How online word‐of‐mouth impacts receivers

Abstract

Online word‐of‐mouth (WOM) can impact consumers’ product evaluations, purchase intentions, and choices—but when does it do so? How do those receiving WOM know whether to rely on a particular message? This article suggests that the multiple players involved in online WOM (receivers, senders, sellers, platforms, and other consumers) each have their own interests, which are often in conflict. Thus, receivers of WOM are faced with a judgment task in deciding what information to rely on: They must make inferences about the product in question and about the players who provide or present WOM. To do so, they use signals embedded in various components of WOM, such as average star ratings, message content, or sender characteristics. The product and player information provided by these signals shapes the impact of WOM by allowing receivers to make inferences about (a) their likelihood of product satisfaction, and (b) the trustworthiness of WOM players, and therefore the trustworthiness of their content. This article summarizes how each player changes the impact of online WOM, providing a lens for understanding the current literature in online WOM, offering insights for theory in this context, and opening up pathways for future research.

How collectivistic values affect online word-of-mouth

“…Moreover, regardless of whether consumers are higher or lower in collectivism, our results suggest that consumers are more likely to share product-related information when they perceive other social media users as similar to themselves. This finding is aligned with previous word-of-mouth research which suggests that consumers are generally more likely to engage in word-of-mouth among similar others (Leonhardt et al, 2020; Moore & Lafreniere, 2020; Packard et al, 2016). Managers should, therefore, consider ways to heighten homophily among their online customer base.…”

“…The influence of eWOM on marketing outcomes, such as sales, loyalty, satisfaction, and trust, is well established (Berger, 2014; Moore & Lafreniere, 2020; Rosario et al, 2016). What is less known is how specific cultural dimensions affect consumers’ propensity to create and share eWOM.…”

“…Consumers often go online to share their opinions about products with other consumers (eWOM; Ham et al, 2018; Moore & Lafreniere, 2020). As with traditional word-of-mouth, eWOM influences important marketing outcomes, such as customer loyalty (Srinivasan et al, 2002), product sales (Rosario et al, 2016), and even stock market performance (Tirunillai & Tellis, 2012).…”

“…Previous research suggests that social groups comprised of collectivistic consumers tend to exhibit shared beliefs, values, and social norms (i.e., they tend to be higher in homophily; (Leonhardt et al, 2020; Triandis et al, 1988). In addition, prior research suggests that homophily is positively related to the extent that consumers share product-related information (Moore & Lafreniere, 2020; Packard et al, 2016). Drawing on these insights, we predict that collectivism is positively associated with sharing product-related information on social networking sites, but not with rating and reviewing products online.…”

Purchasing Behavior of Organic Food among Chinese University Students

“…Online WOM maintains a significant on shaping consumers' product evaluation, choices, and purchase intentions [95]. Scholars argued that consumers use eWOM to share opinions and experiences pertaining to a company or a product which can generate or weaken consumer trust and affect potential new customers purchasing decisions [96][97][98].…”