From Clicks To Consequences: A Multi Method Review of Online Grocery Shopping

Electronic Commerce Research
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-023-09761-x
From clicks to consequences: a multi‑method review

of online grocery shopping
Arvind Shroff1 · Satish Kumar2 · Luisa M. Martinez3,4 · Nitesh Pandey5
Accepted: 10 September 2023

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
2023
Abstract
The academic interest in Online Grocery Shopping (OGS) has proliferated in retail-
ing and business management over the past two decades. Previous research on OGS
was primarily focused on consumer-level consequences such as purchase intention,
purchase decision, and post-purchase behavior. However, there is a lack of literature
integrating intrinsic and extrinsic factors that influence the growth of OGS and its
impact on purchase outcomes. To address this, we conduct a multi-method review
combining traits of a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. Analyz-
ing 145 articles through word cloud and keyword co-occurrence analysis, we iden-
tify publication trends (top journals, articles) and nine thematic clusters. We develop
an integrated conceptual framework encompassing the antecedents, mediators, mod-
erators, and consequences of OGS. Finally, we outline future research directions
using Theory-Context-Characteristics-Methods framework to serve as a reference
point for future researchers working in OGS.
Keywords Online grocery shopping · Systematic literature review · Bibliometric

analysis · Co-occurrence analysis · Conceptual framework
* Satish Kumar
satish@iimnagpur.ac.in
Arvind Shroff
arvind.shroff@iiml.ac.in
Luisa M. Martinez
luisa.martinez@universidadeeuropeia.pt
Nitesh Pandey
scholar.nitesh.pandey@gmail.com
1
Indian Institute of Management Lucknow, Lucknow, India
2
Indian Institute of Management Nagpur, Nagpur, India
3
Instituto Português de Administração de Marketing – IPAM Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal
4
UNIDCOM/IADE, Unidade de Investigação em Design e Comunicação, Lisbon, Portugal
5
Amrita School of Business, Coimbatore, India
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
A. Shroff et al.
1 Introduction
The massive growth of online platforms, especially in the last decade, has fuelled
their usage in day-to-day activities like ride-hailing [1], hospitality and tour-
ism [2], food delivery [3], and so on. The primary reasons for this growth are
smartphone penetration, consumers’ need for choice and convenience, and the
positive attitude of consumers towards mobile shopping adoption [4]. The Online
Grocery Shopping (OGS) market is also not far behind, given that grocery pur-
chasing is one of the essential daily activities and young consumers aged 21–40
have the highest propensity to use OGS platforms worldwide [5]. Online Gro-
cery Shopping (OGS), a well-established term in research and practice, refers to
the usage of online channels by consumers to purchase grocery items for day-to-
day activities [6]. Research in the early 2000s found that the consumers shopping
the groceries online for convenience were very few in number, and most were
older adults indulging in OGS out of necessity [7]. Research also indicated that
transaction barriers, inaccurate information, slow web apps with high load times
and missed/late deliveries were the reasons behind low consumer adoption in
e-grocery shopping [8]. However, OGS adoption has been steadily rising among
consumers due to reduced complexities in mobile applications, the emergence of
super apps like Swiggy catering food and grocery needs simultaneously [9] and
increased convenience compared to the physical channels [10]. The shift from
offline to online channels for multichannel grocery retailers is also a function of
the pricing strategy adopted since cross-channel price promotion has the potential
to impact the loyal offline consumers of supermarkets, either positively or nega-
tively [11]. Further, the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to the
rise of OGS as a viable and practical option for consumers in the new normal [12,
13]. Despite the dominance of physical stores as the primary sales channel for
edible groceries, the projected growth of online sales in this category is expected
to rise from 174 billion US$ in 2021 to over 275 billion in 2026 [14]. Accord-
ing to Statista, the worldwide online food delivery industry has a market size of
approximately 770 billion US$ as of 2022, in which grocery delivery accounts
for 60% of the market valued at 460 billion US$ [15]. Given that in 2022, over
1.2 billion consumers used online platforms for grocery deliveries [16], the OGS
industry lies among the fastest-growing e-commerce sectors (see Fig. 1).
There has been extensive research on the advantages of OGS, such as how con-
venient it is, how many options there are, and how adaptable it is, both from the
perspective of the consumers and the supermarket chains. However, there are still
a lot of unanswered questions about how it will affect the retail industry and how
consumers will behave in the future [17]. For instance, the expansion of OGS
has both positive and negative implications for all the stakeholders involved, be
it consumers, retailers, or manufacturers. To understand the changes in pricing,
marketing, purchasing, selling, and promotional strategies through the perspec-
tive of each of these stakeholders, an in-depth investigation is required on the
ways which will ensure that the stakeholders’ growth is maintained. In addition,
a more in-depth exploration of the potentially disruptive effects of COVID-19 on
13
From clicks to consequences: a multi‑method review of online…
2,500 1.20
1.00
2,000
Number of users (in millions)
Revenues (in trillionsUS$)

0.80
1,500
0.60
1,000
0.40
500
0.20
0 0.00
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Year
Fig. 1 Growth in the OGS market worldwide from 2017 to 2027. Source Statista Digital Market
Insights, November 2022
consumers’ grocery shopping habits and its potential effects in the longer run as
the new normal begins to emerge must be conducted. (Table 3).
A Systematic Literature Review (SLR) aims to synthesize the academic litera-
ture within a particular area of research [18]. Despite the considerable amount
of research conducted in grocery shopping focusing on OGS over the last two
decades, the current state of research in this domain remains fragmented and
unclear. Accordingly, moving beyond the basics of grocery shopping, this review
study argues in favor of the necessity to pursue a stock-take of OGS research.
Moreover, to our knowledge, a single review study on online consumer shopping
behavior [19] has been published in the last 5 years in ABDC (Australian Busi-
ness Deans Council) B or above-ranked journals. This claim is validated through
a SCOPUS search of “Online Grocery Shopping” and “review” between 2017
and 2023. More importantly, the review paper [19] has a broader scope focusing
on online consumer shopping behavior indulging in all kinds of online purchas-
ing like apparel, luxury goods, second-hand products and multichannel retail-
ing. Their review lacks a singular focus and does not comprehensively synthe-
size the scholarly output on OGS in terms of Theories, Contexts, Characteristics,
and Methods. Furthermore, the OGS research corpus has never been reviewed
through the lens of bibliometric analysis, a widely accepted method to identify
clusters and critical research themes [20, 22].
To extend the practice and fill the aforementioned gaps, this review is positioned
as a leading initiative to map the domain of OGS through an SLR coupled with
bibliometric analysis, where current insights and future research directions on OGS
take center stage. This is also in line with the call for papers dedicated to novel
explorations on the topics related to OGS [17]. Taken together, we seek to address
the following research questions:
13
A. Shroff et al.
RQ 1 What is the trend in publication frequency, as measured by the number of

articles published per year, for the topic of OGS?
RQ 2 What are the primary outlets and articles that hold the most influence in the
field of OGS?
RQ 3 What are the theories employed and methodologies used to study the OGS
phenomena?
RQ 4 What insights can be gleaned from the current body of research (including
topics and themes) on OGS?
RQ 5 What potential future research directions can be pursued to enhance the
understanding of OGS?
The rest of the review is structured as follows. Section 2 describes the methodol-
ogy for finalizing the review corpus. Section 3 profiles the OGS research in terms
of publication trends (articles, authors and journals), followed by Sect. 4 reporting
the findings of science mapping through bibliometric analysis. Section 5 integrates
the antecedents, mediators and moderators of OGS, as informed by the literature
culminating into an integrated conceptual framework. In Sect. 6, we summarize the
findings of the review, outlining future research directions. Finally, in Sect. 7, we
conclude. All the articles included in this review are mapped in the supplementary
material with all the details.
2 Methodology
In this section, we outline the review structure and the organizing framework, fol-
lowed by the criteria utilized to finalize the corpus of articles to curate the review of
OGS literature.
2.1 Review structure and organizing framework
The present study employs a multi-method review approach [23] that integrates the
characteristics of an SLR [24, 25] and a bibliometric analysis [20] in a step-by-step
manner. The SLR methodology allows for the development of a review of the litera-
ture that is transparent and can be replicated [26]. Researchers have suggested utiliz-
ing organizing frameworks to conduct SLRs, as evidenced by the works of [27, 28].
Consistent with the literature, the present investigation employs the TCCM frame-
work to structure the core concept of OGS, drawing upon Theories, Contexts, Char-
acteristics, and Methods. On the other hand, the bibliometric analysis enables an
objective evaluation of said literature, as highlighted by [22]. The information gen-
erated through bibliometric analysis helps scholars, practitioners, and policymak-
ers identify OGS’s leading journals, articles, and topics, understand its knowledge
structure, and identify future research themes [22]. The bibliometric approach has
been incorporated into the generic SLRs to evaluate the existing literature objec-
tively through quantitative techniques like citation, co-citation and co-occurrence
analysis of keywords [20]. Fig. 2 depicts the outcome, showcasing our integration of
13
the SLR technique utilizing the TCCM framework and bibliometric analysis to map
the literature pertaining to the domain of OGS.
2.2 Search and filtration
In May 2023, a search was conducted to identify articles to be included in the review
process. To ensure that none of the relevant articles on OGS were missed from the
review process, we devised an all-exhaustive search string based on the keyword
“Online Grocery Shopping”. The search strategy comprised six stages, namely
database search, scholarly filtration, language filtration, subject filtration, document
screening and manual inclusion, was implemented (see Fig. 3). While Scopus has
been recognized as a high-quality source for extracting bibliometric data, many
studies also use alternative databases like the Web of Science to extensively search
for articles to be included in the review process [18, 20]. In this study, we chose
the most preferred combination of Scopus and Web of Science databases to curate
a comprehensive, high-quality corpus for the review. Following [18], we undertook
scholarly filtration by including only journal articles as they are subjected to peer
review and present novel contributions. Articles written in the English language
were retained after the language filtration stage, as scholars worldwide communi-
cate primarily in English and are comfortable disseminating knowledge in this lan-
guage [20]. For the subject filtration stage, we chose to include the articles within
the defined subjects, Economics, Econometrics and Finance; Business, Manage-
ment and Accounting; Decision Sciences; Social Sciences, as they were broadest
and most comprehensively relevant to business and management [18, 20]. Further,
in line with the recommendation of [29], the research papers with a B and above
ranking in the ABDC journal listing were selected since these are accepted in the
scholarly community as quality journals reporting insights of the highest standards.
How do we know about OGS? What do we know about OGS?
Existing Theories (T) Existing Contexts (C) Existing Methods (M) Existing Characteristics (C)
Theory of Planned Behavior United States Research Methodology MULTI-METHOD REVIEW =

