavior in respect of industries like jewellery, cosmetics, grocery etc.

Q2- Explore the showrooming behavior and its tendency among consumers in context of service sector like healthcare, teaching, banking, catering, publishing etc.

Q3- Explore how showrooming differs across high / low involvement product and high / low cost products?

As far as methods and methodologies are concerned, the review demonstrated that the majority of the empirical studies have employed survey-based method raising questions on the longevity and capturing the actual lived experience of consumers. In addition, qualitative techniques are relatively less representative in the showrooming context. Therefore, in order to find comprehensive and unique empirical evidence regarding customers' showrooming behavior, future study should broaden the scope of current research approaches.  Conventional linear statistical techniques like Structural equation modelling, multiple regression analysis applied in showrooming literature may have oversimplified the complexity of decision-making processes. Therefore, the exploring nonlinear relationships among variables can further yield fruitful insights. Studies are also needed to borrow methods from other disciplines that apply multi analytical techniques to increase the reliability and validity of the results (Bauer & Kohavi, 1999). Also a paucity of research studies employing use of advance statistical techniques can be an interesting research gap for forthcoming researchers to predict the consumer journey and decipher the drivers of their showrooming purchase journey. Additionally, the application of mixed methods is needed to reduce confirmation bias and potential personal biases of researchers to produce more rigorous and convincing evidence by triangulating the findings (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). Future research endeavours need to prioritize theory-driven studies, cross-cultural studies, and qualitative investigations to capture consumer decision making in a variety of industrial and cultural contexts. Hence, authors suggest –

Q4- To conduct longitudinal studies to capture actual showrooming behavior of consumers over the time.

Q5- To use qualitative techniques like Delphi, the focus group method, interviews, etc. to measure showrooming behavior of consumers.

Q6- To employ use of statistical techniques like machine learning, neural networks etc.

Keeping theoretical foundation in consideration, authors did not find any review paper linking behavioural theories and consumer decision making. Hence, authors suggest exploring showrooming phenomena within the theoretical framework of behavioural theories. Apart from this authors suggest –

Q7- Explore consumer showrooming decision making in context of behavioural theories like classical conditioning, operant conditioning etc.

Q8- Explore showrooming behavior in light of self-determination theory which focuses on internal sources of motivation.

Authors also propose following research ideas -  

As the shopping behaviour of consumers has been shown to vary significantly between developed and developing countries (Davis, 2013), future studies can inform this field of inquiry concerning the influence of socio-demographic and cultural characteristics.

Furthermore, future research should gather data from social media platforms to explore showrooming approach of shopping adopted by consumers because social networks and social media is found to be significantly influencing consumer decisions (Hwang & Kim, 2015; Rosenmayer et al., 2018).

As showrooming involves both exploration in market area and making purchase via online platforms, we feel there must have been significant reduction in instances of showrooming during COVID times. So, authors suggest to conduct a comparative study on showrooming behavior of consumers before, during and post COVID pandemic.

 Another interesting dimension may be about focusing on examining the interrelationship between different drivers like price and promotional deals, showrooming & self-efficacy, showrooming & past showrooming experience. Further dimensions of showrooming i.e., loyal showrooming and competitive showrooming are also needed to be explored. Also, a comparative view on drivers of webrooming can serve as an insightful research idea as this study solely focus on showrooming only.

Implications of the study –

This study advances our knowledge on showrooming as well as provide notable implications for retail practitioners and academicians. Academically, it helps researchers in identifying gaps in showrooming literature like the under researched psychological drivers, theoretical frameworks etc. thereby guiding future research efforts. While practically the study provides key suggestions to offline retailers to curb showrooming instances and enhance customer experience as possible way outs for retailers to counter showrooming are proposed in Table 7. By systematically analyzing the drivers of showrooming, findings of the study proves helpful for businesses in predicting consumer trends and remain competitive in an increasingly digital retail environment. Policymakers can also benefit from such research by considering regulations or support such innovations in retail sector that promote fair competition between physical and online retailers, ensuring that showrooming does not unfairly disadvantage brick-and-mortar stores.

“All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest”.

