Social free sampling: engaging consumer through product trial reports

Abstract

PurposeRecent years have witnessed the popularity of social free sampling (SFS). That is, firms on social commerce platforms (e.g. Amazon Vine and Pconline Try) offer free sample products for consumers' applications, and the selected applicants are required to write a product trial report on the sites as a return. The main advantage of SFS is to leverage users' product trial reports to increase product exposure and attract prospective consumers. Thus, product trial reports play a central role in SFS. Despite that scholars have examined the rating bias of product trial reports in recent years' knowledge concerning how product trial reports influence user (i.e. readers of product trial reports) engagement remains sparse. To address the research gap, this paper aims to examine the drivers of user engagement with product trial reports.Design/methodology/approachThis study utilized the Poisson regression model to analyze 3,419 trial reports collected from a well-known Chinese SFS site.FindingsBased on the ELM model, the empirical results indicate that product rating, vividness, opinion balance, and reputation of the trial user are positively associated with user engagement. However, longer reports and reports with higher emotional intensity lead to weaker user engagement. Furthermore, product prices strengthen the positive impact of opinion balance but weaken the positive impact of trial users' reputations.Originality/valueThis study is among one of the first studies to investigate the impact of trial reports on user engagement in SFS. It yields actionable guidelines for SFS campaigns.

Does brand community participation lead to early new product adoption? The roles of networking behavior and prior purchase experience

“…Predicting consumer behavior is notoriously difficult ( Li and Zheng, 2020 ; Liao et al, 2022a , b ). Identifying consumers who are more likely to purchase new products is therefore important, and large online brand communities such as the Galaxy Community are thus particularly useful.…”

“…The development of the Internet and the proliferation of mobile devices enables consumers to gather in virtual communities and interact with each other based on their shared love of a brand, and subsequently to form a structured set of social relationships. These specialized, non-geographically based brand communities ( Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001 ; Thompson et al, 2019 ) can reduce consumer uncertainty about purchasing decisions and facilitate the success of new products ( Gruner et al, 2014 ; Liao et al, 2021a , b , c , d , 2022a , b ) even if they underperform relative to competitors’ offerings ( Thompson et al, 2018 ). Communities activate brand loyalty and create a sense of oppositional loyalty ( Zhang et al, 2016 ; Coelho et al, 2018 ; Sohail et al, 2020 ; Liao et al, 2021a , b , c , d ), serve as channels for disseminating and sharing information ( Kim et al, 2008 ; Wang et al, 2019 ), and create a peer social influence effect among members ( Algesheimer et al, 2005 ; Hook et al, 2018 ).…”

“…The members also disseminate and share product information across the membership and with the public ( Gruner et al, 2014 ). This helping behavior allows members to learn about each other’s purchasing experiences and share product knowledge ( Liao et al, 2022a , b ). As Rogers (2010) noted, the dissemination of new product information facilitates consumers’ purchasing intentions.…”