Examining the interplay of affect and cognition in online information disclosure in E-commerce: insights from two empirical studies

This study explores how shifting from a general to a specific decision-making context influences the interaction between affect and cognition in online information sharing with e-commerce vendors. While previous research has primarily examined these factors separately, their interplay—especially in relation to situational context—remains underexplored. To address this gap, two studies were conducted: a scenario-based survey and a controlled experiment. The first study found that in a general decision-making context, individuals tend to rely on heuristic processing, investing minimal cognitive effort due to perceived low relevance, limited accuracy requirements, and the absence of specific objectives. In contrast, in a specific decision-making context, cognitive evaluation played a greater role in determining whether to share personal information, while the influence of affect decreased. The second study examined how inconsistencies in cognitive evaluations between a general and a specific situation shape the role of affect in specific decision-making contexts. Participants were assigned to one of three experimental conditions (consistency, upward inconsistency, and downward inconsistency) and assessed the impact of affect, perceived benefits, and privacy risks on information sharing. The findings revealed that in inconsistency conditions, the influence of cognitive evaluations related to benefits and privacy risks weakened significantly. Moreover, the impact of affect varied across experimental conditions depending on the level of perceived risk. These results highlight the critical role of situational factors—such as goals, engagement levels, and perceived relevance—in shaping online information-sharing behavior.