积极口碑比消极口碑影响更大

#研究分享1#【积极口碑比消极口碑影响更大】与以往研究认为消极口碑影响更大,人们会更听从消极口碑的意见不同;该研究结论是,积极口碑比消极口碑有着更大的影响,对购买意向有着更大的转变力。口碑发布者的表达欲望强不强,其知识水平以及与接受者的关系如何;口碑接受者的品牌忠诚度如何,以及搜索口碑的意向强不强,都直接影响着消极或积极口碑的影响效果。

 

#研究分享2#【影响口碑效果的因素】(1)购买者所感受到的购买风险。购买者所感受到的购买风险越大,其搜索口碑的欲望越大,积极或消极口碑对其的影响也就最大。(2)购买者自身的经验,品牌忠诚度高不高,有否该品牌不好的购买经历。(3)口碑传播者的知识水平、经验和表达强度。(4)口碑传播者和接受者之间的关系。

 

#研究分享3#【如何获得好的口碑】品牌若想营造长久的良好口碑,须得品牌可信,产品和服务可靠,营销活动可信任。如此消费者会乐于传递积极的口碑。品牌可:(1)开展以口碑传播者为中心的关系营销,尤其是意见领袖们。(2)允许消费者共同创造品牌意义,鼓励其讲述与品牌的故事。(3)以忠诚客户为中心开展营销活动,使其成为积极口碑的传递者。

 

文章原文:

文章题目:The Word ofMouth Dynamic: How Positive (and Negative) WOM Drives Purchase Probability

摘要:

 This study has two main objectives: (a) toexamine the relative impacts of positive and negative word of mouth (PWOM andnWOM) on the shift in the receiver’s brand purchase probability; and (b) toanalyze the effect, direct or indirect, of a number of interpersonal andnon-interpersonal factors on the relation between PWOM or nWOM and the shift inthe receiver’s purchase probability. The data were collected from a sample of1,035 consumers in four product/service categories. The results suggest thatfirms should develop a proactive management of WOM communications that takesinto account aspects of both the sender and receiver.

 

DISCuSSION AND CONCLuSIONS

 

WOM long has been recognized as a powerfulforce affecting consumers’ attitude and choice. The results of the current studyenhance current understanding of how WOM influences the receiver’s choice. Thisarticle, unlike previous studies, represents an attempt to explicitly test the differentialimpact of positive and negative WOM on the mean shift in the brandpurchase probability.Furthermore, this work differs from most earlier studies on WOM in that the authorsinvestigated various brands in a range of categories of products (mobile phonesand laptops) and services (mobilephone companies and travel agencies). Fromthis perspective, this study makes various contributions to the literature onWOM communications in marketing.

Specifically:

 

    The empirical analysis shows that positive(negative) WOM has a positive

(negative) impact on the shift in the receiver’sbrand-purchase probability. The results also show that positive WOM has astronger impact on brandpurchase probability than negative WOM.

An explanation for positive WOM’s strongereffect in this study is that the prior purchase probability tends to be below 5on a 10-point scale. In particular, the prior purchase probability is 4.2984 forthe positive WOM subsample and 4.4721 for the negative WOM subsample. Thissituation leaves more room for change in response to positive WOM than inresponse to negative WOM.

Thus, the results suggest that negative WOMis less diagnostic than positive WOM. There is a “positivity effect” (using Fiske’sgap explanation), with positive WOM having more impact than negative WOM.

 

    The results also show that the same interpersonalfactors govern the impact of both positive and negative WOM on the shift in thereceiver’s brandpurchase probability. The authors can conclude that the sender’sstrength of expression has the greatest influence for both positive andnegative WOM, followed by how actively WOM is sought.The findings of this studysuggest that when the sender’s strength of expression is high and when WOM(positive or negative) is actively sought, WOM will have a significantinfluence (positive or negative) on the shift in the receiver’s brand-purchaseprobability.Thus, marketing strategies designed to promote interpersonalcommunication will reach more senders/receivers and be more efficient if theyare directed at senders with strength of expression and receivers who aremotivated to seek information through WOM.Firms also should pay particular attentionto the potential influence of negative WOM, as these communications reduce thepurchase probability. Consequently, companies should also adopt decisions aboutmarketing strategies directed at senders and receivers with the objective ofminimizing the sending of negative WOM and/or the effects of exposure tonegative communications of people motivated to seek advice actively.

Nevertheless, the effect of both interpersonalfactors on the receiver’s decision is stronger when the WOM information ispositive (positive WOM) than when it is negative (negative WOM).The currentfindings support the hypothesis that level of receiver’s loyalty (a non-interpersonalfactor) reduces the impact of both positive and negative WOM on the shift inthe receiver’s purchase probability. Thus, the effect of WOM (positive ornegative) is conditioned by the receiver’s previous loyalty.

As the receiver’s level of loyalty toward abrand increases, positive and negative WOM about that brand will have lessimpact on the shift in the future purchase probability. Looking at the plots inFigure 4, positive messages (positive WOM) clearly have more impact when thereceiver’s pre-WOM loyalty is from 0 to 6, whereas negative messages (negativeWOM) have more influence in the range 4 to 7 (See Figure 4).Thus, the potentialimpact of WOM (positive or negative) can be estimated for any segment ofconsumers if the mean pro-WOM loyalty can be assessed using purchase records ormanagement judgment, for example.

 

    Various factors directly influence how activelyWOM is sought and indirectly affect the shift in the receiver’s purchase

probability.Thecurrent findings indicate that, when senders are perceived as knowledgeable,the receivers are motivated to actively seek information (positive or negativeWOM) from them. Thus, a significant positive relation exists between the twoconstructs.Likewise, when the tie between senders and receivers is strong, thereceivers are motivated to actively seek positive WOM information (empiricalevidence for negative WOM was not found).

Conversely, the receiver’s experience wasalso found to be a significant indicator of how actively WOM is sought. Themore knowledgeable people are or the more experience they possess, the less intensewill be the active search for information (positive or negative WOM).

Furthermore, the greater the receiver’sexperience, the less risk they will perceive in the purchase; and the greater theperceived risk, the more active the search for WOM information (positive ornegative WOM).

 

     For both positive and negative WOM, the receiver’sperceived risk has the strongest positive effect, followed by the receiver’sexperience (negative effect), sender’s experience (positive) and, to a lesser extent,strength of tie between sender and receiver (positive influence only forpositive WOM).

The practical implication of theseempirical results is that companies should pay particular attention to theconsumers who are most motivated to seek advice actively (less experiencedconsumers who perceive more risk in the purchase) to maximize their exposure topositive communications from senders perceived as knowledgeable and with whomthey have strong ties and minimize their exposure to negative communicationsfrom senders perceived as experts.

文章作者:RODOLFOVáZquEZCASIELLES

LETICIA SuáREZ-

áLVAREZ

ANA-BELéN

文章来源:Journal ofAdvertising Research

 

文章链接:http://web.ebscohost.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=704ef083-fdd6-431b-a86c-6ce8f7450c8f%40sessionmgr10&vid=4&hid=11

 

文章下载:The word of Mouth Dynamic


Comments are closed.



无觅相关文章插件