Social practice theory United Kingdom Empirical
Conceptual Systematic literature review
Technology Acceptance Germany Content analysis, Trend analysis, Thematic
Analytical Modeling
Model Belgium analysis
Research design
Theory of Reasoned Action France Qualitative
Choice theory South Korea Quantitative Outcomes
Economic theory Sweden Data collection methodologies Theories, Contexts, Characteristics,
Random Utility Theory China Survey/Questionnaire Methods, Conceptual framework, Future
Stimulus-Organism-Response Finland Field Work research directions
+
Theory India Archival
Unified Theory of Italy Experimental
Acceptance of the Use of Data analysis approach
Spain Descriptive statistics
Technology (UTAUT) Switzerland Bibliometric analysis
ANOVA
Attitude-Behavior-Context Brazil Citation analysis, Topic modeling, Science
Chi-square test
(ABC) theory Canada Correlation analysis mapping
Construal-level theory Denmark t-test
Cue-theory of consumption Japan Game theoretic modeling Outcomes
Elaboration Likelihood South Africa Multinomial Logit modeling Top journals, Top articles, Top authors,
Model Spain Regression Word-clouds, Topical evolution, Thematic
Engagement Theory Structural equation modeling clusters
Game Theory Estimation models
New Theories (T) Emerging Contexts (C) Emerging Methods (M) Emerging Characteristics (C)
What are the future avenues in OGS research?
Fig. 2 TCCM framework and its application for systematic review
13
A. Shroff et al.
Finally, a manual inclusion was performed with a title and abstract reading of the
remaining 177 articles to judge the relevance of these articles with the subject matter
Stage 1: Database extraction
Database: Scopus and Web of Science

Keyword: Online Grocery Shopping (OGS)
Period: Till April 2023
Included: n=668
Excluded: 172
Stage 2: Scholarly filtration
Document type: Article, Review article

Included: n=496
Excluded: 05
Stage 3: Language filtration
Language: English
Included: n=491
Excluded: 188
Stage 4: Subject filtration
Subject: Economics, Econometrics and Finance; Business, Management and

Accounting; Decision Sciences; Social Sciences
Included: n=304
Excluded: 127
Stage 5: Document screening
Criteria: Journal ranking of ABDC B and above

Included: n=177
Excluded: 32
Stage 6: Manual inclusion
Criteria: Title and abstract reading for relevancy to the subject of OGS
Studies included in final review: n=145
Fig. 3 A flowchart on the retrieval of articles
13
of OGS. Based on these criteria, 145 peer-reviewed articles survived the search and
filtration process, which progressed for the multi-method review.
3 Profiling of OGS research
After the search and filtration process, the final corpus comprised 145 articles pub-
lished between 2000 and 2023. Utilizing the TCCM framework, as shown in Fig. 2,
the following sections respond to the proposed research questions.
3.1 Publication trends (RQ 1)
The temporal distribution of published research papers on OGS provided valuable

insights into the gradual evolution of scholarly research. Despite refraining from
imposing temporal constraints on our search, our corpus revealed that the inception
of research on OGS could be traced back to the early 2000s, as evidenced by these
works [30, 31]. Interestingly, OGS research appeared in the single digits till 2018
and picked up from 2019 onwards, which can be attributed to the diversification of
supermarkets into Offline-to-Online (O2O) channels, technology adoption by con-
sumers and mobility restrictions imposed by COVID-19. Fig. 4 shows the year-wise
distribution of the research papers published in 2000–2023 and their collated cita-
tions till May 2023.
25 1400
1200
20
1000
15
Publications
800
Citations
600
10
400
5
200
0 0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
Yearly Publication Yearly Citation
Fig. 4 Publication trend of OGS research (2000–2023)
13
A. Shroff et al.
3.2 Top contributing journals and articles (RQ 2)
Next, we grouped the articles based on the publication outlets to decipher the impact
of various journals on the evolution of OGS research. A total of 145 articles in our
corpus were published in journals categorized as A* (n = 35 articles, 24.14%), A
(n = 63 articles, 43.45%) or B (n = 47 articles, 32.41%) by the ABDC 2022 rating.
This metric proves that top journals are highly interested in publishing research on
OGS. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services was identified to be the most
prolific destination for OGS research (ABDC A, n = 16 articles), followed by the
Journal of Retailing (ABDC A*, n = 10 articles) and International Journal of Retail
and Distribution Management (ABDC A, n = 12 articles). Table 1 lists all the jour-
nals that published two or more articles on OGS. To understand the impact of arti-
cles individually, we collated the total number of citations, i.e., the number of times
other researchers have cited the articles in our corpus. The article “On the Go: How
Mobile Shopping Affects Customer Purchase Behavior,” published in the Journal of
Retailing, tops the list with the highest number of citations (n = 359 citations), fol-
lowed by “Consumer response to online grocery shopping,” published in Interna-
tional Journal of Retail and Distribution Management (n = 244 citations).
Table2 lists the top 25 articles in terms of the number of citations received,
revealing the most impactful articles on OGS.
3.3 Theories and methodologies in OGS research (RQ 3)
An in-depth analysis was performed to unpack the major theories applied by

researchers to undertake empirically and analytically driven inquiries on OGS (see
Table 3). Noteworthily, the Theory of Planned Behavior found the highest applica-
tion among the OGS researchers [32–35], followed by Social Practice Theory [36,
37] and Technology Acceptance Model [38, 39]. Some other prominent theories used
by researchers are the Innovation Diffusion Theory [40], Choice Theory [41], Stim-
ulus-Organism-Response Theory [42], and Unified Theory of Acceptance of the Use
of Technology (UTAUT) model [43]. Taken collectively, researchers have utilized
over 50 theories to understand the intricacies of OGS, rationales behind the O2O
movement of consumers and diversification into online channels by supermarket
chains like Walmart [44].
Alongside theories, a diverse set of methodological choices in terms of research
designs, research approach, data collection method and data analysis techniques
were adopted by researchers as presented in the TCCM framework. Most of the
articles in our corpus relied on empirical methodologies to study OGS research
(87.5%), out of which the survey/questionnaire method was used in 42.7% of the
articles to collect data. This was followed by 22.8% of articles using archival data
and 9.75% employing experimental methods for data collection. To analyze the col-
lected data, some notable analysis techniques used were correlation, regression, and
test of differences (ANOVA, t-test and chi-square test). Finally, only 28.2% of the
articles utilized mathematical and analytical techniques like choice estimation, panel
data modeling and multinomial logit modeling to inform OGS research.
13
Table 1 Top contributing journals in OGS research
ABDC ranking Journal Number of articles Citations Citation/article
A* Journal of Retailing 10 1074 107.40

Marketing Science 5 639 127.80
European Journal of Marketing 2 177 88.50
Journal of Marketing 2 64 32.00
Transportation Research Part C: 2 48 24.00
Emerging Technologies
Production and Operations Man- 2 9 4.50
agement
Transportation Research Part A: 3 76 25.33
Policy and Practice
A Journal of Retailing and Con- 16 545 34.06
sumer Services
International Journal of Retail and12 700 33.67
Distribution Management
Journal of Business Research 4 61 15.25

Journal of Interactive Marketing 3 202 67.33
International Journal of Con- 3 179 59.67
sumer Studies
Journal of Marketing Manage- 2 93 46.50
ment
Electronic Commerce Research 2 2 1.00
Transportation Research Part D: 2 0 0.00
Transport and Environment
13
Table 1 (continued)
ABDC ranking Journal Number of articles Citations Citation/article
13
B International Review of Retail, 8 204 25.50
Distribution and Consumer
Research
Journal of Food Products Market- 6 72 12.00
ing
International Journal of Logistics 2 21 10.50
Research and Applications
Travel Behaviour and Society 2 17 8.50
Research in Transportation 7 164 23.43
Economics
Journal of Theoretical and 4 29 7.25
Applied Electronic Commerce
Research
Journal of Internet Commerce 2 70 35.00
British Food Journal 2 28 14.00
ABDC australian business deans council journal ranking 2022

A. Shroff et al.
Table 2 Top contributing articles in OGS research
Rank Authors Title Year Source Title Total citations Citations/year
1 Wang R.J.H.; Malt- On the Go: How Mobile 2015 Journal of Retailing 359 39.89
house E.C.; Krishna- Shopping Affects
murthi L Customer Purchase
Behavior
2 Morganosky M.A.; Consumer response to 2000 International Journal of 244 10.17
Cude B.J online grocery shop- Retail & Distribution
ping Management
3 Danaher P.J.; Wilson A Comparison of 2003 Marketing Science 213 10.14
I.W.; Davis R.A Online and Offline
Consumer Brand
Loyalty
4 Melis K.; Campo K.; The Impact of the 2015 Journal of Retailing 203 22.56
Breugelmans E.; Multichannel Retail
Lamey L Mix on Online Store
Choice: Does Online
Experience Matter?
5 Vrechopoulos A.P.; Virtual store layout: An 2004 Journal of Retailing 183 9.15
O’Keefe R.M.; Douk- experimental com-
idis G.I.; Siomkos G.J parison in the context
of grocery retail
6 Hansen T Consumer values, the 2008 International Journal of 177 11.06
theory of planned Consumer Studies
behavior and online
grocery shopping
7 Chintagunta P.K.; Chu Quantifying transaction 2012 Marketing Science 159 13.25
J.; Cebollada J costs in online/offline
grocery channel
choice
13
Table 2 (continued)
13
8 Hand C.; Riley F.D.; Online grocery shop- 2009 European Journal of 148 9.87
Harris P.; Singh J.; ping: The influence of Marketing
Rettie R situational factors
9 Borle S.; Boatwright P.; The effect of product 2005 Marketing Science 144 7.58
Kadane J.B.; Nunes assortment changes on
J.C.; Shmueli G customer retention
10 Ramus K.; Nielsen N.A Online grocery retail- 2005 Internet Research 141 7.42
ing: What do consum-
ers think?
11 Chu J.; Arce-Urriza M.; An Empirical Analysis 2010 Journal of Interactive 121 8.64
Cebollada-Calvo J.-J.; of Shopping Behavior Marketing
Chintagunta P.K Across Online and
Offline Channels for
Grocery Products:
The Moderating
Effects of Household
and Product Charac-
teristics
12 Driediger F.; Bhatia- Online grocery shop- 2019 Journal of Retailing and 109 21.80
sevi V ping in Thailand: Consumer Services
Consumer acceptance
and usage behavior
13 Hansen T Consumer adoption of 2005 International Journal of 104 5.47
online grocery buy- Retail & Distribution
ing: A discriminant Management
analysis
A. Shroff et al.
Table 2 (continued)
14 Mortimer G.; Fazal e Online grocery shop- 2016 International Review 99 12.38
Hasan S.; Andrews L.; ping: the impact of of Retail, Distribu-
Martin J shopping frequency tion and Consumer
on perceived risk Research
15 Li J.; Hallsworth A.G.; Changing Grocery 2020 Tijdschrift voor Econo- 96 24.00
Coca-Stefaniak J.A Shopping Behaviours mische en Sociale
Among Chinese Con- Geografie
sumers At The Outset
Of The COVID-19
Outbreak
16 Chu J.; Chintagunta P.; A comparison of 2008 Marketing Science 93 5.81
Cebollada J within-household
price sensitivity
across online and
offline channels
17 Huyghe E.; Verstraeten Clicks as a healthy 2017 Journal of Marketing 83 11.86
J.; Geuens M.; Van alternative to bricks: Research

