Analysis of Consumer Recommendation Behavior and Market Equilibrium in E-Commerce from the Perspective of Social Media

Abstract

Under the strategic goal of building a domestic economic cycle, the development quality of social e-commerce in my country needs to be improved urgently. The main reason for the low quality of social e-commerce development in my country is that the natural advantages of social e-commerce, such as high-efficiency dissemination of information and increased consumer utility due to improper sales model design, cannot play a role. However, the lack of research on social e-commerce systems makes it difficult for retailers to obtain effective theoretical guidance for their sales model design. Based on this, this paper takes the three most important and important social e-commerce sales models in my country at present—recommended reward model, online group purchase model, and online crowdfunding model as the research objects, and systematically analyzes the consumer recommendation behaviors in the three sales models. By analyzing and market equilibrium, while improving the theoretical research of social e-commerce, it also provides theoretical basis and policy guidance for the optimal mode design of social e-commerce under different sales modes. This paper considers the consumer recommendation behavior in social networks and analyzes the main characteristics of the three sales models in view of the development status and specific problems of social e-commerce in my country, and then constructs retailer-existing consumer-potential The three-agent dynamic Stackelberg game model of consumers analyzes the influence mechanism and market equilibrium of consumer recommendation behavior under three sales models.

Retracted: Analysis of Consumer Recommendation Behavior and Market Equilibrium in E-Commerce from the Perspective of Social Media

“…This article has been retracted by Hindawi, as publisher, following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [1]. This investigation has uncovered evidence of systematic manipulation of the publication and peer-review process.…”