Analysis of Indonesian Marketplace Based On Customer Satisfaction, Trust and Loyalty

International Journal of Engineering Research and
E-ISSN : 2454-6135
Advanced Technology (IJERAT)
Volume.5, Issue 2
DOI: 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371 February -2019
Analysis of Indonesian Marketplace Based on Customer

Satisfaction, Trust and Loyalty
Verry1 and Wing Wahyu Winarno2
1,2
Department of Magister Informatics Engineering
University of Islam Indonesia
Yogyakarta
Indonesia
_______________________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT
Indonesian people are starting to realize to make the internet one of their sources of income such as making sales in the
marketplace. The public's interest in using e-commerce can be seen from the number of local and international companies trying
to dominate the online market in Indonesia. Online shopping transactions in the marketplace are new experiences for people in
Indonesia. The success of a marketplace can be measured based on the number of visitors and transaction volume that occurs in
the marketplace. Marketplace that customers often make repeated purchases will increase the marketplace revenue. The
repurchase is the main goal of the marketplace company. Many marketplace companies compete to provide the best to their
customers by continuing to improve system quality, information quality, and service quality. This study aims to determine the
satisfaction, trust and Loyalty factors of Marketplaces in Indonesia. This study uses the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
model to examine 12 hypotheses in the study. The results of the study show that all of these hypotheses are accepted.
Key Words: Structural Equation Modeling, Marketplace, Satisfaction, Trust, Customer Loyalty.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
1. INTRODUCTION
The development of information technology in Indonesia is increasingly rapid. One of them is the development of the internet.
The use of the internet has become a major need for the people of Indonesia. Data from the survey conducted by the Indonesian
Internet Service Providers Association (APJII) in 2017, the number of internet users in Indonesia reached 143.26 million. This
number increased compared to 2016 which only reached 132.7 million. The number of internet users in 2017 covered 54.68
percent of Indonesia's total population of 262 million [1]. With this large number, more and more people have the awareness to
use the internet.
The public's interest in using e-commerce can be seen from the number of local and international companies trying to dominate
the online market in Indonesia [2]. E-commerce allows retailers to market products and complete transactions through the
internet [3]. One form of e-commerce that is currently developing and is quite popular in Indonesia is the marketplace. According
to a survey of International Data Corporation (IDC) in 2016, only 13.3 percent of them conducted online shopping transactions
compared to the number of internet users in Indonesia [4]. Online shopping transactions in the marketplace are new experiences
for people in Indonesia. For example, when a customer wants to buy a garment on an online shopping system, customers cannot
try the clothes they want to buy like when doing offline shopping at a clothing store. Customers can only see products through the
images displayed and see the quality of the product based on the specifications of the information delivered through the web or
marketplace applications. Additional information that can be obtained by customers is information provided by other customers
who have bought it and provided product reviews. This user experience will affect the relationship between performance,
satisfaction and intention to repurchase [5].
Customer satisfaction in shopping online through a marketplace is a major concern. Satisfaction can influence other potential
customers through word of mouth or electronic data such as customer reviews that have an impact on the market of their business
[6]. Customers must be managed as assets, including what is needed, preferences, and customer behavior in making a purchase
[7]. In addition to customer satisfaction, trust is also identified as an important factor in the success of the marketplace [8]. Trust
www.ijerat.com Page 1
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371
International Journal of Engineering Research And Advanced Technology, Vol.1, Issue 1, February-2019
greatly influences customer behavior before and after purchasing certain products. When a customer has trust in a company, they
have a strong belief in the quality of the company's services [9]. The issue of loyalty also becomes very important in a fairly high
marketplace competition [10]. Loyalty is defined as the attitude and commitment of customers to online retailers, which leads to
repurchase behavior [11].
Some marketplace companies lose their customers in a competitive environment on the Internet because of a lack of satisfaction,
trust and loyalty from customers [8]. The development of marketplace in Indonesia is happening very rapidly. In the last decade
