Does digital trust discriminate? Testing construct validity and mediation among Indonesian Generation Z
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/im.22(4).2026.08
-
Article InfoVolume 22 2026, Issue #4, pp. 118–133
- 4 Views
-
1 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Type of the article: Research Article
Abstract
Digital trust is widely modeled as the mechanism through which influencer credibility, e-WoM, and social media interaction shape the decisions of Generation Z consumers, yet studies rarely verify that trust is empirically distinct from the outcome it mediates. Using survey data from 255 Indonesian Generation Z respondents, this study tests whether digital trust and purchase decision-making are empirically distinct constructs, and whether indirect effects are correctly derived from the model’s own structural coefficients rather than a differently specified equation. Influencer credibility, e-WoM, and social media interaction all positively predicted digital trust (β = 0.307, 0.323, 0.291), and trust strongly predicted purchase decision-making (β = 0.908, R² = 0.825). Applying the Fornell-Larcker criterion, HTMT, and a nested chi-square difference test, trust and the outcome show weak discriminant validity (HTMT = 0.904, above the conventional ceiling) despite a Chi-square test rejecting their full merger, a disagreement that a single criterion would not reveal. Correctly specified mediation finds all three sources produce significant, similarly sized indirect effects (0.264–0.293), preserving their direct-effect ranking; a separately computed reduced-form regression bypassing trust produces a starkly different pattern (0.503, 0.302, 0.077) that is not a trust-mediated effect but an artifact of multicollinearity among the three sources. These results show that overall model fit and an unverified validity claim are insufficient for mediation claims, and that Generation Z trust-formation studies require multi-criterion construct verification before accepting indirect-effect claims.
Acknowledgments
No external funding was received for this study. The authors declare no acknowledgements.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M31, D83, O33
-
References57
-
Tables10
-
Figures1
-
- Figure 1. Conceptual framework of digital trust as a proportional or selective conduit
-
- Table 1. Construct operationalization
- Table 2. Measurement model results
- Table 3. Fornell-Larcker matrix (√AVE on diagonal)
- Table 4. HTMT matrix (threshold: <0.85 strict / <0.90 lenient)
- Table 5. Chi-Square difference test: two-factor vs. merged one-factor model (Y, Z indicators only)
- Table 6. Goodness-of-fit results
- Table 7. Structural path coefficients – direct effects
- Table 8. Mediated indirect effects on purchase decision-making via digital trust (aᵢ × b, Sobel test)
- Table 9. Reduced-form regression of purchase decision-making on X1, X2, X3 (bypasses digital trust – not a mediated effect)
- Table A1. Differentiation of the present study from Fauzan et al. (2026)
-
- Akerlof, G. A. (1970). The market for “lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(3), 488-500.
- Albarq, A. N., Hasanein, A. M., & Aliane, N. (2025). Beyond likes and shares: A structural model of social media marketing effects on trust and loyalty. Journal of Cultural Analysis and Social Change, 10(4), 4013-4024.
- Anaya-Sánchez, R., Aguilar-Illescas, R., Molinillo, S., & Martínez-López, F. J. (2020). Trust and loyalty in online brand communities. Spanish Journal of Marketing – ESIC, 24(2), 177-191.
- Anwar, M. M. (2025). How digital financial literacy and social media usage build saving behavior among Generation Z. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration.
- Arini, H. M., Wijayanto, T., Lathifah, N., Li, J., & Yin, H. (2024). Detecting fake news during COVID-19 in Indonesia: the role of trust level. Journal of Communication in Healthcare, 17(2), 180-190.
- Arizal, N., Nofrizal, Dwika Listihana, W., & Hadiyati. (2024). Gen Z customer loyalty in online shopping: An integrated model of trust, website design, and security. Journal of Internet Commerce, 23(2), 121-143.
- Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 421-458.
- Baudier, P., & de Boissieu, E. (2025). Are social media robot influencers credible? A cross-continental analysis in a fashion context. Computers in Human Behavior, 162.