Limitations –

Though this study contributes in the extension of existing literature, but suffers from certain limitations which are needed to be taken into account in future research studies. Firstly, this study is conducted using a single database i.e., Scopus. Other electronic database like Web of Science, Google Scholar and others in conjunction to Scopus can also be accessed for data search. Secondly, Significant articles published in the form of conference proceedings, book chapters, industry reports, white papers, or consumer surveys conducted by businesses have been excluded which limits the range of perspectives and data considered in the review, which could impact the comprehensiveness of the findings.

References -

• Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.
• Alesanco-Llorente, M., Reinares-Lara, E., Pelegrín-Borondo, J., & Olarte-Pascual, C. (2024). Assessing the key variables of mobile-assisted showroomers’ behavior to enhance their shopping experience. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 1-21.
• Arora, S., & Sahney, S. (2018). Antecedents to consumers’ showrooming behaviour: an integrated TAM-TPB framework. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 35(4).
• Arora, S., Parida, R. R., & Sahney, S. (2020). Understanding consumers’ showrooming behaviour: a stimulus–organism–response (S-O-R) perspective. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 48(11).
• Arora, S., Sahney, S., & Parida, R. R. (2022). Drivers of showrooming behaviour: insights from integrated perspectives. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 50(3).
• Arora, S., Singha, K., & Sahney, S. (2017). Understanding consumer’s showrooming behaviour: Extending the theory of planned behaviour. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 29(2).
• Astari, I. S., Huliselan, J. J., & Jong, M. T. T. (2017). Customer Showrooming Behavior and the Effect on Salesperson Performance. DeReMa (Development Research of Management): Jurnal Manajemen, 12(2).
• Bauer, E., & Kohavi, R. (1999). Empirical comparison of voting classification algorithms: bagging, boosting, and variants. Machine Learning, 36(1).
• Boden, J., Maier, E., & Dost, F. (2020). The Effect of Electronic Shelf Labels on Store Revenue. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 24(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.2020.1806472
• Burns, D. J., Gupta, P. B., Bihn, H. C., & Hutchins, J. (2018). Showrooming: an Exploratory Empirical Investigation of Students’ Attitudes and Behavior. Information Systems Management, 35(4).
• Carvalho de Mesquita, J. M., Shin, H., Longuinho, J. P., & Moura, L. R. C. (2024). The consequences of showrooming behaviour on customer satisfaction and loyalty. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 52(12), 1125-1141.
• Chimborazo-Azogue, L. E., Frasquet, M., Molla-Descals, A., & Miquel-Romero, M. J. (2021). Understanding mobile showrooming based on a technology acceptance and use model. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(13).
• Chokkannan, P., Bhavani Shankar, S., & Pattusamy, M. (2023). The fashion retailer's opportunity: effect of deal-seeking behavior on mobile shopping intention of showroomers. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 35(5), 1187-1205.
• Dahana, W. D., Shin, H. J., & Katsumata, S. (2018). Influence of individual characteristics on whether and how much consumers engage in showrooming behavior. Electronic Commerce Research, 18(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-017-9277-4
• Daunt, K. L., & Harris, L. C. (2017). Consumer showrooming: Value co-destruction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.05.013
• Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 13(3).
• Davis, J., Mengersen, K., Bennett, S., & Mazerolle, L. (2014). Viewing systematic reviews and meta-analysis in social research through different lenses. SpringerPlus, 3(1).
• Denyer, D., & Tranfield, D. (2009). Producing a Systematic Review. In The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Research Methods.
• Fassnacht, M., Beatty, S. E., & Szajna, M. (2019). Combating the negative effects of showrooming: Successful salesperson tactics for converting showroomers into buyers. Journal of Business Research, 102.
• Flavián, C., Gurrea, R., & Orús, C. (2016). Choice confidence in the webrooming purchase process: The impact of online positive reviews and the motivation to touch. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 15(5). https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1585
• Frasquet, M., Miquel-Romero, M. J., & Mollá-Descals, A. (2023). When showrooming is not a threat: Uncovering opportunities for showroomer retention. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 60, 101287.