Kerckhove A How online grocery
shopping reduces vice
purchases
18 Heng Y.; Gao Z.; Jiang Exploring hidden fac- 2018 Journal of Retailing and 83 13.83
Y.; Chen X tors behind online Consumer Services
food shopping from
Amazon reviews: A
topic mining approach
13
Table 2 (continued)
13
19 de Bellis E.; Venkata- Autonomous Shopping 2020 Journal of Retailing 81 20.25
ramani Johar G Systems: Identify-
ing and Overcoming
Barriers to Consumer
Adoption
20 Huang Y.; Oppewal H Why consumers hesitate 2006 International Journal of 77 4.28
to shop online: An Retail and Distribu-
experimental choice tion Management
analysis of grocery
shopping and the role
of delivery fees
21 Davis R.; Buchanan- Retail Service Branding 2000 Journal of Service 76 3.17
Oliver M.; Brodie R.J in Electronic-Com- Research
merce Environments
22 Belavina E.; Girotra K.; Online grocery retail: 2017 Management Science 75 10.71
Kabra A Revenue models and
environmental impact
23 Campo K.; Breugel- Buying Groceries 2015 Journal of Interactive 69 7.67
mans E in Brick and Click Marketing
Stores: Category Allo-
cation Decisions and
the Moderating Effect
of Online Buying
Experience
24 Geuens M.; Brengman Food retailing, now and 2003 Journal of Retailing and 68 3.24
M.; S’Jegers R in the future. A con- Consumer Services
sumer perspective
A. Shroff et al.
Table 2 (continued)
25 Breugelmans E.; CampoCross-Channel Effects 2016 Journal of Retailing 63 7.88
K of Price Promotions:
An Empirical Analy-
sis of the Multichan-
nel Grocery Retail
Sector
13
13
Table 3 Theories tested/used/discussed in OGS studies
Theory /Model %age of studies Exemplar references
Theory of planned behavior 7.59 [6, 12, 32–35, 45, 46]

Social practice theory 2.76 [36, 37, 47, 48]
Technology acceptance model 2.76 [5, 38, 39, 49]
Theory of reasoned action 2.76 [50–53]
Choice theory 1.38 [41, 54]
Economic theory 1.38 [55, 56]
Grounded theory 1.38 [57, 58]
Random utility theory 1.38 [59, 60]
Stimulus-organism-response theory 1.38 [42, 61]
Unified theory of acceptance of the use of technology 1.38 [43, 62]
(UTAUT) model
No guiding theory 48.28 [63–70]
A. Shroff et al.
4 Science mapping through bibliometric analysis (RQ 4)
Science mapping is a methodological approach that examines existing knowledge

and its interconnections within a particular field through graphical representations
[20, 21]. To uncover the OGS research, we carried out science mapping through R
software using two bibliometric analysis techniques, word-cloud analysis and key-
word co-occurrence analysis, as described next.
4.1 Temporal analysis of OGS using word clouds
Word cloud analysis was performed to highlight the significant topics characteriz-
ing OGS research across five time periods between 2000 and 2023. OGS research
emerged in 2002, focusing on understanding the consumer’s initial response to gro-
cery shopping online [31].
Figure 5 indicates the emergence of the “internet”, “food retailing”, and “online
shopping attributes” of consumers in the period 2000 and 2004. Notably, the studies
revealed that the positive “adoption behavior” for “online grocery shopping” among
the “older consumers” was more out of necessity [7] and less due to the service con-
venience in “e-commerce” environments [30].
Figure 6 depicts the continued growth of “internet shopping”, “electronic com-
merce,” and “retailing” between 2005 and 2009, alongside the emergence of new
research areas, including “online supermarkets”, “consumer purchase decisions,”
and “customer retention”. OGS was explored in more detail across various contexts
at the country level like “United Kingdom” [71], “China” [72] and “South Africa”
[73].
Figure 7 illustrates the simultaneous growth of “e-commerce” and “online gro-
cery shopping” in full swing between 2010 and 2014. This includes a noteworthy
proliferation of research from the previous decade on the role of factors like “internet
Fig. 5 OGS research between 2000 and 2004
13
A. Shroff et al.
marketing”, “customized promotions,” and “delivery fee” on “buying behaviour”,

“consumer attributes”, “consumer loyalty,” and “transformative consumer research”.
In this period, the analysis shows that OGS research was mainly focused on the
“shopping practices” of consumers in “online shopping store” using the “click-
stream data” from “smart shopping carts” and “real-time spending feedback”.
Figure 8 exhibits the continued growth of “online shopping” and “grocery shop-
ping” between 2015 and 2019 due to the increased alignment of consumers towards
“multichannel shopping”. In response, the retailers focused on enabling “multi-
channel retailing” through simultaneous “in-store shopping” and “online grocery
retail”. “Sustainability” practices like reduction of “food waste” and efficient “e-gro-
cery delivery routing” took center stage in this 5 year period which can be attrib-
uted to the launch of sustainable development goals (SDGs) in 2015. Furthermore,
13
researchers started applying quantitative techniques in OGS research like “inte-

grated choice and latent variable models”, “discrete choice modeling,” and “panel
data” regression to explore the effects of “price-promotion” and “competition” on
“multichannel retailers”.
In the period between 2020 and 2023 (see Fig. 9), “online shopping” of gro-
ceries exploded due to the emergence of “COVID-19” “pandemic”. This led to an
increased inclination of consumers towards “grocery delivery”, “home delivery,”
and “click and collect” business models of OGS. Multiple studies started exploring
the changes in “consumer behavior”, “shopping behaviour”, “technology adoption”,
and “consumer satisfaction” towards OGS using theories like the “theory of planned
behaviour” and “technology adoption model”. Further, there is also a stream of stud-
ies that attributed “situational factors” to be the prime reason for consumers shifting
to OGS and questioned the future of “electronic commerce” and “online grocery” as
the new normal approaches in the post-covid era.
Overall, the word-cloud analysis showed that “grocery shopping”, “e-commerce”,
“multichannel retailing,” and “consumer behaviour” are the most frequently used
13
A. Shroff et al.
keywords in all five time periods. This indicates that the central focus of OGS litera-
ture is on exploring the consumers’ behaviour towards grocery shopping, their inten-
tion to purchase groceries online, and retailer’s benefits on opting for multichannel
(both offline and online) selling of groceries.
5 Keyword co‑occurrence analysis
We utilized a keyword co-occurrence analysis to create a network of the fundamen-

tal themes shaping the intellectual structure of OGS research. Using all the key-
words from 145 articles, we identified nine thematic clusters, each representing a
theme directed towards a topic of interest in OGS research. The graphical visualiza-
tion of clusters generated through R software is illustrated in Fig. 10.
Table 4 summarizes the nine clusters with dominant keywords, namely, consumer
response to OGS (cluster 1), multichannel grocery shopping dynamics (cluster 2),
consumer perspective in OGS (cluster 3), OGS adoption and its risks (cluster 4),
online vs. offline grocery shopping (cluster 5), mobile shopping and OGS opera-
tions (cluster 6), exploring consumer experiences in OGS (cluster 7), consumer val-
ues and OGS (cluster 8), trends in OGS adoption (cluster 9). Then, we conducted a
detailed content analysis of the top 5 highly cited articles from each cluster, forming
our understanding of existing OGS research through an integrated conceptual frame-
work in Sect. 5. We also identified directions for future research on OGS in Sect. 6.
Fig. 10 Visualization of clusters using R software
13
Table 4 A summary of major clusters in OGS research
Author Title Year Journal TC
Cluster 1: Consumer Response to OGS

Morganosky M.A.; Cude B.J Consumer response to online grocery shopping 2000 International Journal of Retail & Distribution 244
Management
Schmid B.; Axhausen K.W In-store or online shopping of search and experi- 2019 Journal of Choice Modelling 48
ence goods: A hybrid choice approach
Bjørgen A.; Bjerkan K.Y.; Hjelkrem O.A E-groceries: Sustainable last mile distribution in 2021 Research in Transportation Economics 43
city planning
Suel E.; Polak J.W Development of joint models for channel, store, 2017 Transportation Research Part A: Policy and 42
and travel mode choice: Grocery shopping in Practice
London
Saphores J.-D.; Xu L E-shopping changes and the state of E-grocery 2021 Research in Transportation Economics 35
shopping in the US—Evidence from national
travel and time use surveys
Cluster 2: Multichannel grocery shopping dynamics
Melis K.; Campo K.; Breugelmans E.; Lamey L The Impact of the Multichannel Retail Mix on 2015 Journal of Retailing 203
Online Store Choice: Does Online Experience