various marketplaces have emerged that offer a variety of facilities and advantages of each. The success of the marketplace is
influenced by the factors that determine success so that many customers are interested. Satisfaction, trust, and loyalty are factors
that determine the success of a marketplace. This study aims to determine what factors of customer satisfaction, trust, and loyalty
to the marketplace in Indonesia.
2. LITERATURE SURVEY
There are several previous studies that can be used as references in the study about satisfaction, trust and customer
loyalty of marketplace in Indonesia.
The research was titled Customer Expectation, Satisfaction and Loyalty Relationship in Turkish Airline Industry [12]. The
purpose of this study was to find a relationship between customer expectations, satisfaction, and the relationship of loyalty in the
airline industry in Turkey. The factors investigated are reliability, assurance, facilities, employees, flight patterns, adjustments,
responsiveness, satisfaction, and customer loyalty. This study uses confimatory factor analysis (CFA) and Structural equation
modeling (SEM). The results of the study show that reliability and facilities have a significant positive impact on customer
satisfaction. In addition, customer satisfaction is a significant determinant of customer loyalty.
The research entitled Female online shoppers Examining the mediating roles of e-satisfaction and e-trust on e-loyalty
development [13]. This study aims to determine the variables of satisfaction and trust as an intermediary factor of female customer
loyalty to online stores. This research was conducted to add to the literature that discusses the relationship of loyalty, satisfaction
and trust of female customers who often shop for clothes online. The factors investigated are shipping, web design, privacy,
security, satisfaction, trust and loyalty. Data analysis in this study uses structural equation modeling (SEM). The results of this
study indicate that privacy and security in online shopping positively affect customer trust, while web design does not influence
trust. Furthermore, sending and web design have a positive effect on satisfaction. Both trust and satisfaction have a positive effect
on loyalty to women who shop online.
The research entitled The impacts of corporate social responsibility, service quality, and transparency on relationship quality and
customer loyalty in the hotel industry [14]. This study aims to examine whether customer perceptions of corporate social
responsibility activities and transparency have an influence on the quality of relationships such as trust, satisfaction and loyalty of
hotel industry customers in America. This research was conducted so that hotel managers in America are able to retain existing
customers in the face of increasingly fierce competition. The method used to test the relationship between variables used
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and strutural equation modeling (SEM). The variables investigated are social responsibility,
reputation, service quality, transparency, satisfaction, trust and customer loyalty. The results of the study show that social
responsibility and corporate reputation have a positive relationship to customer trust and satisfaction. While service quality has a
direct effect on customer loyalty. In addition, transparency has a significant influence on customer trust. Trust has a significant
positive influence on customer loyalty. The influence of satisfaction on customer loyalty is mediated by trust.
Research with the title Perceived Quality, Perceived Risk And Customer Trust Affecting Customer Loyalty Of Environmentally
Friendly Electronics Products [15]. This study discusses the influence of customer perceived quality, risk and trust in customer
loyalty in marketing environmentally friendly electronic products in Thailand. This research was conducted because
environmentally friendly products can increase the value of the product so that it has an influence on consumer decisions. This
study investigates four variables: perceived quality, perceived risk, customer trust and loyalty. Methods Data analysis uses
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM). The results showed that perceived risk and trust have
a direct influence on customer loyalty. While perceived quality has an indirect effect on loyalty by mediating customer trust. In
addition, the perceived quality has a direct influence on perceived risk and customer trust.
3. METODOLOGY
3.1 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
This study will investigate the variables that affect marketplace customer loyalty through eight independent factors, namely
reliability, features, design, delivery, reputation, transparency, privacy and security, and two mediation factors, namely customer
satisfaction and trust. The relationship between these variables is shown in the model like Figure 1 below.
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371
Figure1: Research Proposal Model