- Brodie, R. J., Hollebeek, L. D., Jurić, B., & Ilić, A. (2011). Customer engagement: Conceptual domain, fundamental propositions, and implications for research. Journal of Service Research, 14(3), 252-271.
- Casaló, L. V., Flavián, C., & Ibáñez-Sánchez, S. (2020). Influencers on Instagram: Antecedents and consequences of opinion leadership. Journal of Business Research, 117, 510-519.
- Cheung, M. L., Leung, W. K. S., Yang, M. X., Koay, K. Y., & Chang, M. K. (2022). Exploring the nexus of social media influencers and consumer brand engagement. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 34(10), 2370-2385.
- Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Edelman. (2020). 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer special report: Brand trust in 2020.
- Edelman. (2024). 2024 Edelman Trust Barometer: Global report.
- Fauzan, E., Suteja, J., & Juju, U. (2026). Digital trust formation in Gen-Z wealth-tech adoption: The influence of e-WOM, engagement, and influencers. Journal of Research, Innovation and Technologies, 5(1), 47-62.
- Filieri, R., & McLeay, F. (2014). E-WOM and accommodation: An analysis of the factors that influence travelers' adoption of information from online reviews. Journal of Travel Research, 53(1), 44-57.
- Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51-90.
- Guerra-Tamez, C. R., Kraul Flores, K., Serna-Mendiburu, G. M., Chavelas Robles, D., & Ibarra Cortés, J. (2024). Decoding Gen Z: AI's influence on brand trust and purchasing behavior. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 7, 1323512.
- Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
- Hassan, M. S., Mai, N. H., Abdul Wahab, N. S., Hassan, M. M., & Oláh, J. (2025). Decentralized fintech platforms adoption intention in cyber risk environment among GenZ: A dual-method approach using PLS-SEM and necessary condition analysis. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 18.
- Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135.
- Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J. (2014). Consumer brand engagement in social media: Conceptualization, scale development and validation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(2), 149-165.
- Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. Yale University Press.
- Hudders, L., De Jans, S., & De Veirman, M. (2021). The commercialization of social media stars: A literature review and conceptual framework on the strategic use of social media influencers. International Journal of Advertising, 40(3), 327-375.
- Ismagilova, E., Slade, E. L., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2020). The effect of electronic word of mouth communications on intention to buy: A meta-analysis. Information Systems Frontiers, 22, 1203-1226.
- Joshi, H. (2025). Integrating trust and satisfaction into the UTAUT model to predict Chatbot adoption – A comparison between Gen-Z and Millennials. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 5(1).
- Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL 8.80 [Computer software]. Scientific Software International.
- Khoa, B. T. (2025). The Triple Helix of Digital Engagement: Unifying Technology Acceptance, Trust Signaling, and Social Contagion in Generation Z’s Social Commerce Repurchase Decisions. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 20(2).
- Koay, K. Y., Ong, D. L. T., Khoo, K. L., & Yeoh, H. J. (2021). Perceived social media marketing activities and consumer-based brand equity: Testing a moderated mediation model. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 33(1), 53-72.
- Le Thi Thu, M., Pham Thi Hoai, A., Vu Nhat, H., Nguyen, M. T. N., & Ta Tu, A. (2025). Highlighting eTrust in the linkage between user-generated videos and travel destination behavioral intention. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 1-17.
- Lou, C., & Yuan, S. (2019). Influencer marketing: How message value and credibility affect consumer trust of branded content on social media. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 19(1), 58-73.
- MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 83-104.
- Matin, A., Khoshtaria, T., & Tutberidze, G. (2020). The impact of social media engagement on consumers’ trust and purchase intention. International Journal of Technology Marketing, 14(3), 305-323.
- McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 334-359.
- Meiranto, W., Abbad, T. A. S., Ramadhan, A. F., & Marsono, M. (2026). Determinants of E-Wallet Adoption Among Generation Z in Indonesia: An Extended UTAUT3 Model Integrating Personal Innovativeness and Perceived Security. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 19(6).