• Frasquet, M., & Ieva, M. (2024). Driving customer inspiration to foster loyalty: a study on showroomers. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 41(5), 583-595.
• Gensler, S., Neslin, S. A., & Verhoef, P. C. (2017). The Showrooming Phenomenon: It’s More than Just About Price. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2017.01.003
• Gilal, F. G., Zhang, J., Paul, J., & Gilal, N. G. (2019). The role of self-determination theory in marketing science: An integrative review and agenda for research. European Management Journal, 37(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2018.10.004
• Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9
• Herhausen, D., Binder, J., Schoegel, M., & Herrmann, A. (2015). Integrating Bricks with Clicks: Retailer-Level and Channel-Level Outcomes of Online-Offline Channel Integration. Journal of Retailing, 91(2).
• Hwang, H., & Kim, K. O. (2015). Social media as a tool for social movements: The effect of social media use and social capital on intention to participate in social movements. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 39(5).
• Jadad, A. R., Moher, D., & Klassen, T. P. (1998). Guides for reading and interpreting systematic reviews: II. How did the authors find the studies and assess their quality? In Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (Vol. 152, Issue 8).
• Jain, S., & Shankar, A. (2023). Examining the luxury consumers’ showrooming behaviour: The effect of perceived values and product involvement. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 14(3), 294-311.
• Jo, W., Kim, J., & Choi, J. (2020). Who are the multichannel shoppers and how can retailers use them? Evidence from the French apparel industry. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 33(1), 250-274.
• Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. Educational Researcher, 33(7).
• Kalyanam, K., & Tsay, A. A. (2013). Free Riding and Conflict in Hybrid Shopping Environments: Implications for Retailers, Manufacturers, and Regulators. Antitrust Bulletin, 58(1).
• Khoshtaria, T., Matin, A., Mercan, M., & Datuashvili, D. (2021). The impact of customers' purchasing patterns on their showrooming and webrooming behaviour: an empirical evidence from the Georgian retail sector. International Journal of Electronic Marketing and Retailing, 12(4), 394-413.
• Kumar, V., & Venkatesan, R. (2005). Who are the multichannel shoppers and how do they perform?: Correlates of multichannel shopping behavior. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(2).
• Lim, W.M., Kumar, S., Pandey, N., Verma, D. and Kumar, D. (2023b), “Evolution and trends in consumer behaviour: insights from journal of consumer behaviour”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 1 January.
• Machavolu, M. S. K., & Raju, K. (2014). Showrooming: the next threat to Indian retail. In MITS International Journal of Business ….
• Mehra, A., Kumar, S., & Raju, J. S. (2012). Showrooming and the competition between store and online retailers. 22nd Workshop on Information Technologies and Systems, WITS 2012.
• Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. the MIT Press.
• Mishra, R., Singh, R. K., & Koles, B. (2021). Consumer decision‐making in Omnichannel retailing: Literature review and future research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 45(2), 147-174.
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., Antes, G., Atkins, D., Barbour, V., Barrowman, N., Berlin, J. A., Clark, J., Clarke, M., Cook, D., D’Amico, R., Deeks, J. J., Devereaux, P. J., Dickersin, K., Egger, M., Ernst, E., Gøtzsche, P. C., … Tugwell, P. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. In PLoS Medicine (Vol. 6, Issue 7).
• Moorthy, S., Chen, Y., & Tehrani, S. S. (2018). Selling your product through competitors’ outlets: Channel strategy when consumers comparison shop. Marketing Science, 37(1). https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2017.1063
• Nguyen, H. N., & Tran, M. D. (2023). Antecedents and outcomes of omnichannel retail customer experience. International Journal of Electronic Marketing and Retailing, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEMR.2023.129883
• Picot-Coupey, K., Huré, E., & Piveteau, L. (2016). Channel design to enrich customers’ shopping experiences: Synchronizing clicks with bricks in an omni-channel perspective – the Direct Optic case. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 44(3). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-04-2015-0056
• Prasad, S., 2016. ‘Showrooming and Webrooming: The Emerging Trends Consumer Behaviour’, Market Express, 23rd May 2016, ⟨http://www.marketexpress.in/2016/ 05/showrooming-and-webrooming-the-emerging-trends-consumer-behaviour.html⟩
• Rajkumar, N., Vishwakarma, P., & Gangwani, K. K. (2021). Investigating consumers’ path to showrooming: a perceived value-based perspective. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 49(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-05-2020-0184