From the figure 1, there are 12 hypotheses, as follows:
H1: Reliability has an influence on customer satisfaction
H2: Features have an influence on Customer Satisfaction
H3: Design has an influence on Customer Satisfaction
H4: Shipping has an influence on Customer Satisfaction
H5: Reputation has an influence on Customer Satisfaction
H6: Reputation has an influence on Customer Trust
H7: Transparency has an influence on Customer Trust
H8: Privacy has an influence on Customer Trust
H9: Security has an influence on Customer Trust
H10: Customer Satisfaction has an influence on Customer Loyalty
H11: Customer Satisfaction has an influence on Customer Trust
H12: Customer trust has an influence on customer loyalty
3.2 Research Stage

The stages in solving problems in this study are literature studies, preparation of instruments and
indicators, data collection, and data analysis as shown in figure 2.
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371
Figure 2: Research Stage

3.2 Instruments and Indicators
The instrument used in this research is a questionnaire containing questions from variables such as reliability, features,
design, delivery, reputation, openness, privacy, security, assurance, satisfaction, trust, and loyalty. Each variable has several
indicators which are represented by questions on the questionnaire. Each question consists of 5 attributes: 1 = strongly disagree, 2
= disagree, 3 = quite agree, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree. Table 1 is a list of variables, indicators, and questions on the
questionnaire used.
Table1. Variables, Indicators and Questionnaire Questions

Answer
Code Indicator Question
SA A QA D SD
1. Reliability
C11 Ease of Use The marketplace application is
easy to use
C12 Response time The response time of each
process in this marketplace is
done quickly
C13 Accuracy The information presented by
this marketplace is not biased or
misleading
C14 On time The information presented by
this marketplace is not obsolete
C15 Service This marketplace provides
Performance services as promised
2. Feature
C21 Search Engine This marketplace provides

search engines for product
searches
C22 Shopping cart In this marketplace there is a
shopping cart
C23 Payment method This marketplace provides
complete payment methods such
as cash on delivery (COD),
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371
ATM transfers, internet
banking, mobile banking, and
credit cards
C24 Order Status This marketplace provides
information to find out order
status
C25 Customer Service This marketplace has customer
service services such as
telephone, chat, and e-mail
3. Design
C31 Layout The layout of the components in

this marketplace application is
well structured
C32 Color Options The choice of colors in this
marketplace application is
comfortable
C33 Navigation Navigation like menus and links
in this marketplace application
is good and easy
C34 Image quality The image quality used in this
marketplace application is good
and clear
4. Shipping
C41 Time Delivering products in this

marketplace is on time
C42 Shipping agent This marketplace provides a
variety of courier options for
product delivery
C43 Shipping cost This marketplace provides free
shipping
5. Reputation
C51 Rating There are ratings from

customers In the marketplace
C52 Product quality The marketplace sells quality
products
6. Transparency
C61 Review The marketplace provides

customer reviews
C62 Shopping Process The marketplace performs a
clear shopping process step
7. Privacy
C71 Personal Thee marketplace maintains the

information customer's personal information
properly and correctly
C72 The marketplace does not
provide customer personal
information to anyone
8. Security
C81 Security Level The marketplace has a high

level of security
C82 The marketplace uses passwords
for logins and transactions
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371
9. Satisfaction
C91 Enjoy I am satisfied because I really

enjoy and love shopping in this
marketplace
C92 Convenience I am satisfied because I feel
comfortable shopping at this
marketplace anytime and
anywhere
C93 Advantage I am satisfied because shopping
through this marketplace I can
compare prices easily, choose
items faster and don't waste time
on trips to stores
10. Trust
C101 Personal I believe because this

marketplace will safeguard my
personal information
C102 Security I believe because this
marketplace has a good security
system
C103 Transparent I believe because the steps in
the shopping and payment
process in this marketplace are
easy and clear
11. Loyalty
C111 Intention to Buy I will buy again in this

Back marketplace in the future
C112 Recommendation I would recommend to other
people to shop at the
marketplace
C113 Shopping I will tell others about positive
Experience things about my experience
shopping at the marketplace
4. RESULT AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Instrument Quality Test
Instrument quality test is conducted to find out whether the research instrument has met the valid and reliable criteria. In
this study consisted of 34 lists of statements representing each variable with the number of respondents 100 using the AMOS
version 21 application. The results obtained from instrument quality testing with validity and reliability of CFA with AMOS
version 21 can be seen in Table 2 below.
Table 2. Validity and Reliability Test Results