Matter?
Chintagunta P.K.; Chu J.; Cebollada J Quantifying transaction costs in online/offline 2012 Marketing Science 159
grocery channel choice
Chu J.; Arce-Urriza M.; Cebollada-Calvo J.-J.; An Empirical Analysis of Shopping Behavior 2010 Journal of Interactive Marketing 121
Chintagunta P.K Across Online and Offline Channels for Grocery
Products: The Moderating Effects of Household
and Product Characteristics
Chu J.; Chintagunta P.; Cebollada J A comparison of within-household price sensitivity 2008 Marketing Science 93
across online and offline channels
Huyghe E.; Verstraeten J.; Geuens M.; Van Kerck- Clicks as a healthy alternative to bricks: How 2017 Journal of Marketing Research 83
hove A online grocery shopping reduces vice purchases
13
Table 4 (continued)
Cluster 3: Consumer Perspective in OGS
13
Hand C.; Riley F.D.; Harris P.; Singh J.; Rettie R Online grocery shopping: The influence of situ- 2009 European Journal of Marketing 148
ational factors
Ramus K.; Nielsen N.A Online grocery retailing: What do consumers 2005 Internet Research 141
think?
Driediger F.; Bhatiasevi V Online grocery shopping in Thailand: Consumer 2019 Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 109
acceptance and usage behavior
Singh R.; Rosengren S Why do online grocery shoppers switch? An 2020 Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 56
empirical investigation of drivers of switching in
online grocery
Anshu K.; Gaur L.; Singh G Impact of customer experience on attitude and 2022 Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 42
repurchase intention in online grocery retailing:
A moderation mechanism of value Co-creation
Cluster 4: OGS adoption and its risks
Mortimer G.; Fazal e Hasan S.; Andrews L.; Online grocery shopping: the impact of shopping 2016 International Review of Retail, Distribution and 99
Martin J frequency on perceived risk Consumer Research
Van Droogenbroeck E.; Van Hove L Adoption of Online Grocery Shopping: Personal or 2017 Journal of Internet Commerce 44
Household Characteristics?
Piroth P.; Ritter M.S.; Rueger-Muck E Online grocery shopping adoption: do personality 2020 British Food Journal 28
traits matter?
Loketkrawee P.; Bhatiasevi V Elucidating the Behavior of Consumers toward 2018 Journal of Internet Commerce 26
Online Grocery Shopping: The Role of Shopping
Orientation
Frank D.-A.; Peschel A.O Sweetening the Deal: The Ingredients that Drive 2020 Journal of Food Products Marketing 23
Consumer Adoption of Online Grocery Shopping
A. Shroff et al.
Table 4 (continued)
Cluster 5: Online vs. Offline grocery shopping

Vrechopoulos A.P.; O’Keefe R.M.; Doukidis G.I.; Virtual store layout: An experimental comparison 2004 Journal of Retailing 183
Siomkos G.J in the context of grocery retail
de Bellis E.; Venkataramani Johar G Autonomous Shopping Systems: Identifying and 2020 Journal of Retailing 81
Overcoming Barriers to Consumer Adoption
Huang Y.; Oppewal H Why consumers hesitate to shop online: An experi- 2006 International Journal of Retail and Distribution 77
mental choice analysis of grocery shopping and Management
the role of delivery fees
Harris P.; Dall’Olmo Riley F.; Riley D.; Hand C Online and store patronage: a typology of grocery 2017 International Journal of Retail and Distribution 61
shoppers Management
Singh R Why do online grocery shoppers switch or stay? 2019 International Journal of Retail and Distribution 49
An exploratory analysis of consumers’ response Management
to online grocery shopping experience
Cluster 6: Mobile shopping and OGS operations
Wang R.J.H.; Malthouse E.C.; Krishnamurthi L On the Go: How Mobile Shopping Affects Cus- 2015 Journal of Retailing 359
tomer Purchase Behavior

Zissis D.; Aktas E.; Bourlakis M Collaboration in urban distribution of online 2018 International Journal of Logistics Management 35
grocery orders
Kühn F.; Lichters M.; Krey N The touchy issue of produce: Need for touch in 2020 Journal of Business Research 21
online grocery retailing
Arbex Valle C.; Beasley J.E Order batching using an approximation for the 2020 European Journal of Operational Research 15
distance travelled by pickers
Delasay M.; Jain A.; Kumar S Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on grocery 2022 Production and Operations Management 9
retail operations: An analytical model
13
Table 4 (continued)
Cluster 7: Exploring consumer experiences in OGS
13
Elms J.; Tinson J Consumer vulnerability and the transformative 2012 Journal of Marketing Management 41
potential of Internet shopping: An exploratory
case study
Burningham K.; Venn S.; Christie I.; Jackson T.; New motherhood: A moment of change in every- 2014 Young Consumers 36
Gatersleben B day shopping practices?
Berg J.; Henriksson M In search of the ‘good life’: Understanding online 2020 Journal of Transport Geography 20
grocery shopping and everyday mobility as social
practices
de Kervenoael R.; Yanık S.; Bozkaya B.; Palmer Trading-up on unmet expectations? Evaluating 2016 International Journal of Logistics Research and 17
M.; Hallsworth A consumers’ expectations in online premium Applications
grocery shopping logistics
Blitstein J.L.; Frentz F.; Jilcott Pitts S.B A Mixed-method Examination of Reported Ben- 2020 Journal of Food Products Marketing 10
efits of Online Grocery Shopping in the United
States and Germany: Is Health a Factor?
Cluster 8: Consumer Values and OGS
Hansen T Consumer values, the theory of planned behaviour 2008 International Journal of Consumer Studies 177
and online grocery shopping
Anckar B.; Walden P.; Jelassi T Creating customer value in online grocery shop- 2002 International Journal of Retail & Distribution 49
ping Management
Desrochers C.; Léger P.-M.; Fredette M.; Mirho- The arithmetic complexity of online grocery shop- 2019 Industrial Management and Data Systems 11
seini S.; Sénécal S ping: the moderating role of product pictures
Mirhoseini M.; Pagé S.-A.; Léger P.-M.; Sénécal S What deters online grocery shopping? Investigating 2021 Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic 9
the effect of arithmetic complexity and product Commerce Research
type on user satisfaction
A. Shroff et al.
Table 4 (continued)
Kim H Use of mobile grocery shopping application: Moti- 2021 Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic 8
vation and decision-making process among south Commerce Research
korean consumers
Cluster 9: Trends in OGS adoption
Hansen T Consumer adoption of online grocery buying: A 2005 International Journal of Retail & Distribution 104
discriminant analysis Management
Li J.; Hallsworth A.G.; Coca-Stefaniak J.A Changing Grocery Shopping Behaviours 2020 Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 96
Among Chinese Consumers At The Outset Of
The COVID-19 Outbreak
Geuens M.; Brengman M.; S’Jegers R Food retailing, now and in the future. A consumer 2003 Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 68
perspective
Goethals F.; Leclercq-Vandelannoitte A.; Tütüncü French consumers’ perceptions of the unattended 2012 Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 43
Y delivery model for e-grocery retailing
Seitz C.; Pokrivčák J.; Tóth M.; Plevný M Online grocery retailing in Germany: an explora- 2017 Journal of Business Economics and Management 36
tive analysis
13
A. Shroff et al.
ANTECEDENTS
MODERATORS OUTCOMES
Intrinsic factors
Type of grocery item
Diet requirement
Attitude
Healthfulness
Motivation Purchase / Repurchase
Choice
Trust intention
Convenience
E-satisfaction
Product reviews
Technology Acceptance
Peer pressure
Personalized recommendations
Willingness to pay
Demographic factors - gender, age, income
Purchase frequency
Shopping orientation ONLINE
GROCERY Purchase decision
Extrinsic factors SHOPPING
Pricing and discounts

Transaction cost
Delivery fees
Mode of payment
Advertising MEDIATORS Post-purchase behavior
Promotions
On-time deliveries Mental effort
Sustainability measures Search cost
Social media influence Availability of alternatives
App / Website environment Prior shopping experience
Inventory level/control
Perceived risk
Fig. 11 An integrated conceptual framework of OGS research
6 Discussion
In this section, we synthesize the antecedents, mediators, moderators and conse-

quences of OGS studied in the extant literature and propose an integrated conceptual
framework in Fig. 11, described next.
6.1 Antecedents and outcomes of OGS
Antecedents are the factors that can potentially promote or inhibit OGS behavior
among consumers. The literature shows that a wide range of intrinsic and extrin-
sic factors influence OGS behavior. For example, studies suggest that demographic
factors such as age [74], gender [75] and income [76] impact the OGS behavior of
individuals. At an intrinsic level, other factors like attitude [32, 77], motivation [78],
trust [49], e-satisfaction [79], technology acceptance [43], and willingness to pay
[80] have been analyzed critically in the extant research. In the expanse of ante-
cedents, a series of studies found that financial factors like pricing [55, 81], dis-
counts [41], delivery fee [51], transaction cost [82], and advertising and promotions
[83] also determine the OGS shopping behavior among consumers. The information
available on the website or the mobile application [84] and the sustainability meas-
ures undertaken for packaging and deliveries are also likely to positively impact the
online purchase of groceries [85, 86]. In the context of outcomes, the literature pro-
vides evidence that the OGS positively impacts consumers’ purchase/re-purchase
intentions and purchase decisions. This can be attributed to factors like on-time
deliveries, proper packaging, improved service level and e-satisfaction, as discussed
in the clusters [77, 84]. OGS also impacts post-purchase behavior and promotes
repeat purchases from consumers through personalized recommendations and sav-
ing their payment methods leading to a less time-taking and hassle-free experience
13
[60, 61]. Further, researchers have found evidence of a positive spillover effect of
online grocery purchases on sales through offline channels like stores and supermar-
kets, incentivizing the latter to operate in a multichannel retailing environment [44,
87]. Some studies have also explored the positive impact of the sustainable logis-
tics models implemented by online retailers to reduce the economic, environmental
and social costs on the grocery purchase decisions of consumers [88]. Therefore,
these studies suggest that various intrinsic and extrinsic factors can either facilitate,
impede, or even predict the level of OGS behavior among consumers.
6.2 Moderators and mediators of OGS
Moderators are the factors that affect the strength and direction of the relationship
between OGS and its outcomes, while mediators include the factors that primarily
explain the existence of this relationship. A study in the early 2000s found that OGS
is associated with purchasing behavior via the choice and convenience of grocery
shopping enabled through online channels [6]. Choice is defined as the variety of
options available for online orders, while convenience is expressed in terms of facili-
ties, digital payments and time-specific home deliveries, which positively affect the
purchase intentions of the consumers [3]. Recently, another study analyzed the effect
of OGS on the healthfulness of grocery purchases via factors like the type of gro-
cery item, nutrition and diet requirements of the individuals [89]. In a study involv-
ing South Korean consumers, researchers found evidence that word-of-mouth of
other consumers on OGS leads to peer pressure and may positively influence repur-
chase intentions and post-purchase behavior [90]. Some mediating variables used
to study the OGS behavior of the consumers include the mental effort required for
searching the desired products in the application [79], availability of alternate buy-
ing channels [91], prior shopping experience [92] and the timely order fulfillment
of the essential grocery items [93]. Another study examined the mediating role of
perceived risk between trust and repurchase intention in the context of OGS [94]. In
sum, these studies suggest that the relationship between OGS and its outcomes, like
purchase intentions, decisions and post-purchase behavior, is moderated and medi-
ated by various factors at the consumer level.
7 Summary and future research directions (RQ 5)
To summarize the findings of this review, we utilize the comprehensive TCCM