• Rapp, A., Baker, T. L., Bachrach, D. G., Ogilvie, J., & Beitelspacher, L. S. (2015). Perceived customer showrooming behavior and the effect on retail salesperson self-efficacy and performance. Journal of Retailing, 91(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2014.12.007
• Rejón-Guardia, F., & Luna-Nevarez, C. (2017). “Showrooming” in Consumer Electronics Retailing: An Empirical Study. Journal of Internet Commerce, 16(2).
• Rosenmayer, A., McQuilken, L., Robertson, N., & Ogden, S. (2018). Omni-channel service failures and recoveries: refined typologies using Facebook complaints. Journal of Services Marketing, 32(3). https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-04-2017-0117
• Sahu, K. C., Naved Khan, M., & Gupta, K. Das. (2021). Determinants of Webrooming and Showrooming Behavior: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Internet Commerce, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2020.1863041
• Schneider, P. J., & Zielke, S. (2020). Searching offline and buying online – An analysis of showrooming forms and segments. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101919
• Shankar, A., Gupta, M., Tiwari, A. K., & Behl, A. (2021). How does convenience impact showrooming intention? Omnichannel retail strategies to manage global retail apocalypse. Journal of Strategic Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2021.1965189
• Shankar, V., Venkatesh, A., Hofacker, C., & Naik, P. (2010). Mobile marketing in the retailing environment: Current insights and future research avenues. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 24(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2010.02.006
• Sharma, N., Sharma, A., Dutta, N., & Priya, P. (2023). Showrooming: a retrospective and prospective review using the SPAR-4-SLR methodological framework. In International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-12-2022-0513
• Smith, A. M. (2013). The value co-destruction process: A customer resource perspective. European Journal of Marketing, 47(11–12).
• Spaid, B. I., O’Neill, B. S., & Ow, T. T. (2019). The upside of showrooming: How online information creates positive spill-over for the brick-and-mortar retailer. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 29(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/10919392.2019.1671738
• Su, Y., & Tian, M. (2023). Influence of showrooming and price matching strategy to combat showrooming under different costs. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 51(7). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-06-2022-0182
• Terán-Yépez, E., Marín-Carrillo, G. M., Casado-Belmonte, M. del P., & Capobianco-Uriarte, M. de las M. (2020). Sustainable entrepreneurship: Review of its evolution and new trends. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252.
• Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. In British Journal of Management (Vol. 14, Issue 3). https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375
• Van Bruggen, G. H., Antia, K. D., Jap, S. D., Reinartz, W. J., & Pallas, F. (2010). Managing marketing channel multiplicity. Journal of Service Research, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670510375601
• Verhoef, P. C., Kannan, P. K., & Inman, J. J. (2015). From Multi-Channel Retailing to Omni-Channel Retailing. Introduction to the Special Issue on Multi-Channel Retailing. Journal of Retailing, 91(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2015.02.005
• Wei, J., Chang, M., & Zhao, J. (2023). Price matching and product differentiation strategies considering showrooming. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103473
• Zeng, Y., & Hou, W. (2022). An analysis of price strategies with price matching in the presence of showrooming. International Transactions in Operational Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.13187
• Zhang, Z., & Wen, X. (2023). Physical or virtual showroom? The decision for omni-channel retailers in the context of cross-channel free-riding. Electronic Commerce Research, 1-27.
• Zhang, S., Yao, Y., & Zhang, J. (2023). Consumer showrooming with supplier encroachment and omnichannel retailing. Decision Sciences, 54(2).
• Zhang, T., Ge, L., Gou, Q., & Chen, L. (2018). Consumer showrooming, the sunk cost effect and online-offline competition. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 19(1).

Weblinks:

• https://www.pushon.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Webrooming-vs-Showrooming-Report-by-PushON.pdf
• https://www.salsify.com/blog/what-are-webrooming-and-showrooming
  https://www.shopify.com/news/charging-ahead-shopifys-first-annual-future-of-commerce-report-reveals-five-trends-brands-need-to-know-in-2021
• https://abdc.edu.au/abdc-journal-quality-list