Factor Construct
Variable Item
Loading Reliability
Reliability C15 0,832
C14 0,752
C13 0,742 0,8901
C12 0,755
C11 0,847
Feature C25 0,874

0,9052
C24 0,872
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371
C23 0,821
C22 0,713
C21 0,763
Design C31 0,772
C32 0,773
0,8576
C33 0,772
C34 0,784
Shipping C43 0,694
C42 0,954 0,8937
C41 0,911
Reputation C52 0,795

0,7858
C51 0,814
Transparency C62 0,710

0,8228
C61 0,950
Satisfaction C93 0,760
C92 0,862 0,8779

C91 0,894
Loyalty C111 0,667
C112 0,834 0,7978

C113 0,755
Trust C101 0,774
C102 0,820 0,8499

C103 0,831
Privacy C72 0,642

0,7608
C71 0,911
Security C82 0,989

0,8453
C81 0,705
4.2 Model Research With AMOS

A Model that is structured on AMOS. Form Flowchart, both structural equations and measurement model equations are seen in
Figure 3 below.
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371
Figure 3: Model Research
4.3 Structure Model Evaluation

The normality test is done by comparing the CR value (critical ratio) at the critical assessment of normality ± 2.58 at the
0.01 level. If there is a CR value that is greater than the critical value, the distribution of the data is not normally univariate. While
multivariate can be seen in the last line c.r with the same conditions (Ghozali, 2014). The nomination shield results are shown in
table 3 below. Table 3. Normality Test
Variable min max skew c.r. kurtosis c.r.
C81 2.000 5.000 -.367 -1.500 .002 .005
C82 2.000 5.000 -.061 -.248 -.321 -.656
C71 2.000 5.000 -.256 -1.045 -.447 -.912
C72 2.000 5.000 -.240 -.980 -.174 -.354
C103 2.000 5.000 -.224 -.913 -.874 -1.783
C102 2.000 5.000 -.226 -.922 -.625 -1.275
C101 2.000 5.000 -.122 -.500 -.600 -1.225
C113 2.000 5.000 -.085 -.347 -.672 -1.372
C112 2.000 5.000 -.078 -.317 -.719 -1.467
C111 2.000 5.000 -.362 -1.479 .053 .108
C91 2.000 5.000 -.265 -1.082 -.628 -1.282
C92 2.000 5.000 -.259 -1.058 -.498 -1.016
C93 2.000 5.000 -.234 -.956 -.656 -1.340
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371
Variable min max skew c.r. kurtosis c.r.
C61 2.000 5.000 -.326 -1.331 -.183 -.374
C62 2.000 5.000 -.123 -.501 -.500 -1.020
C51 2.000 5.000 -.322 -1.315 -.625 -1.276
C52 2.000 5.000 -.260 -1.063 -.287 -.587
C41 1.000 5.000 -.474 -1.935 .428 .875
C42 1.000 5.000 -.240 -.980 .189 .385
C43 1.000 5.000 -.461 -1.881 .294 .599
C34 2.000 5.000 -.272 -1.110 -.345 -.703
C33 2.000 5.000 -.154 -.628 -.504 -1.029
C32 2.000 5.000 -.125 -.509 -.371 -.757
C31 2.000 5.000 -.189 -.773 -.224 -.458
C21 2.000 5.000 -.210 -.856 -.456 -.931
C22 2.000 5.000 -.287 -1.173 -.442 -.901
C23 2.000 5.000 -.183 -.746 -.603 -1.231
C24 2.000 5.000 -.226 -.922 -.625 -1.275
C25 2.000 5.000 -.152 -.621 -.506 -1.032
C11 2.000 5.000 -.411 -1.677 .140 .287
C12 2.000 5.000 -.142 -.579 -.817 -1.668
C13 2.000 5.000 -.209 -.853 -.514 -1.048
C14 2.000 5.000 -.478 -1.952 -.055 -.113
C15 2.000 5.000 -.447 -1.825 .018 .037
Multivariate 6.869 .694
After the normalization test, the next is the hypothesis test. The process of testing this statistic can be seen in the table below.
From data processing, it is known that the CR value in the relationship is shown by the value above 1.96 for CR and below 0.05
for the p value (Ghozali, 2014). The results of the hypothesis test table are shown in Table 4 below..
Table 4. Hypothesis Test Results
No Hypothesis Coefficient C.R. p Information