framework developed in Fig. 2. We elaborate further with four sub-sections sequen-
tially structured to understand the Theories, outline the Contexts, examine the Char-
acteristics and present the research Methods, thus laying out possible directions for
future research on OGS.
13
A. Shroff et al.
7.1 Theory
This review has brought to light that researchers have employed various theoreti-
cal frameworks in their study of OGS (see Table 1). However, close to 52% of the
studies in our corpus have not utilized the support of any theoretical framework.
Researchers should incline themselves to perform theory-driven work to provide a
concrete foundation for their findings. Another observation is that most studies have
used a single theory to arrive at their findings, to which we suggest a combination
of theories that can better explain OGS behavior. Apart from the Theory of planned
behavior, the Theory of reasoned action presents a viable alternative framework that
can be widely utilized to elucidate the interplay between consumer behavior, pur-
chase intentions, and post-purchase behaviors concerning online grocery sales [50,
52, 53].
Furthermore, the Behavioral control theory can explain the possible hindrances
to implementing OGS and suggest strategies to overcome them, thereby increas-
ing the impact of OGS in the retail industry [32, 90]. It is recommended to utilize
the risk theory in evaluating the cost and benefits associated with online grocery
purchases to gain a deeper insight into consumers who weigh the convenience of
home delivery against the affordability of in-store shopping. The review reveals a
restricted usage of theories in the literature, such as the uses and gratification theory
[90], technology adoption model and continuance theory [95], and innovation-dif-
fusion theory [40]. In the future, it is recommended that research scholars employ
diverse theoretical frameworks from relevant disciplines to emphasize innovative
applications of OGS, as outlined in Table 5.
7.2 Context
In terms of context, most studies have concentrated on data obtained from a particu-
lar geographical locale, thereby constraining the extent to which the findings can
apply to other settings. The corpus under analysis encompassed data collected from
nearly 27 countries to comprehend diverse facets of OGS. The studies analyzed in
this research were derived from data originating from the United States of America
[66, 97], the United Kingdom [63, 64], and Germany [12, 80], which accounted for
17.24%, 16.55%, and 8.28% of the total corpus, respectively. The outcomes of the
study could potentially be impacted by socio-demographic variables unique to the
countries under investigation, such as the level of technology adoption [98], popula-
tion density [99], and gender-specific participation in OGS [100]. This highlights
a significant research void concerning the involvement of developing and underde-
veloped economies in comprehending OGS behavior. Furthermore, the responses of
participants in various studies have been observed to exhibit a bias, which is primar-
ily attributed to the overrepresentation of adult females owing to their frequent utili-
zation of OGS platforms [40]. Consequently, there exists a dearth of studies focused
on other cohorts of consumers, such as adult males and elderly individuals. Hence,
the results obtained may possess limited validity for specific age cohorts, cultural
backgrounds, and socio-economic strata, thereby necessitating further investigation.
13
Table 5 Future research directions based on Theory

Potential theoretical framework Exemplar research questions with relevant work
Theory of planned behavior What impact do same-day deliveries have on consumers’ intention
to shop for groceries online? [33]
What framework can be used to explain the inconsistencies between
purchase intention and consumers’ purchase behavior in OGS?
[96]
Social practice theory How does geographical boundary and nationality affect the behav-
ior of consumers towards OGS? [10]
How OGS affects the accessibility to products and services for
people who live in sparsely populated areas? [37]
Technology acceptance model What change in the shopping orientation of consumers change can
be anticipated with perishable and non-perishable groceries? [49]
How does the OGS intention of the consumers change depending
on the various delivery modes offered by the retailers/supermar-
kets? [39]
Theory of reasoned action What frameworks can explain the differential effects of consumers
staying in metro and non-metro cities on their OGS behavior?
[50]
What models can be used to predict the effect of delivery fees on
the consumers’ attitude towards OGS? [53]
Choice theory How to measure the perceived risk of online payment frauds on
adopting OGS across various geographies? [54]
Economic theory What is the impact of introducing bundling of products and
quantity variations in the online channel compared to the offline
channel on OGS? [55]
Grounded theory How do demographic factors like the age and gender of the children
affect the OGS practices of the parents? [57]
Random utility theory What is the policy-level implication of the increasing e-grocery
market share on the last mile logistics and urban freight distribu-
tion? [60]
Stimulus-organism-response theory What is the effect of the boundary condition, like the attractiveness
of the webpage and online environment, on the OGS behavior?
[61]
Unified theory of acceptance of Understanding the various trigger points for the transition of
the use of technology (UTAUT) consumers in O2O grocery shopping apart from the established
model factors like technology and convenience. [62]
Various business models of OGS are customized to meet the specific requirements
of distinct consumer segments, such as online supermarkets, click-and-collect stores,
two-sided platforms, and others. Several grocery brands have also introduced their
private labels in addition to national brands to compete for shelf space in physical
supermarkets and online orders [101]. Both these developments in the OGS business
warrant further investigation as they have not yet been examined in academic litera-
ture. Researchers can further investigate these topics to gain a comprehensive under-
standing of consumer behavior, market dynamics, and strategies for online grocery
retailers. Based on the above research gaps, we propose some guiding research ques-
tions encompassing contexts in Table 6.
13
A. Shroff et al.
Table 6 Future research directions based on Context

Potential research context Exemplar research questions with relevant work
Socio-economic demography What barriers do specific socio-economic groups face in accessing and
utilizing the services of OGS platforms? [102]
Emerging economies How does the socio-cultural context of emerging economies influence
consumer behavior and preferences in OGS? [103]
What are the implications of OGS for the local economy and employment
in emerging markets? [17, 59]
Repurchase intention and What are the effective strategies online grocery retailers use to encourage
post-purchase behavior repeat purchases and positive post-purchase behaviors? [53]
Business models in OGS How do marketplace, direct-to-consumer, and hybrid models compare
regarding customer satisfaction and market penetration in OGS? [43]
How does the co-existence of various business models in OGS impact the
supply chain, logistics, and delivery of groceries? [32, 66]
What framework can measure the impact of growing OGS market seg-
ments and business models on the triple bottom line – environmental,
economic and social? [88]
Private and national brands What factors influence consumers’ preferences for private labels versus
national brands in OGS? [104]
How do private labels’ quality perception, pricing, and brand image com-
pare to national brands in the context of OGS? [101]
7.3 Characteristics
With regard to characteristics, OGS platforms primarily emphasize enhancing

service quality as opposed to offline channels [105]. The experiential aspect of
the quality of grocery products ordered online is limited as it does not undergo
consumer approval through physical inspection before purchase [79]. Hence, the
frequency of reordering and post-purchase behavior is predominantly contingent
upon the product and service quality facilitated by the OGS platforms. Hassle-
free online payments are a significant service quality determining factor for con-
sumers when ordering online [19]. The perceived risk of fraudulent cyber activity
influences the consumer experience of online payment gateways [75]. The phe-
nomenon of offline consumers transitioning to online ordering is also significantly
influenced by peer reviews and word-of-mouth communication [19, 106]. Further,
the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on consumers transitioning from tradi-
tional brick-and-mortar retail to e-commerce channels is a significant factor that
warrants attention [13, 60]. Questions may arise on the willingness of consumers
to continue ordering online or return to offline purchases in the emerging new
normal times, which needs in-depth inquiry. Researchers should endeavor to gain
insights into consumer behavior, operational challenges, technological advance-
ments, sustainability considerations, and the overall transformation of the OGS in
response to the pandemic. Drawing from the above premise, we present a set of
guiding future research inquiries encompassing various characteristics in Table 7.
13
Table 7 Future research directions based on Characteristics

Potential research characteristics Exemplar research questions with relevant work
Perceived risk of online payments How does consumers’ perception of security and privacy risks
in online payment systems impact their willingness to make
online grocery purchases? [75]
What strategies can online grocery retailers employ to mitigate
consumers’ perceived risk of online payments and increase
their trust? [19]
Trust on the website or online platform How do the design and user interface of OGS websites/plat-
forms influence consumers’ trust? [49]
What strategies can online grocery retailers employ to enhance
consumers’ trust in their website, such as trust seals, cus-
tomer reviews, or secure payment symbols? [79]
Perceived service quality of online vs. How do consumers evaluate service quality dimensions, such
offline grocery shopping as responsiveness, reliability, and tangibility, in the context of
OGS compared to traditional offline grocery shopping? [107]
What role do the latent factors of personalization, customiza-
tion and recommendation play in enhancing service quality
for consumers in OGS? [108]
COVID-19 and the new normal How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted the supply chain
and logistics of OGS? What challenges do retailers face in
meeting the increased demand and ensuring timely delivery?
[17, 97]
How has the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the role of
technology, such as artificial intelligence, machine learning,
or robotics, in OGS? [109]
How do consumers perceive the sustainability and environ-
mental impact of OGS in the context of the new normal
post-COVID-19? [110]
7.4 Method
As discussed in Sect. 3.3, most studies have used survey and questionnaire meth-
ods followed by archival and experimental methods to collect the data. Hence,
we suggest that authors contemplate alternative methodologies, such as qualita-
tive inquiry [98] or mixed-method design [111], to undertake future research. A
mixed-method approach would be advantageous as it would enable the researcher
to identify the underlying factors that influence the OGS behavior without rely-
ing solely on an established scale. Qualitative research methods like ethnography
[58], netnography [112], semi-structured interviews [98] and focused group dis-
cussions [30] can be employed to identify the factors, followed by a quantitative
method to analyze and validate the results of the qualitative study, resulting in a
holistic mixed-method study. Furthermore, a longitudinal investigation like [107]
could be conducted to assess the evolution of consumers’ sentiments on OGS
adoption over time and to predict the critical factors that influence consumer pur-
chase intention in various OGS business models. For the studies included in our
corpus, the data analysis process involved utilizing several techniques such as
13
A. Shroff et al.
Table 8 Future research directions based on Methods