- Nurhilalia, N., Yusuf, M., Menne, F., & Yusuf, Y. Y. (2026). Perceptions of consumer authenticity in influencer marketing: A qualitative study on Generation Z in the online fashion industry. International Journal of Computer Information Systems and Industrial Management Applications, 18(7s), 1047-1059.
- Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39-52.
- Oliveira, T., Alhinho, M., Rita, P., & Dhillon, G. (2017). Modelling and testing consumer trust dimensions in e-commerce. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 153-164.
- Onofrei, G., Filieri, R., & Kennedy, L. (2022). Social media interactions, purchase intention, and behavioural engagement: The mediating role of source and content factors. Journal of Business Research, 142, 100-112.
- Phan, T. A., Huynh, M. K., & Nguyen, H. K. (2026). Anti-consumption toward untrustworthy influencers promoting charity campaigns. In Reference Module in Social Sciences.
- Pop, R.-A., Săpăcan, Z., Dabija, D.-C., & Alt, M. A. (2022). The impact of social media influencers on travel decisions: The role of trust in consumer decision journey. Current Issues in Tourism, 25(5), 823-843.
- Prawira, I., Ramadhan, M. R., Yufriadi, E., & Catur Andryani, N. A. (2026). Content over appearance: what drives Indonesian youth's trust in AI news presenters. Media International Australia, 199(1), 118-131.
- Priporas, C. V., Stylos, N., & Fotiadis, A. K. (2017). Generation Z consumers' expectations of interactions in smart retailing: A future agenda. Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 374-381.
- Rachmat, B. (2026). Algorithm-driven personalization, content exposure, and live commerce: The roles of engagement and trust in Gen Z impulse buying on TikTok Shop. Innovative Marketing, 22(2), 179-195.
- Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Simon & Schuster.
- Salmiah, S., Sahir, S. H., & Fahlevi, M. (2024). The effect of social media and electronic word of mouth on trust and loyalty: Evidence from generation Z in coffee industry. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 8(1), 641-654.
- Sanawan, S. U., Hassan, M. T., & Khalid, S. (2026). Enhancing Online Impulse Buying through Artificial Intelligence Stimuli and Social Stimuli in Generation Z: The Mediating Role of Brand Trust. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 20(1), 268-295.
- Santoso, A., Prasetio, A., Martini, E., Manalu, V. G., & Sulaiman, E. (2026). Assessing the impact of seller and platform trust on consumer engagement matter in live streaming: evidence from Indonesia. Innovative Marketing, 22(1), 96-106.
- Saragih, A. M. M., Peranginangin, Y. A., Putra, M. A., Hutabara, R. H., & Mahaganti, F. S. (2026). Social media, institutional credibility, and digital trust: Understanding employment social security participation decisions among generation Z in Indonesia. Decision Science Letters, 15(3), 577-594.
- Sokolova, K., & Kefi, H. (2020). Instagram and YouTube bloggers promote it, why should I buy? How credibility and parasocial interaction influence purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53, 101742.
- Suleman, D., Herawaty, M. T., Panigoro, E., Zahra, Z., & Mahadewi, E. P. (2026). Digital engagement, online brand experience, and social media credibility shaping visit intention via destination trust. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure, 15(2), 428-443.
- Tafesse, W., & Wien, A. (2018). Using message strategy to drive consumer behavioral engagement on social media. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 35(3), 241-253.
- Wahyudi, M. A., Rahmadhani, M. V., Mu’is, A., & Evelyna, F. (2025). The impact of short-form video marketing, influencer relatability, and trust signals on Gen Z's purchase intention. International Journal of Business, Law, and Education, 6(1), 855-864.
- Wong, A. (2023). How social capital builds online brand advocacy in luxury social media brand communities. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 70, 103143.
- Xiao, L., Guo, F., Yu, F., & Liu, S. (2019). The effects of online shopping context cues on consumers' purchase intention for cross-border e-commerce sustainability. Sustainability, 11(10), 2777.
- Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2, Pt. 2), 1-27.
- Zhao, Y., Wang, L., Tang, H., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Electronic word-of-mouth and consumer purchase intentions in social e-commerce. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 41, Article 100980.