1 F1 influence on F9 0,467 4.469 0,000 There is influence
2 F2 influence on F9 0,034 There is influence
0,194 2.123
4 F4 influence on F9 -0,082 -1.133 0,257 There is no influence
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371
7 F6 influence on F10 0,005 0.043 0,966 There is no influence

9 F7 influence on F10 0,196 1.555 0,120 There is no influence
10 F8 influence on F10 -0,213 -1.697 0,090 There is no influence
Based on the table above it can be explained the relationship between variables as follows:
1) F1 influence on F9
The estimated parameter of the standardized regression weight coefficient value is 0.467 and the value of C.R 4.469 shows that
the F1 and F9 relationships are positive. This means that the better F1 will increase F9. Testing the relationship between the two
variables shows a probability value of 0,000 (p <0.05), so that it can be stated if there is a significant influence between F1 and F9.
the relationship between F2 and F9 is positive. This means that the better F2 will increase F9. Testing the relationship between the
two variables shows a probability value of 0.034 (p <0.05), so that it can be stated if there is a significant influence between F2
and F9.
two variables shows a probability value of 0.006 (p <0.05), so that it can be stated if there is a significant influence between F3
and F9.
The estimated parameters of the standardized regression weight coefficient value are -0.082 and the value of C.R -1.133, this
indicates that the relationship between F4 and F9 is negative. This means that the better F4 it will reduce F9. Testing the
relationship between the two variables shows a probability value of 0.257 (p> 0.05), so that it can be stated if there is no
significant influence between F4 and F9.
two variables shows a probability value of 0,000 (p> 0.05), so that it can be stated if there is a significant influence between F4
and F9.
Estimated parameters of standardized regression weight coefficient values obtained at 0.540 and the value of C.R 3.164 this shows
that the relationship F5 with F10 is positive. This means that the better F5 will increase F10 Testing the relationship between the
two variables shows a probability value of 0.002 (p> 0.05), so that it can be stated if there is a significant influence between F5
and F10.
The estimated parameters of the standardized regression weight coefficient value are 0.005 and the value of C.R 0.043 shows that
the relationship F6 with F10 is positive. This means that the better F6 will increase F10 Testing the relationship between the two
variables shows a probability value of 0.966 (p> 0.05), so that it can be stated if there is no significant influence between F6 and
F10.
the relationship F9 with F10 is positive. This means that the better F9 it will increase F10 Testing the relationship between the two
variables shows a probability value of 0.003 (p <0.05), so that it can be stated if there is a significant influence between F9 and
F10.
the relationship between F7 and F10 is positive. This means that the better F7 will increase F10 Testing the relationship between
the two variables shows a probability value of 0.120 (p <0.05), so that it can be stated if there is no significant influence between
F7 and F10.
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371
The estimated parameters of the standardized regression weight coefficient are obtained at -0.213 and the value of C.R -1.697,
which shows that the relationship between F8 and F10 is negative. This means that the better F8 it will reduce F10. Testing the
relationship between the two variables shows a probability value of 0.090 (p <0.05), so that it can be stated if there is no
significant influence between F8 and F10.

The estimated parameter of the standardized regression weight coefficient value is 0,299 and the value of C.R 2,571 shows that
the relationship F9 with F11 is positive. This means that the better F9 will increase F11 Testing the relationship between the two
variables shows a probability value of 0.010 (p <0.05), so that it can be stated if there is a significant influence between F9 and
F11.