Potential research methods Exemplar research questions with relevant work
Qualitative study Call for interviews (semi-structured and structured) and focused group dis-
cussions to collect primary data instead of surveys/questionnaires [6, 71]
Future researchers should employ diverse qualitative methodologies such as
content analysis, coding or text mining, contingent upon the objective of
the OGS research [84]
Quantitative study Researchers should utilize mathematical modeling techniques like game
theory and optimization to capture the aspect of competition in the OGS
market [66, 70]
Other techniques like logistic regression, multinomial logit modeling and
stochastic modeling can be used to model the demand and supply uncer-
tainty in the OGS market [60, 115]
Mixed-method study Researchers can use a mixed method approach to identify the relevant fac-
tors using the qualitative lens and validate those factors in the context of
OGS through the quantitative study [81, 92]
correlation [45], regression [74, 110], and tests of differences, including ANOVA
[62], t-test [113], and chi-square test [53, 94]. Finally, very few studies have used
analytical and mathematical modeling techniques like multinomial logit modeling
[91], discrete choice modeling [59], game theory [88], and estimation models
[114] to research OGS. Through this review, we stress using mathematical tech-
niques to model the various aspects of competition like online vs. offline chan-
nel profits, market share of private and national brands, demand uncertainty, or
demand–supply mismatch. (Table 8)
8 Conclusion
In this review study, we propose a mixed-method approach to present a systematic

literature review and bibliometric analysis of OGS literature, which has evolved
significantly in the last two decades. The evolution of OGS can be primarily
attributed to technological advancements like smartphone penetration, internet
accessibility and the latent need of consumers for choice and convenience. To the
best of our knowledge, this review is the first attempt to consolidate the findings
of highly scattered online consumer shopping literature with a singular focus on
grocery shopping online. The objective of this review is to examine the factors
pertinent to developing an understanding of the OGS scholarship and practice
using the well-established TCCM framework. We highlight the publication trends
through bibliometric analysis—top journals, authors and articles in OGS. Using a
keyword co-occurrence analysis and a word-cloud analysis, we capture the evolu-
tion of topics relevant to OGS and identify nine thematic clusters informing the
knowledge foundations of OGS research. We also present an integrated concep-
tual framework by synthesizing the antecedents of OGS and the factors mediat-
ing and moderating its relationship with the outcomes, like purchase/repurchase
intention, purchase decision and post-purchase behavior. Finally, we outline
13
several future research directions drawing upon Theories, Contexts, Character-

istics, and Methods that will serve as a guiding light for researchers to undertake
novel explorations and advance the knowledge in the field of OGS.
Although we attempted to cover as much ground as possible, some limitations
are worth considering. Firstly, we have considered articles published in ABDC
B and above category journals, which might have rendered some articles out of
scope. However, the effects of this exclusion may be limited due to the high num-
ber of articles published, as is the case with OGS literature. Secondly, the cor-
pus included only peer-reviewed studies written in English under business and
management, which may have limited the scope of the study, as pointed out by
[116]. Thirdly, even though the search has taken into account all relevant stud-
ies, searching databases other than Scopus and Web of Science can yield addi-
tional results, as mentioned in [18]. Finally, our multi-method review combines
the traits of bibliometric analysis and SLR but misses out on the merits of per-
forming a meta-analysis that can estimate the direction and strength of the inter-
action effects between OGS and its determinants [21]. Thus, we encourage future
research aiming to conduct a review on OGS to consider using meta-analysis as
the primary methodology with data encompassing all databases and irrespective
of any filtration criteria mentioned above as limitations.
Overall, this study adds to the body of knowledge regarding offline to online
(O2O) business models, particularly with a singular focus on OGS. The find-
ings of this study have financial and operational implications for supermarkets
planning to operate in a dual channel manner, i.e., online channels in addition
to their offline businesses. This analysis of the OGS literature will assist super-
market owners in utilizing online channels to effectively increase sales in their
brick-and-mortar locations and manage the perceived risk of online channels on
offline sales. Furthermore, the present study outlines the implications that can
assist practitioners in effectively managing the diverse issues and challenges hin-
dering the growth of the OGS industry. In sum, this review study should act as
a starting point for future researchers to build a holistic understanding of OGS,
advance OGS research, and offer significant implications for retail managers and
practitioners.
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10660-023-09761-x.
Acknowledgements This study was partially funded by UNIDCOM under a Grant by the Fundação para
a Ciência e a Tecnologia (UIDB/DES/00711/2020) attributed to UNIDCOM/IADE – Unidade de Investi-
gação em Design e Comunicação, Lisbon, Portugal.
Declarations
Conflict of interest On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of
interest.
13
A. Shroff et al.
References
1. Bernstein, F., DeCroix, G. A., & Keskin, N. B. (2021). Competition between two-sided platforms
under demand and supply congestion effects. Manufacturing and Service Operations Management,
23(5), 1043–1061. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2020.0866
2. Mody, M. A., Hanks, L., & Cheng, M. (2021). Sharing economy research in hospitality and tour-
ism: A critical review using bibliometric analysis, content analysis and a quantitative systematic
literature review. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 33(5), 1711–
1745. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-12-2020-1457
3. Shroff, A., Shah, B. J., & Gajjar, H. (2022). Online food delivery research: A systematic litera-
ture review. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 34(8), 2852–2883.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2021-1273
4. Jen-Hui Wang, R., Malthouse, E. C., & Krishnamurthi, L. (2015). On the go: How mobile shop-
ping affects customer purchase behavior. Journal of Retailing, 91(2), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jretai.2015.01.002
5. Hui, T. K., & Wan, D. (2009). Who are the online grocers? Service Industries Journal, 29(11),
1479–1489. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060902793334
6. Ramus, K., & Nielsen, N. A. (2005). Online grocery retailing: What do consumers think? Internet
Research. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240510602726
7. Anckar, B., Walden, P., & Jelassi, T. (2002). Creating customer value in online grocery shopping.
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 30(4), 211–220. https://doi.org/10.
1108/09590550210423681
8. Kaufman-Scarborough, C., & Lindquist, J. D. (2002). E-shopping in a multiple channel environ-
ment. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 19(4), 333–350. https://doi.org/10.1108/073637602104336
45
9. Shrivastava, A. (2021). Food-delivery commissions in India among the highest globally. The CapT-
able. Retrieved August 29, 2022, from https://the-captable.com/2021/05/food-delivery-commi
ssions-india-among-highest-swiggy-zomato/.
10. Hansen, T. (2005). Consumer adoption of online grocery buying: A discriminant analysis. Inter-
national Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 33(2), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1108/
09590550510581449
11. Breugelmans, E., & Campo, K. (2016). Cross-channel effects of price promotions: An empirical
analysis of the multi-channel grocery retail sector. Journal of Retailing, 92, 333–351. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jretai.2016.02.003
12. Gruntkowski, L. M., & Martinez, L. F. (2022). Online grocery shopping in Germany: Assessing
the impact of COVID-19. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research,
17(3), 984–1002. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer17030050
13. Brüggemann, P., & Olbrich, R. (2022). The impact of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on offline
and online grocery shopping: New normal or old habits? Electronic Commerce Research. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10660-022-09658-1
14. Edible grocery global sales by channel 2021–2026|Statista. (2022). Retrieved May 24, 2023, from
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1268769/global-edible-g rocer y-store-based-and-e-comme
rce-sales/.
15. Global online food delivery market size 2027|Statista. (2023). Retrieved May 24, 2023, from
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1170631/online-food-delivery-market-size-worldwide/.
16. Online food delivery users worldwide 2017–2027|Statista. (2023). Retrieved May 24, 2023, from
https://www.statista.com/forecasts/891088/online-food-delivery-users-by-segment-worldwide.
17. Martinez, L. F., Pauwels, K., & Brüggemann, P. (2023). Call for papers on online grocery shop-
ping—current and future challenges and opportunities. Electronic Commerce Research. Retrieved
May 24, 2023, from https://www.springer.com/journal/10660/updates/23919876.
18. Paul, J., Lim, W. M., O’Cass, A., Hao, A. W., & Bresciani, S. (2021). Scientific procedures and
rationales for systematic literature reviews (SPAR-4-SLR). International Journal of Consumer
Studies, 45(4), O1–O16. https://doi.org/10.1111/IJCS.12695
19. Singh, K., & Basu, R. (2023). Online consumer shopping behaviour: A review and research
agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 47(3), 815–851. https://doi.org/10.1111/IJCS.
12899
13
20. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a biblio-
metric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
21. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping
analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
22. Kumar, S., Lim, W. M., Pandey, N., & Christopher Westland, J. (2021). 20 years of electronic
commerce research. Electronic Commerce Research, 21(1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10660-021-09464-1
23. Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Ali, F. (2022). Advancing knowledge through literature reviews: ‘what’,
‘why’, and ‘how to contribute.’ Service Industries Journal, 42(7–8), 481–513. https://doi.org/10.
1080/02642069.2022.2047941
24. Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines.
Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
25. Kraus, S., Breier, M., Lim, W. M., Dabić, M., Kumar, S., Kanbach, D., & Ferreira, J. J. (2022).
Literature reviews as independent studies: Guidelines for academic practice. Review of Managerial
Science, 16(8), 2577–2595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00588-8
26. Palmatier, R. W., Houston, M. B., & Hulland, J. (2018). Review articles: Purpose, process, and
structure. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11747-017-0563-4
27. Lim, W. M., Yap, S. F., & Makkar, M. (2021). Home sharing in marketing and tourism at a tipping
point: What do we know, how do we know, and where should we be heading? Journal of Business
Research, 122, 534–566. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2020.08.051
28. Jebarajakirthy, C., Maseeh, H. I., Morshed, Z., Shankar, A., Arli, D., & Pentecost, R. (2021).
Mobile advertising: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. International Jour-
nal of Consumer Studies, 45(6), 1258–1291. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12728
29. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Pandey, N., Pandey, N., & Mishra, A. (2021). Mapping the electronic word-
of-mouth (eWOM) research: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis. Journal of Business
Research, 135(July), 758–773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.07.015
30. Davis, R., Buchanan-Oliver, M., & Brodie, R. J. (2000). Retail service branding in electronic-com-
merce environments. Journal of Service Research, 3(2), 178–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/10946
7050032006
31. Morganosky, M. A., & Cude, B. J. (2000). Consumer response to online grocery shopping. Inter-
09590550010306737
32. Brand, C., Schwanen, T., & Anable, J. (2020). Online omnivores or Willing but struggling? Iden-
tifying online grocery shopping behavior segments using attitude theory. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETCONSER.2020.102195
33. Thomas-Francois, K., Jo, W. M., Somogyi, S., Li, Q., & Nixon, A. (2023). Virtual grocery shop-
ping intention: an application of the model of goal-directed behaviour. British Food Journal.
https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-06-2022-0510
34. Piroth, P., Ritter, M. S., & Rueger-Muck, E. (2020). Online grocery shopping adoption: Do
personality traits matter? British Food Journal, 122(3), 957–975. https://doi.org/10.1108/
BFJ-08-2019-0631
35. Stenius, M., & Eriksson, N. (2022). What beliefs underlie decisions to buy groceries online? Inter-
national Journal of Consumer Studies, 47(3), 922–935. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12874
36. Hansson, L., Holmberg, U., Post, A., Hansson, L., & Holmberg, U. (2022). Reorganising grocery
shopping practices—the case of elderly consumers. The International Review of Retail, Distribu-
tion and Consumer Research, 32(4), 351–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2022.2085137
37. Berg, J., & Henriksson, M. (2020). In search of the ‘good life’: Understanding online grocery
shopping and everyday mobility as social practices. Journal of Transport Geography, 83, 102633.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JTRANGEO.2020.102633
38. Driediger, F., & Bhatiasevi, V. (2019). Online grocery shopping in Thailand: Consumer acceptance
and usage behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 48, 224–237. https://doi.org/10.
1016/J.JRETCONSER.2019.02.005
39. Badenhop, A., & Frasquet, M. (2021). Online grocery shopping at multichannel supermarkets: the
impact of retailer brand equity. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 27(2), 89–104. https://doi.
org/10.1080/10454446.2021.1894296
13
A. Shroff et al.
40. Hood, N., Urquhart, R., Newing, A., & Heppenstall, A. (2020). Sociodemographic and spatial dis-
aggregation of e-commerce channel use in the grocery market in Great Britain. Journal of Retail-
ing and Consumer Services, 55, 102076. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETCONSER.2020.102076
41. Shi, S. W., Zhang, J., & Smith, R. H. (2014). Usage experience with decision aids and evolution of
online purchase behavior. Marketing Science, 33(6), 871–882. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2014.
0872
42. Yokoyama, N., Azuma, N., & Kim, W. (2023). The impact of e-retail usage on relative retail
patronage formation. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 51(13), 16–32.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-04-2022-0142
43. Ponte, D., & Sergi, D. (2023). E-grocery delivery channels: Acceptance of the click and collect
solutions. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.
2022.2163890
44. Weinstein, A. T., Anti, K., & Ochoa, E. (2022). World’s biggest retailer launches Walmart Plus and
customers have their say. Journal of Business Strategy, 43(6), 381–390. https://doi.org/10.1108/
JBS-07-2021-0133
45. Bezirgani, A., & Lachapelle, U. (2021). Online grocery shopping for the elderly in Quebec, Can-
ada: The role of mobility impediments and past online shopping experience. Travel Behaviour and
Society, 25, 133–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TBS.2021.07.001
46. Campbell, J. M., & Fairhurst, A. (2014). Billion dollar baby: Local foods and U.S. grocery. Journal
of Food Products Marketing, 20(3), 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2012.728985
47. De Kervenoael, R., Soopramanien, D., Hallsworth, A., & Elms, J. (2007). Personal privacy as a
positive experience of shopping an illustration through the case of online grocery shopping. Inter-
09590550710755958
48. Burningham, K., Venn, S., Christie, I., Jackson, T., & Gatersleben, B. (2014). New motherhood: A
moment of change in everyday shopping practices? Young Consumers, 15(3), 211–226. https://doi.
org/10.1108/YC-11-2013-00411
49. Loketkrawee, P., & Bhatiasevi, V. (2018). Elucidating the behavior of consumers toward online
grocery shopping: The role of shopping orientation. Journal of Internet Commerce, 17(4), 418–
445. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2018.1496390
50. Khan, A., & Khan, S. (2022). Purchasing grocery online in a nonmetro city: Investigating the role
of convenience, security, and variety. Journal of Public Affairs, 22(2), e2497. https://doi.org/10.
1002/PA.2497
51. Goethals, F., Leclercq-Vandelannoitte, A., & Tütüncü, Y. (2012). French consumers’ perceptions of
the unattended delivery model for e-grocery retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
19(1), 133–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2011.11.002
52. Cervellon, M. C., Sylvie, J., & Ngobo, P. V. (2015). Shopping orientations as antecedents to chan-
nel choice in the French grocery multichannel landscape. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Ser-
vices, 27, 31–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETCONSER.2015.06.008
53. Hansen, T. (2006). Determinants of consumers’ repeat online buying of groceries. International
Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 16(1), 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09593960500453617
54. Huyghe, E., Verstraeten, J., Geuens, M., & Van Kerckhove, A. (2017). Clicks as a healthy alter-
native to bricks: How online grocery shopping reduces vice purchases. Journal of Marketing
Research, 54(1), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.14.0490
55. Cebollada, J., Chu, Y., & Jiang, Z. (2019). Online category pricing at a multichannel grocery
retailer. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 46, 52–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2018.12.004
56. Chu, J., Chintagunta, P., & Cebollada, J. (2008). Research note-A comparison of within-household
price sensitivity across online and offline channels. Marketing Science, 27(2), 283–299. https://doi.
org/10.1287/mksc.1070.0288
57. Ayadi, K., & Muratore, I. (2020). Digimums’ online grocery shopping: The end of children’s influ-
ence? International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 48(4), 348–362. https://doi.
org/10.1108/IJRDM-09-2019-0291
58. Elms, J., & Tinson, J. (2012). Consumer vulnerability and the transformative potential of Internet
shopping: An exploratory case study. Journal of Marketing Management, 28(11–12), 1354–1376.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2012.691526
13
59. Rossolov, A. (2021). A last-mile delivery channel choice by E-shoppers: Assessing the potential
demand for automated parcel lockers. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applica-
tions. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2021.2005004
60. Maltese, I., Le Pira, M., Marcucci, E., Gatta, V., & Evangelinos, C. (2021). Grocery or @grocery:
A stated preference investigation in Rome and Milan. Research in Transportation Economics, 87,
101096. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RETREC.2021.101096
61. Kolesova, S., & Singh, R. (2019). One Vs. Many: who wins? An empirical investigation of online
product display. International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 29(3), 285–
305. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2019.1598465
62. Li, J., Hallsworth, A. G., & Coca-Stefaniak, J. A. (2020). Changing grocery shopping behaviours
among chinese consumers at the outset of the COVID-19 outbreak. Tijdschrift voor economische
en sociale geografie, 111(3), 574–583. https://doi.org/10.1111/TESG.12420
63. Singh, R., & Söderlund, M. (2022). There is no place like home: Home satisfaction and customer
satisfaction in online grocery retailing. International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer
Research, 32(4), 370–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2022.2073555
64. Motte-Baumvol, B., Belton Chevallier, L., & Bonin, O. (2022). Does e-grocery shopping reduce
CO2 emissions for working couples’ travel in England? International Journal of Sustainable Trans-
portation, 17(5), 515–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2022.2074326
65. Van Hove, L. (2022). Consumer characteristics and e-grocery services: The primacy of the
primary shopper. Electronic Commerce Research, 22(2), 241–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10660-022-09551-x
66. Dayarian, I., & Pazour, J. (2022). Crowdsourced order-fulfillment policies using in-store custom-
ers. Production and Operations Management, 31(11), 4075–4094. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.
13805
67. Samudio Lezcano, M., Harper, C. D., Nock, D., Lowry, G. V., & Michalek, J. J. (2023). Online
grocery delivery: Sustainable practice, or congestion generator and environmental burden? Trans-
portation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 119(March), 103722. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.trd.2023.103722
68. Neumayr, L., & Moosauer, C. (2021). How to induce sales of sustainable and organic food: The
case of a traffic light eco-label in online grocery shopping. Journal of Cleaner Production, 328,
129584. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2021.129584
69. Lim, B., Xie, Y., & Haruvy, E. (2022). The impact of mobile app adoption on physical and online
channels. Journal of Retailing, 98(3), 453–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETAI.2021.10.001
70. Pan, F., Pan, S., Zhou, W., & Fan, T. (2022). Perishable product bundling with logistics uncer-
tainty: Solution based on physical internet. International Journal of Production Economics,
244, 108386. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJPE.2021.108386
71. Hand, C., Riley, F. D. O., Harris, P., Singh, J., & Rettie, R. (2009). Online grocery shopping:
The influence of situational factors. European Journal of Marketing, 43(9), 1205–1219. https://
doi.org/10.1108/03090560910976447
72. McNeill, L. S. (2006). The influence of culture on retail sales promotion use in Chinese
supermarkets. Australasian Marketing Journal, 14(2), 34–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1441-
3582(06)70059-3
73. McClatchey, J., Cattell, K., & Michell, K. (2007). The impact of online retail grocery shopping
on retail space: A Cape Town case study. Facilities, 25(3–4), 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1108/
02632770710729700
74. Itani, O. S., & Hollebeek, L. D. (2020). Consumers’ health-locus-of-control and social distanc-
ing in pandemic-based e-tailing services. Journal of Services Marketing, 35(8), 1073–1091.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-10-2020-0410
75. Handayani, P. W., Nurahmawati, R. A., Pinem, A. A., & Azzahro, F. (2020). Switching inten-
tion from traditional to online groceries using the moderating effect of gender in Indonesia.
Journal of Food Products Marketing, 26(6), 425–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2020.
1792023
76. Van Droogenbroeck, E., & Van Hove, L. (2020). Intra-household task allocation in online gro-
cery shopping: Together alone. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. https://doi.org/10.
1016/J.JRETCONSER.2020.102153
77. Anshu, K., Gaur, L., & Singh, G. (2022). Impact of customer experience on attitude and repur-
chase intention in online grocery retailing: A moderation mechanism of value Co-creation.
13
A. Shroff et al.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 64, 102798. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETC

ONSER.2021.102798
78. Suher, J., Huang, S. C., & Lee, L. (2019). Planning for multiple shopping goals in the market-
place. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 29(4), 642–651. https://doi.org/10.1002/JCPY.1130
79. Mirhoseini, M., Pagé, S. A., Léger, P. M., & Sénécal, S. (2021). What deters online grocery
shopping? Investigating the effect of arithmetic complexity and product type on user satisfac-
tion. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16(4), 1–18. https://
doi.org/10.3390/jtaer16040047
80. Wang, K., Gao, Y., Liu, Y., & Nurul Habib, K. (2023). Exploring the choice between in-store
versus online grocery shopping through an application of semi-compensatory independent
availability logit (SCIAL) model with latent variables. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Ser-
vices, 71, 103191. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETCONSER.2022.103191
81. Hillen, J., & Fedoseeva, S. (2021). E-commerce and the end of price rigidity? Journal of Busi-
ness Research, 125, 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2020.11.052
82. Chintagunta, P. K., Chu, J., & Cebollada, J. (2012). Quantifying transaction costs in online/off-
line grocery channel choice. Marketing Science, 31(1), 96–114. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.
1110.0678
83. Breugelmans, E., & Campo, K. (2016). Cross-channel effects of price promotions: An empirical
analysis of the multi-channel grocery retail sector. Journal of Retailing, 92(3), 333–351. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2016.02.003
84. Kumar, A., Chakraborty, S., & Bala, P. K. (2023). Text mining approach to explore determi-
nants of grocery mobile app satisfaction using online customer reviews. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services, 73, 103363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103363
85. Belavina, E., Girotra, K., & Kabra, A. (2017). Online grocery retail: Revenue models and environ-
mental impact. Management Science, 63(6), 1781–1799. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2430
86. Bjørgen, A., Bjerkan, K. Y., & Hjelkrem, O. A. (2021). E-groceries: Sustainable last mile distribu-
tion in city planning. Research in Transportation Economics, 87, 100805. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
RETREC.2019.100805
87. Melis, K., Campo, K., Breugelmans, E., & Lamey, L. (2015). The impact of the multi-channel
retail mix on online store choice: Does online experience matter? Journal of Retailing, 91(2), 272–
288. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETAI.2014.12.004
88. Zissis, D., Aktas, E., & Bourlakis, M. (2018). Collaboration in urban distribution of online grocery
orders. International Journal of Logistics Management, 29(4), 1196–1214. https://doi.org/10.1108/
IJLM-11-2017-0303
89. Harris-lagoudakis, K. (2022). Online shopping and the healthfulness of grocery purchases. Ameri-
can Journal of Agricultural Economics, 104(3), 1050–1076. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajae.12262
90. Kim, H. (2021). Use of mobile grocery shopping application: Motivation and decision-making pro-
cess among South Korean consumers. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce
Research, 16(7), 2672–2693. https://doi.org/10.3390/JTAER16070147
91. Suel, E., & Polak, J. W. (2017). Development of joint models for channel, store, and travel mode
choice: Grocery shopping in London. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 99,
147–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2017.03.009
92. Singh, R., & Söderlund, M. (2020). Extending the experience construct: An examination of online
grocery shopping. European Journal of Marketing, 54(10), 2419–2446. https://doi.org/10.1108/
EJM-06-2019-0536
93. Gielens, K., Gijsbrechts, E., & Geyskens, I. (2021). Navigating the last mile: The demand effects of
click-and-collect order fulfillment. Journal of Marketing, 85(4), 158–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0022242920960430
94. Mortimer, G., Fazal e Hasan, S., Andrews, L., & Martin, J. (2016). Online grocery shopping: The
impact of shopping frequency on perceived risk. International Review of Retail, Distribution and
Consumer Research, 26(2), 202–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2015.1130737
95. Wang, X. C., Kim, W., Holguín-Veras, J., & Schmid, J. (2021). Adoption of delivery services in
light of the COVID pandemic: Who and how long? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and
Practice, 154, 270–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2021.10.012
96. Hansen, T. (2008). Consumer values, the theory of planned behaviour and online grocery shop-
ping. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32(2), 128–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1470-
6431.2007.00655.X
13
97. Delasay, M., Jain, A., & Kumar, S. (2022). Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on grocery retail
operations: An analytical model. Production and Operations Management, 31(5), 2237–2255.
https://doi.org/10.1111/POMS.13717
98. Van Droogenbroeck, E., & Van Hove, L. (2020). Triggered or evaluated? A qualitative inquiry
into the decision to start using e-grocery services. International Review of Retail, Distribution and
Consumer Research, 30(2), 103–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2019.1655085
99. Sousa, R., Horta, C., Ribeiro, R., & Rabinovich, E. (2020). How to serve online consumers in rural
markets: Evidence-based recommendations. Business Horizons, 63(3), 351–362. https://doi.org/10.
1016/J.BUSHOR.2020.01.007
100. Van Droogenbroeck, E., & Van Hove, L. (2020). Intra-household task allocation in online grocery
shopping: Together alone. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 56, 102153. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102153
101. Dawes, J., & Nenycz-Thiel, M. (2014). Comparing retailer purchase patterns and brand metrics
for in-store and online grocery purchasing. Journal of Marketing Management, 30(3–4), 364–382.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2013.813576
102. Dias, F. F., Lavieri, P. S., Sharda, S., Khoeini, S., Bhat, C. R., Pendyala, R. M., & Srinivasan, K. K.
(2020). A comparison of online and in-person activity engagement: The case of shopping and eat-
ing meals. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 114, 643–656. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.TRC.2020.02.023
103. van Ewijk, B. J., Steenkamp, J. B. E. M., & Gijsbrechts, E. (2020). The rise of online grocery
shopping in China: Which brands will benefit? Journal of International Marketing, 28(2), 20–39.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1069031X20914265
104. Shroff, A., Shah, B. J., & Gajjar, H. (2021). Shelf space allocation game with private brands: A
profit-sharing perspective. Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, 20(2), 116–133. https://
doi.org/10.1057/s41272-021-00295-1
105. Harris, P., Dall’Olmo Riley, F., Riley, D., & Hand, C. (2017). Online and store patronage: A typol-
ogy of grocery shoppers. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 45(4),
419–445. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-06-2016-0103
106. Aagja, J. P., Mammen, T., & Saraswat, A. (2011). Validating service convenience scale and profil-
ing customers: A study in the indian retail context. Vikalpa, 36(4), 25–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0256090920110403
107. Lim, H., Widdows, R., & Hooker, N. H. (2009). Web content analysis of e-grocery retailers: A
longitudinal study. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 37(10), 839–851.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550910988020
108. Hallikainen, H., Luongo, M., Dhir, A., & Laukkanen, T. (2022). Consequences of personalized
product recommendations and price promotions in online grocery shopping. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services, 69(July), 103088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103088
109. de Bellis, E., & Venkataramani Johar, G. (2020). Autonomous shopping systems: Identifying and
overcoming barriers to consumer adoption. Journal of Retailing, 96(1), 74–87. https://doi.org/10.
1016/J.JRETAI.2019.12.004
110. Xu, L., & Saphores, J. D. (2022). Grocery shopping in California and COVID-19: Transportation,
environmental justice, and policy implications. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and
Environment, 113, 103537. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2022.103537
111. Blitstein, J. L., Frentz, F., & Jilcott Pitts, S. B. (2020). A mixed-method examination of reported
benefits of online grocery shopping in the United States and Germany: Is health a factor? Journal
of Food Products Marketing, 26(3), 212–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2020.1754313
112. Singh, R. (2019). Why do online grocery shoppers switch or stay? An exploratory analysis of con-
sumers’ response to online grocery shopping experience. International Journal of Retail and Dis-
tribution Management, 47(12), 1300–1317. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-10-2018-0224
113. Seitz, C., Pokrivčák, J., Tóth, M., & Plevný, M. (2017). Online grocery retailing in Germany: An
explorative analysis. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 18(6), 1243–1263. https://
doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2017.1410218
114. Fedoseeva, S., Herrmann, R., & Nickolaus, K. (2017). Was the economics of information approach
wrong all the way? Evidence from German grocery r(E)tailing. Journal of Business Research, 80,
63–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2017.07.006
115. Van Droogenbroeck, E., & Van Hove, L. (2017). Adoption of online grocery shopping: Personal or
household characteristics? Journal of Internet Commerce, 16(3), 255–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/
15332861.2017.1317149
13
A. Shroff et al.
116. Ruggeri, G., Orsi, L., & Corsi, S. (2019). A bibliometric analysis of the scientific literature on
Fairtrade labelling. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 43(2), 134–152. https://doi.org/10.
1111/ijcs.12492
117. Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Wright, T. A. (2011). Best-practice recommendations for esti-
mating interaction effects using meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(8), 1033–
1043. https://doi.org/10.1002/JOB.719
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under
a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and
applicable law.
13

