OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Frontiers in psychology
2020;11 583768.

Online Food Shopping: A Conceptual Analysis for Research Propositions.

Chi-Fang Liu, Chien-Ho Lin
Author Information
  1. Chi-Fang Liu: Department of Business Administration, Cheng Shiu University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
  2. Chien-Ho Lin: Department of Business Administration, Cheng Shiu University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
PMID: 33041952 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.583768

Abstract

shopping foods online is different from shopping other things online. To stimulate more thinking and enrich potential future research imagination, this paper reviews for online food shopping features, offers a commentary, and proposes future research directions. The propositions include the following: (1) The design and implementation of online food shopping (eco)systems should engage the consumers and other stakeholders to co-create collective and social values; (2) A better fit between technologies' and food businesses' natures could generate better applications for online food shopping; (3) A business model with sound finance systems becomes the core of a healthy online food ecosystem; (4) The interaction and transformation between online (virtual) and offline (virtual) food businesses determines the dynamic development of future food shopping.

Keywords

conceptual analysis future research online food shopping propositions theory and practice

References

  1. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 May 14;15(5): [PMID: 29757954]
  2. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Feb 08;17(3): [PMID: 32046238]
  3. Front Psychol. 2020 Feb 19;11:121 [PMID: 32140124]
  4. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Nov 23;15(12): [PMID: 30477105]
  5. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Oct 29;14(11): [PMID: 29109377]
  6. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 31;17(7): [PMID: 32244498]
  7. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Jun 06;15(6): [PMID: 29882832]
  8. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Mar 03;14(3): [PMID: 28273824]
  9. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013 Sep 27;10(10):4607-27 [PMID: 24084672]
  10. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 30;17(7): [PMID: 32235433]
  11. Front Psychol. 2018 Mar 22;9:352 [PMID: 29623056]
  12. Front Psychol. 2016 Jul 28;7:1117 [PMID: 27516749]
  13. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 03;17(5): [PMID: 32138342]
  14. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 09;17(5): [PMID: 32182811]
  15. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2011 Sep;8(9):3528-52 [PMID: 22016701]
  16. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Jun 22;15(7): [PMID: 29932142]
  17. Front Psychol. 2016 Oct 18;7:1618 [PMID: 27803686]
  18. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Jul 06;15(7): [PMID: 29986474]
  19. Front Psychol. 2017 Feb 24;8:248 [PMID: 28286489]
  20. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Aug 10;16(16): [PMID: 31405093]
  21. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014 Nov 13;11(11):11691-704 [PMID: 25421063]
  22. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Dec 30;16(1): [PMID: 30598034]
  23. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016 Nov 09;13(11): [PMID: 27834888]
  24. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016 Aug 11;13(8): [PMID: 27529263]
  25. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015 Aug 20;12(8):9907-19 [PMID: 26308016]
  26. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014 Jun 06;11(6):6037-51 [PMID: 24914640]
  27. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014 May 26;11(6):5640-50 [PMID: 24865399]
  28. Front Psychol. 2016 Nov 10;7:1740 [PMID: 27891103]
  29. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Sep 09;14(9): [PMID: 28891937]
  30. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Oct 25;14(11): [PMID: 29068365]
  31. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Apr 05;16(7): [PMID: 30959755]
  32. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015 Aug 27;12(9):10490-507 [PMID: 26343693]
  33. Front Psychol. 2018 Aug 23;9:1521 [PMID: 30190693]
  34. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Nov 20;16(23): [PMID: 31757100]
  35. Front Psychol. 2017 Dec 19;8:2200 [PMID: 29312062]
  36. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Nov 13;16(22): [PMID: 31766175]
  37. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Aug 01;15(8): [PMID: 30071695]
  38. Front Psychol. 2017 Jun 23;8:1022 [PMID: 28690564]
  39. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Jun 16;16(12): [PMID: 31208146]
  40. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 06;17(5): [PMID: 32155789]
  41. Front Psychol. 2019 Nov 15;10:2567 [PMID: 31803110]
  42. Front Psychol. 2015 May 13;6:585 [PMID: 26029136]
  43. Front Psychol. 2017 Jul 25;8:1256 [PMID: 28790950]
  44. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Jan 06;14(1): [PMID: 28067811]
  45. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Mar 02;15(3): [PMID: 29498682]
  46. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013 Aug 02;10(8):3296-309 [PMID: 23917815]
  47. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jun 07;17(11): [PMID: 32517293]
  48. Front Psychol. 2018 Mar 22;9:382 [PMID: 29623061]
  49. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Apr 21;17(8): [PMID: 32326244]
  50. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 03;17(5): [PMID: 32138334]
Journal Article

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0onlinefoodshoppingfutureresearchpropositionssystemsbettervirtualShoppingfoodsdifferentthingsstimulatethinkingenrichpotentialimaginationpaperreviewsfeaturesofferscommentaryproposesdirectionsincludefollowing:1designimplementationecoengageconsumersstakeholdersco-createcollectivesocialvalues2fittechnologies'businesses'naturesgenerateapplications3businessmodelsoundfinancebecomescorehealthyecosystem4interactiontransformationofflinebusinessesdeterminesdynamicdevelopmentOnlineFoodShopping:ConceptualAnalysisResearchPropositionsconceptualanalysistheorypractice

Similar Articles

Cited By (8)