the relationship between F10 and F11 is positive. This means that the better F10 will increase F11 Testing the relationship
between the two variables shows a probability value of 0.001 (p> 0.05), so that it can be stated if there is a significant influence
between F10 and F11.
5. CONCLUSSION
Based on the results of hypothesis testing, the research that has been carried out on the determinants of satisfaction, trust and
customer loyalty in the marketplace in Indonesia can be summarized as follows:
1. Test results of standardized regression weights in Hypothesis 1 namely Reliability has a significant effect on customer
satisfaction. Because it has a significant value, so H1 is accepted.
2. The standardized regression weights test results in Hypothesis 2, which are features have a significant effect on customer
3. Test results of standardized regression weights in Hypothesis 3 namely Design have a significant effect on customer
4. Test results of standardized regression weights in Hypothesis 4 namely Delivery have a significant effect on customer
satisfaction. Because it has a significant value, so H4 is rejected.
5. Test results of standardized regression weights in Hypothesis 5 namely Reputation have a significant effect on customer
6. Test results of standardized regression weights in Hypothesis 6 namely Reputation have a significant effect on customer
trust. Because it has a significant value, so H6 is accepted.
7. The standardized regression weights test results in Hypothesis 7, namely Transparency have a significant effect on customer
trust. Because it has a significant value, so H7 is rejected.
8. Test results of standardized regression weights in Hypothesis 8 namely Privacy have a significant effect on customer trust.
Because it has a significant value, so H8 is rejected.
9. Test results of standardized regression weights in Hypothesis 9 namely Security have a significant effect on customer
satisfaction. Because it has a significant value, so H9 is rejected.
10. Test results of standardized regression weights in Hypothesis 10, namely customer satisfaction has a significant effect on
customer loyalty. Because it has a significant value, so H10 is accepted.
11. Test results of standardized regression weights in Hypothesis 11 namely customer satisfaction has a significant effect on
customer trust. Because it has a significant value, so H11 is accepted.
12. Test results of standardized regression weights in Hypothesis 12 namely Trust have a significant effect on customer loyalty.
Because it has a significant value, so H12 is accepted.
REFERENCES
[1] S. R. D. Setiawan, "tahun-2017-pengguna-internet-di-indonesia-mencapai-14326-juta-orang.," 19 February 2018. [Online].

Available: https://ekonomi.kompas.com/read/2018/02/19/161115126/tahun-2017-pengguna-internet-di-indonesia-mencapai-
14326-juta-orang.. [Accessed 6 March 2018].
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371
[2] M. R. Sandegi, "Faktor - Faktor Keberhasilan Proses Virtualisasi Dalam Perspektif E-Commerce Di Indonesia," JURNAL
INFOTEL, 2017.
[3] J.-Y. Lai, K. R. Ulhas and J.-D. Lin, "Assessing and managing e-commerce service convenience," Information Systems
Frontiers, 2014.
[4] M. Nawangwulan, "baru-133-persen-pengguna-internet-indonesia-belanja-online," 21 November 2016. [Online]. Available:

https://tekno.tempo.co/read/821936/baru-133-persen-pengguna-internet-indonesia-belanja-online. [Accessed 6 March 2018].
[5] I. O. Pappas, A. G. Pateli, M. N. Giannakos and V. Chrissikopoulos, "Moderating effects of online shopping experience on
customer satisfaction and repurchase intentions," International Journal of Retail, pp. 187-204, 2014.
[6] B. K and S. B, "End-user Acceptance of Online Shopping Sites in India," Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 2015.
[7] Y.-C. Lee, Y.-C. Wang, S.-C. Lu, Y.-F. Hsieh, C.-H. Chien, S.-B. Tsai and W. Dong, "An empirical research on customer
satisfaction study : a consideration of different levels of performance," SpringerPlus, 2016.
[8] N. S. Safa, "Customers repurchase intentin formatin in e-commerce," South African Journal of Informatin Management,
2016.
[9] R. Gul, "The Relationship between Reputation, Customer Satisfaction, Trust, and Loyalty," Journal of Public Administration
and Governance, 2014.
[10] J. V. Chen, D. C. Yen, W. Pornpriphet and A. E. Widjaja, "E-commerce web site loyalty : A cross cultural comparison,"
Information Systems Frontiers, pp. 1283-1299, 2015.
[11] N. S. Safa and M. A. Ismail, "A customer loyalty formation model in electronic commerce," Economic Modelling, pp. 559-
564, 2013.
[12] N. Gures, S. Arslan and S. Y. Tun, "Customer Expectation, Satisfaction and Loyalty Relationship in," International Journal
of Marketing Studies, pp. 66-74, 2014.
[13] S. Chou, C.-W. Chen and J.-Y. Lin, "Female online shoppers Examining the mediating roles of e-satisfaction and e-trust on
e-loyalty development," Internet Research, pp. 542-561, 2015.
[14] S.-B. Kim and D.-Y. Kim, "The impacts of corporate social responsibility, service quality, and transparency on relationship
quality and customer loyalty in the hotel industry," Asian Journal of Sustainability and Social Responsibility, pp. 39-55,
2016.
[15] L. Marakanon and V. Panjakajornsak, "Perceived quality, perceived risk and customer trust affecting customer loyalty of
environmentally friendly electronics products," Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, pp. 24-30, 2017.
DOI : 10.31695/IJERAT.2019.3371