From Clicks To Consequences: A Multi Method Review of Online Grocery Shopping

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

From Clicks To Consequences: A Multi Method Review of Online Grocery Shopping

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

From Clicks To Consequences: A Multi Method Review of Online Grocery Shopping

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Electronic Commerce Research

From clicks to consequences: a multi‑method review

Arvind Shroff1 · Satish Kumar2 · Luisa M. Martinez3,4 · Nitesh Pandey5

Accepted: 10 September 2023

Keywords Online grocery shopping · Systematic literature review · Bibliometric

Revenues (in trillionsUS$)

RQ 1 What is the trend in publication frequency, as measured by the number of

2.1 Review structure and organizing framework

2.2 Search and filtration

How do we know about OGS? What do we know about OGS?

Theory of Planned Behavior United States Research Methodology MULTI-METHOD REVIEW =

What are the future avenues in OGS research?

Fig. 2 TCCM framework and its application for systematic review

Stage 1: Database extraction

Database: Scopus and Web of Science

Stage 2: Scholarly filtration

Document type: Article, Review article

Stage 3: Language filtration

Stage 4: Subject filtration

Subject: Economics, Econometrics and Finance; Business, Management and

Stage 5: Document screening

Criteria: Journal ranking of ABDC B and above

Stage 6: Manual inclusion

Fig. 3 A flowchart on the retrieval of articles

3 Profiling of OGS research

3.1 Publication trends (RQ 1)

The temporal distribution of published research papers on OGS provided valuable

Yearly Publication Yearly Citation

Fig. 4 Publication trend of OGS research (2000–2023)

3.2 Top contributing journals and articles (RQ 2)

3.3 Theories and methodologies in OGS research (RQ 3)

An in-depth analysis was performed to unpack the major theories applied by

A* Journal of Retailing 10 1074 107.40

Journal of Business Research 4 61 15.25

ABDC australian business deans council journal ranking 2022

J.; Geuens M.; Van alternative to bricks: Research

Theory of planned behavior 7.59 [6, 12, 32–35, 45, 46]

4 Science mapping through bibliometric analysis (RQ 4)

Science mapping is a methodological approach that examines existing knowledge

4.1 Temporal analysis of OGS using word clouds

Fig. 5 OGS research between 2000 and 2004

Fig. 6 OGS research between 2005 and 2009

Fig. 7 OGS research between 2010 and 2014

marketing”, “customized promotions,” and “delivery fee” on “buying behaviour”,

Fig. 8 OGS research between 2015 and 2019

Fig. 9 OGS research between 2020 and 2023

researchers started applying quantitative techniques in OGS research like “inte-

5 Keyword co‑occurrence analysis

We utilized a keyword co-occurrence analysis to create a network of the fundamen-

Fig. 10 Visualization of clusters using R software

Cluster 1: Consumer Response to OGS

Online Store Choice: Does Online Experience

Cluster 3: Consumer Perspective in OGS

Cluster 5: Online vs. Offline grocery shopping

tomer Purchase Behavior

Cluster 7: Exploring consumer experiences in OGS

Pricing and discounts

Fig. 11 An integrated conceptual framework of OGS research

In this section, we synthesize the antecedents, mediators, moderators and conse-

2.1 Review structure and organizing framework

2.2 Search and filtration

3 Profiling of OGS research

3.1 Publication trends (RQ 1)

3.2 Top contributing journals and articles (RQ 2)

3.3 Theories and methodologies in OGS research (RQ 3)

4 Science mapping through bibliometric analysis (RQ 4)

4.1 Temporal analysis of OGS using word clouds

5 Keyword co‑occurrence analysis

6.1 Antecedents and outcomes of OGS

6.2 Moderators and mediators of OGS

7 Summary and future research directions (RQ 5)

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 64, 102798. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETC