Television Advertising and Online Word-of-Mouth: An Empirical Investigation of Social TV Activity

Fossen, Beth L.; Schweidel, David A.

doi:10.1287/mksc.2016.1002

Cited by 67 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 40 publications

(37 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, research has found that high levels of show involvement can hurt ad recall (Norris and Colman 1993;Tavassoli et al 1995). Fossen and Schweidel (2017) also find evidence to suggest that viewers that discuss shows online may be doing so at the expense of engaging with advertised brands online. Recent studies have also found that online activities and television viewing may be substitute activities (Hinz et al 2016;Seiler et al 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Multi-screen activity by television viewers is on the rise with an estimated 80% of U.S. television viewers simultaneously using another device while watching television (IAB 2015;Nielsen 2014). One of the most prevalent multi-screen activities is social TV, which is the joint viewing of television programming alongside the consumption and/or production of programrelated social media chatter (Benton and Hill 2012;Fossen and Schweidel 2017). Nearly 40% of multi-screeners in the U.S. engage in social TV activity (IAB 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social TV, Advertising, and Sales: Are Social Shows Good for Advertisers?

Fossen

Schweidel

2019

Marketing Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Television viewers are increasingly engaging in media-multitasking while watching programming. One prevalent multiscreen activity is the simultaneous consumption of television alongside social media chatter about the programming, an activity referred to as "social TV." While online interactions with programming can result in a more engaged and committed audience, social TV activities may distract media multitaskers from advertisements. These competing outcomes of social TV raise the question: are programs with high online social TV activity, so called "social shows," good for advertisers? In this research, we empirically examine this question by exploring the relationship among television advertising, social TV, online traffic, and online sales. Specifically, we investigate how the volume of program-related online chatter is related to online shopping behavior at retailers that advertise during the programs. We find that advertisements that air in programs with more social TV activity see increased ad responsiveness in terms of subsequent online shopping behavior. This result varies with the mood of the advertisement, with more affective advertisementsin particular, funny and emotional advertisementsseeing the largest increases in online shopping activity. Our results shed light on how advertisers can encourage online shopping activity on their websites in the age of multi-screen consumers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social TV, Advertising, and Sales: Are Social Shows Good for Advertisers?

Fossen

Schweidel

2019

Marketing Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ultimately, the effect of the marketing mix on receivers is dynamic: marketing mix variables increase sales and drive WOM (e.g., Berger & Schwartz, ; Fossen & Schweidel, ; Fossen & Schweidel, ; Kuksov & Xie, ; Lovett, Peres, & Shachar, ), which, in turn, affects product diffusion (e.g., Amblee & Bui, ; Chintagunta et al, ; Dellarocas Zhang & Awad, ; Gelper et al, ; Godes & Mayzlin, ; Park & Kim, ) and subsequent WOM (Park, Shin, & Xie, ). By monitoring WOM, sellers can assess consumers’ perceptions of product quality, changes in the importance of product attributes, and shifts in market position and competitiveness (e.g., Chen & Xie, ; Kwark, Chen, & Raghunathan, ; Netzer, Feldman, Goldenberg, & Fresko, ; Timoshenko & Hauser, ; Tirunillai & Tellis, ), and adjust the marketing mix accordingly.…”

Section: Sellermentioning

confidence: 99%

How online word‐of‐mouth impacts receivers

Moore

Lafreniere

2019

Consumer Psychology Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…Thousands of pages in practitioners' guides can be found on the importance of a CTA (e.g., Eisenberg et al 2010, Niblick 2013. In the academic literature, Fossen and Schweidel (2016) find in a study of social TV activity that television ads with a hashtag or Web address CTA are associated with greater online brand WOM. Kronrod et al (2012) identify conditions under which an assertive environmental message (e.g., "Stop talking.…”

Section: Advertising Call To Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Greedy or Grateful? Asking for More when Thanking Donors

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Charities often send annual "thank you letters" to express gratitude to donors, but seek to defray these costs by inviting additional donations or engagement. However, the additional asks may backfire if potential donors see the thank you message as "insincere" or "manipulative." We test this trade-off by conducting a field experiment in cooperation with a leading charity in India.We find that an explicit ask for additional donations or even a request to follow the organization on Facebook reduces giving. However, these effects are not only heterogeneous, but asymmetric by past giving behavior. Recent, frequent, and higher monetary value donors react negatively to additional asks by reducing giving, but lapsed, infrequent, and lower monetary value donors react positively by giving more. Our results highlight that findings based on purely cross-sectional experiments may offer incomplete insight. We estimate that differentially targeted ask messages based on past donation behavior, data readily available to charities, can increase donations overall by 6-11%.

show abstract

Television Advertising and Online Word-of-Mouth: An Empirical Investigation of Social TV Activity

Cited by 67 publications

References 40 publications

Social TV, Advertising, and Sales: Are Social Shows Good for Advertisers?

Social TV, Advertising, and Sales: Are Social Shows Good for Advertisers?

How online word‐of‐mouth impacts receivers

Greedy or Grateful? Asking for More when Thanking Donors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About