Analysis of Indonesian Marketplace Based On Customer Satisfaction, Trust and Loyalty

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analysis of Indonesian Marketplace Based On Customer Satisfaction, Trust and Loyalty

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analysis of Indonesian Marketplace Based On Customer Satisfaction, Trust and Loyalty

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Engineering Research and

Analysis of Indonesian Marketplace Based on Customer

Figure1: Research Proposal Model

3.2 Research Stage

Figure 2: Research Stage

Table1. Variables, Indicators and Questionnaire Questions

C21 Search Engine This marketplace provides

C31 Layout The layout of the components in

C41 Time Delivering products in this

C51 Rating There are ratings from

C61 Review The marketplace provides

C71 Personal Thee marketplace maintains the

C81 Security Level The marketplace has a high

C91 Enjoy I am satisfied because I really

C101 Personal I believe because this

C111 Intention to Buy I will buy again in this

4. RESULT AND ANALYSIS

Table 2. Validity and Reliability Test Results

C13 0,742 0,8901

Feature C25 0,874

Design C31 0,772

Shipping C43 0,694

C42 0,954 0,8937

Reputation C52 0,795

Transparency C62 0,710

Satisfaction C93 0,760

C92 0,862 0,8779

Loyalty C111 0,667

C112 0,834 0,7978

Trust C101 0,774

C102 0,820 0,8499

Privacy C72 0,642

Security C82 0,989

4.2 Model Research With AMOS

Figure 3: Model Research

4.3 Structure Model Evaluation

C81 2.000 5.000 -.367 -1.500 .002 .005

C82 2.000 5.000 -.061 -.248 -.321 -.656

C71 2.000 5.000 -.256 -1.045 -.447 -.912

C72 2.000 5.000 -.240 -.980 -.174 -.354

C103 2.000 5.000 -.224 -.913 -.874 -1.783

C102 2.000 5.000 -.226 -.922 -.625 -1.275

C101 2.000 5.000 -.122 -.500 -.600 -1.225

C113 2.000 5.000 -.085 -.347 -.672 -1.372

C112 2.000 5.000 -.078 -.317 -.719 -1.467

C111 2.000 5.000 -.362 -1.479 .053 .108

C91 2.000 5.000 -.265 -1.082 -.628 -1.282

C92 2.000 5.000 -.259 -1.058 -.498 -1.016

C93 2.000 5.000 -.234 -.956 -.656 -1.340

Variable min max skew c.r. kurtosis c.r.

C61 2.000 5.000 -.326 -1.331 -.183 -.374

C62 2.000 5.000 -.123 -.501 -.500 -1.020

C51 2.000 5.000 -.322 -1.315 -.625 -1.276

C52 2.000 5.000 -.260 -1.063 -.287 -.587

C41 1.000 5.000 -.474 -1.935 .428 .875

C42 1.000 5.000 -.240 -.980 .189 .385

C43 1.000 5.000 -.461 -1.881 .294 .599

C34 2.000 5.000 -.272 -1.110 -.345 -.703

C33 2.000 5.000 -.154 -.628 -.504 -1.029