Bateman (1973) divides perceived risk into inherent risk and handling risk. Inherent risk refers to the potential risk of a product category perceived by consumers. Processing risk is the risk that consumers perceive when they choose a brand in the product category, which contains the information of a specific brand. For example, a consumer will feel risky when buying aspirin, but will feel at ease when buying his favorite brand. The inherent risk here is relatively high, and the treatment risk may be very low. When consumers do not have any product information, the inherent risk is the same as the handling risk.
In 1993, Stone and Gronhaug verified the existence of six risk dimensions: financial risk, performance risk, physical risk, psychological risk, social risk and time risk, but at the same time they put forward the opposite view to Jacoby and Kaplan( 1972). They think that all latitudes are not necessarily independent of each other. Since all risks are perceived by individuals and perception is related to psychology, the psychological dimension of risks should be highly related to other latitudes of risks. Therefore, Stone and Gronhaug first put forward the hypothesis that each risk dimension affects the overall risk through the adjustment of psychological risk, and confirmed this hypothesis through an empirical study of consumers buying personal computers. Stone and Gronhaug( 1993) also show that the above six dimensions of risk can explain the overall perceived risk as high as 88.8%, but at the same time, they also point out that if the unexplained part is not caused by measurement errors, the understanding of the overall risk is still incomplete. "Undoubtedly, we need to further explore the truth of risk structure."
The multi-dimensional theory of risk holds that the latitude composition of perceived risk will change with the changes of products and buying situations, and the explanatory power of each dimension to the overall risk is different in different buying situations. In some purchasing situations, some risks may be more important or prominent than others. For example, in the empirical study of Stone and Gronhaug( 1993) on purchasing personal computers, financial risk is the most significant, followed by psychological risk, and the least significant is physical risk. Cunningham( 1967) first proposed a two-factor model, that is, risk = uncertainty of loss # harmfulness of result. For more than 30 years, two-factor model has become the mainstream model of perceived risk research. However, whether the uncertainty of loss and the harmfulness of the result are multiplied or added is still controversial among researchers.
Greatorex and Mitchell( 1993) integrated the previous research into a new conceptual model. They think that there is a certain mismatch between the level of consumers' requirements for a particular attribute and the level they actually achieve, and the amount of losses consumers experience in the shopping process is directly proportional to the degree of this mismatch. When considering the possibility that the attribute can't reach the required level, this loss will turn into risk. At the same time, the loss is also affected by the importance of attributes, the importance of products and the ability of individuals to bear losses. The model also includes the uncertainties perceived by consumers when evaluating the level of demand and the importance of attributes, and describes these uncertainties as probability distribution rather than point estimation. But this model needs empirical research to test. A large number of related studies have measured the perceived risk in different situations, but these studies rarely involve how the perceived risk changes in different stages of the purchase decision-making process. Many studies show that consumers' perceived risk remains unchanged at different stages of the purchase decision-making process. The correctness of this assumption deserves our further consideration. We need to explore the dynamic process of perceiving risk.
In 1994, Mitcell and Boustani first made a preliminary discussion on this issue. They believe that the perceived risk level is constantly changing at different stages of the purchase decision-making process. In the stage of problem cognition, because there is no direct solution to the problem or available products, the level of perceived risk is rising; After searching for information, with the increase of information, the risk level began to decrease; In the evaluation scheme stage, the perceived risk level continues to decline; Before making the purchase decision, the risk level increased slightly due to the uncertainty of the decision; If the purchase result is satisfactory, the perceived risk level will drop rapidly. (as shown in figure 3). However, Mitchell and Boustaany (1994) emphasized that this is only a "hypothetical change" and needs empirical research to test it. Mitchell( 1999) believes that consumers tend to reduce perceived risk rather than maximize perceived income when buying, and perceived risk is more powerful in explaining consumers' buying behavior. Explaining consumers' buying behavior with the theory of perceived risk is a key point of foreign consumer behavior research. The research on perceived risk in the west has a history of more than 40 years, but due to the complexity of the concept of perceived risk itself, many problems in this field are still controversial. First of all, the connotation of perceived risk needs to be further clarified, and the measurement model of perceived risk needs to be further developed, which needs the test and support of empirical research. Secondly, it is necessary to integrate the dimensions of perceived risk, the influencing factors of perceived risk and the dynamic change process of perceived risk into a model in order to systematically and comprehensively investigate the perceived risk problem. In addition, perceived risks are specific to specific products or services, and consumers of different products or services perceive different risks. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a systematic perceived risk measurement model for various products or services. In addition, under the background of new Internet marketing, does the perceived risk of consumers in online shopping have the same dimension and structure as that in the traditional shopping environment? Do online shoppers perceive different types of risks compared with online surfers? What risks have become potential obstacles to online shopping? How will the types of risks perceived by online shoppers affect their online shopping behavior? How to reduce consumers' perceived risk in online shopping? These are the directions of future research.