Literature Review

1. Introduction:

Word of mouth was characterized as verbal, person-to-person

communication between a recipient and a sender whom the

receiver is perceived to be as neither profitable nor

commercial, concerning a product, brand or service (Buttle

1998: 242-243; Kietzmann and Kanhoto 2013: 147). The

fundamental idea of WOM is the fact that information about

products, companies, stories and services can disseminate

from one consumer to another. WOM communication comprises

any information concerning a target object (e.g., company,

brand) transmitted from one person to the other whether

personally or through several communication means. (Brown

et al. 2005: 125). It is commonly known that when consumers

want to purchase a new productor service, they tend to seek

information from family members, friends, and others, as

favored sources of information. Therefore, for many

consumers, information that is received from others, or

word-of-mouth communication is an important source of

product, brand, and retailer information.Word of mouth is

classified to positive word of mouth and negative word of

mouth (Chung Lo, 2012: 190 ; Sundaram et al. 1998: 527).

This study is explaining how word of mouth can be a double

edged weapon by investigating how positive and negative

word of mouth affect customers’ attitudes, beliefs and

consequently affects their purchase probability towards

products, services, companies and brands.

1

Podnar and Javernik (2012: 157) and ; Gildin (2002: 94)

stated that spreading information via word-of-mouth

communication is believed to be the most successful,

efficient and effective intermediate these days. In the

earlier decades and years word-of-mouth was neglected by

companies and vendors, but lately, a lot of companies have

known the extent to which it is effective and as the extent

of its effectiveness becomes more sufficiently understood,

word-of-mouth will have a great influence each time on more

individuals and associations. Word of mouth has been

investigated in the situations, conditions of distributing,

spreading products and information, where they believed to

play a significant, crucial role. Communications of

marketing such as advertising are only noteworthy for a

short time, while word of mouth is the major force

encouraging the succession and sequence of information

dissemination. Furthermore, word of mouth can influence the

choice of brands in established, mature products and

categories, where it operates within a structure of

acquired customer values, preferences, habits, beliefs and

profitable, marketable influences that may limit or

encourage, motivate response to the recommendation,

guidance and advice. WOM is capable of having an effect on

attitudes and decisions of customers. (Podnar and Javernik,

2012: 157).

2

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. The

next section gives an overview on word of mouth and its

definition by different authors and then the

classifications of word mouth followed by stating the

motivators of word of mouth and then describing the

interpersonal dimensions that affect word of mouth.

Afterwards, explaining how the sender’s experience and

strengths will affect the way word of mouth is perceived.

Finally, in the last two sections the shift in the purchase

probability followed by the creation, existence of

uncontrollable new word of mouth marketing.

3

2. Literature Review:

2.1 Background and definitions:

“Word-of-mouth is thousands of times as powerful as conventional marketing”

(SILVERMAN, 2001).

(Quoted in:

Gildin 2002: 98)

Buttle (1998: 242-243) and ; Kietzmann and Kanhoto (2013:

147) characterized WOM as verbal, person-to-person

communication between a recipient and a sender whom the

receiver is perceived to be as neither profitable nor

commercial, concerning a product, brand or service.

Sundaram, Mitra and Webster (1998: 527) agreed with Buttle

(1998: 242-243) and defined WOM as a form of interpersonal

communication between consumers regarding their personal,

private familiarity, knowledge and experience with a firm

or a product. Consistent with the previous definitions,

WOM is defined as all casual communications to new or

different consumers about the possession, usage, or

characteristics of specific goods and services or their

vendors moreover, WOM can be any verbal and personal

communication, positive or negative, about a service,

brand, product or association, in which the recipient of

the message perceives, sees the sender to have a non-

commercial intention according to (Vázquez-Casielles,

Suárez-Álvarez and Río-Lanza 2013: 44).

4

On the other hand Sainio (2011: 6) argued that word-of-

mouth communication has a two level definition which is

divided into internal, and external levels and these levels

have four elements. WOM internal level consists of consumer

influence, networks, and communication and information

exchange. This part of the definition is consistent and

fixed and those elements of internal word of mouth are the

major aspects of WOM. The base of WOM phenomenon lies in

the flow of information of consumers’ networks as

information exchanges from one consumer to another. These

networks can either interpersonal or social networks and

they consist of various sized groups. Regarding the second

level of WOM definition which is the external level, it

consists of aim of review, communicator’s role , review’s

context and the channel of communication and they are

changeable. The review’s aim is the real discussed target

such as product, service, market and brand for instance.WOM

communication has two sides which are sender/source and

recipient/searcher. Their roles are context specific and

for example they might be friends, relatives or even

strangers. (Sainio, 2011: 6). For example, Procter and

Gamble has managed a word-of-mouth marketing service that

helped many of their new products gain traction by

leveraging the social networks of school age children with

homemakers, where the campaign generated a 27.8 % boost in

5

sales between test and control markets. (Iyengar et al.

2011: 17).

2.2 Classification of word-of-mouth:

2.2.1 Positive word of mouth:

The studies in consumer behavior recommend that word of

mouth has a powerful impact on the psychology of

individuals. The influence of word of mouth can be

categorized to have both, positive and negative aspects.

Word of mouth is classified to positive word of mouth and

negative word of mouth (Chung Lo, 2012: 190 ; Sundaram et

al. 1998: 527). Positive word of mouth is an effective tool

for promoting the business of companies (Gildin, 2002: 97 ;

Sundaram et al. 1998: 527). Also, (PWOM) is liable to

upgrade, raise shoppers' buy plans for creative items by

diminishing dangers, help in making a favorable image

concerning the brand and the firm, and hence diminish a

company's general promotional outlays, consumptions and

expenditures. It is very important for advertisers to make

an environment that is favorable for PWOM to expand and

promulgate. (Gildin, 2002: 97 ; Sundaram et al. 1998:

527). In addition, positive word of mouth increases the

probability of the consumers in selecting products (Chung

Lo, 2012: 190). It was indicated that positive word of

mouth impacts the customers to get slanted towards a

specific service or product .Word of mouth is affected

6

positively by culture and motivation. Availability, ease of

access and comparative level of interests make individuals

motivated to spread positive word of mouth. Persons with

high independence contribute extensively towards the

positive develop of word of mouth. (Chung Lo, 2012: 190).

It has been pointed out by Brown et al. (2005: 125) that

positive WOM may incorporate making others conscious that

one does business with an organization or store, making

positive suggestions to others around an organization,

lauding an organization's quality introduction, etc. Added

by Chung Lo, (2012: 190) that commitment and loyalty is

affected by positive word of mouth. The idea of positive

word of mouth has been mainly used by marketing experts as

it can provide the purpose of measuring the adequacy of the

promoting tools like advertising and also at the same time

be used as a reliable source for gaining information

concerning the product. (Chung Lo, (2012: 190). Perceptions, Brand awareness, expectations, purchase

intentions, attitudes, and purchase behavior are affected

and influenced by positive word of mouth. It has been

calculated that word of mouth is nine times as effective as

advertising in changing negative or neutral inclinations

into positive attitudes. Individuals involved in positive

word of mouth will have a more positive attitude toward the

product whereas individuals involved in negative word of

7

mouth will have a more negative attitude toward the product

or service than individuals who weren’t involved in word of

mouth. When consumers’ expectations are exceeded, they

share their satisfaction in the form of positive word of

mouth. There is a positive relationship between positive

word of mouth and satisfaction and between satisfaction and

the probability of making word of mouth. (Podnar and

Javernik, 2012: 151). However, Brown et al. (2005) have

shown that the relationship between satisfaction and

positive word of mouth is not as simple, as both are

moderated by commitment. Identification with the

association is a further predecessor of positive word of

mouth, with direct and indirect impacts on word of mouth

behavior. In their meta-analysis of predecessors and

mediators of word of mouth, commitment was identified as

the major associate, followed by perceived value, quality,

trust, satisfaction, and loyalty.

2.2.2 Negative word of mouth:

(Mardhiyah, Dharmmesta and Purwanto 2013: 113) defined

negative word of mouth as conversations and communications

that spread negative information and hold complaints about

something. Warnings to others not to use specific products

or services, or even complaints that are revealed to a

third party but not to the firm directly will be negative

word of mouth communication about that firm. And this can

8

be so damaging and harmful for the firm’s image. Negative

information transferred by consumers due to dissatisfaction

with the products or services they use is negative WOM

communication and it tends towards being a warning to take

care when using, consuming the product or service that is

being mentioned in the communication. (Mardhiyah et al.

2013: 116). Consistent with Mardhiyah et al. (2013: 113),

(Podnar and Javernik, 2012: 152) explained that a response

to dissatisfaction is generally considered to be negative

word of mouth. Engaging in negative word of mouth rises

when the problem is more serious, the organization is the

one to be blamed for dissatisfaction and the responsiveness

of the seller about complaints is perceived more

negatively.

As stated by Laczniak et al. (2011: 58), negative WOM

communication is known as interpersonal communication

regarding a marketing association or product that

disparages the purpose of the communication. Negative WOM

potentially has a stronger impact on buyer behavior than

print sources, such as consumer reports, for the reason

that individuals find it to be more accessible and

diagnostic. Actually, research has recommended that

negative WOMC has the authority to influence consumers’

behaviors and attiudes. Moreover, it was conducted by Bolen

(1994: 11) that it’s essential to understand that people

can do say negative things in their conversation as well as

9

good/positive things about a business, product or even a

service. Awful services or experiences of products, brands

are the reason why negative word of mouth is generated..

Negative information is paid more attention than positive

information related to the knowledge of people when

considering new products or services. (Bolen, 1994: 11 ;

Mardhiyah et al. 2013: 116)

One of the things that research has shown about word-of-

mouth is the fact that disappointed customers have a

tendency to disseminate their negative experiences to

greater number of individuals than they do when they have

positive experiences. Research shows that when a person has

a positive experience, he shares it with three people about

it, and when he has a negative experience; he shares it

with seven people. (Gildin, 2002: 97). Also, De Angelis et

al. (2011: 616) assumed that there are two stages of WOM

which are generation and transmission. Customers generate

WOM by chatting about their personal experiences with

products, while transmit WOM by transferring information

about the experiences of other people. It was estimated

that positive WOM is likely to be more widespread than

negative WOM in the generation stage, while negative WOM

seems to be more widespread than positive WOM in the stage

of transmission. De Angelis et al. (2011: 616).

Furthermore, (East et al. 2008: 216) observed that negative

information is generally more infrequent than positive

10

information and debated that this made positive information

less valuable than negative information as the normal

positive ones could regularly be assumed. For example,

evidence that a brand is undependable is more valuable than

evidence that the brand is dependable because dependability

may be presumed as the default state for modern products.

Under these conditions, it would be expected that negative

information tend to have more effect on judgments, opinions

and decsions.

2.3 Word of mouth motivators:

Marketing and advertising practitioners share the belief

that a communicator's character has a significant effect on

the persuasiveness of the message. (Ohanian, 1990: 39).

2.3.1 Celebrities:

Jin and Phua (2014: 182) indicated that celebrities are

famous individuals who obtain considerable media attention.

A celebrity is defined as “any human being who takes

pleasure in public recognition and who utilizes this

recognition on behalf of a customer commodity by making an

advertisement appearing with this commodity. Celebrities

are used to motivate consumers for a product is a

recognized strategy for advertisers due to their

significant, obvious impact on costumers and product

11

awareness and loyalty. Year 2006, the United States spent

$2 billion on celebrity advertising only and in 2011, $2.4

billion was spent by Nike on celebrity endorsements.

Companies invest in celebrities to enhance product

identification and dependability and to generate positive

attitudes or different personalities for the endorsed

product. Therefore, individual’s attractiveness and

credibility models are Crucial for motivating consumers to

Purchase or resist a specific product. (Jin and Phua, 2014:

182). In addition, Mowen and Brown (1981: 437)

Conducted that an endless list of products and services are

commonly promoted using celebrities. As well as

automobiles, credit cards, beer, headache remedies, and

losing weight programs It has been mentioned that many

important conditions exist in using endorsers, such as the

personal characteristics and traits of the endorsers, their

reputation, their ability to make people believe them and

finally their likeability, etc.

2.3.2 Social media:

A term which refers to “Internet-based applications that

build on the ideological and technological foundations of

Web 2.0 and that allow the creation and exchange of user

generated content” , has been the most important buzz on

Web 2.0 in current years. Skyrocketing usage of social

media sites are increasingly and highly capitalized by

12

advertisers and marketers on consumers, including Twitter,

Facebook and Pinterest to endorse their brands. The

usefulness of social media sites lies in their impact,

power and influence on popular demographics (e.g., young

adults and teens) that have traveled from further

conventional mass media such as newspapers and television.

Also, social media sites provide an unparalleled platform

for consumers to broadcast and announce their feedback on

purchased products, therefore smoothing the progress of

word-of-mouth (WOM) communication and influencing such key

elements of the company–consumer relationship as brand

consciousness in addition to brand imge. (Jin and Phua,

2014: 181). Sun and Chen (2014: 64) agreed with Jin and

Phua (2014) and indicated that in such a social networking

site, marketers and consumers both can effortlessly make

online communities and promote, motivate their desired

product or alienate people from certain products.

Social networking websites (SNWs) have emerged as a

progressively more powerful media platform. For example, in

2007, 110 million active users were using MySpace and 90

million active users using usual traditional media, social

networking websites are user-centered and user-generated.

SNWs create a center of attention for users by permitting

them to "build a public or semi-public account inside a

bounded system," set up connections and sustain

communications with others in the system (Zhang and

13

Daugherty, 2009: 53). In fact, the expansion in the

dissemination of such electronic word of mouth since 2004

has lead to the great growth of the word of mouth marketing

Association from three to about 300 business members with

the highest rates of expansion found online and on social

networking media where EWOM is perceived to have greater

credibility, compassion, and significance for consumers

than marketer formed sources of data and information.

(Kietzmann and Canhoto, 2013: 148).

2.3.3 Opinion leaders :

Sarathy and Patro (2013: 128) defined an opinion leader as

"trusted and informed people who exist in virtually all

primary groups.” As they are considered to be a model for

opinion, they can have crucial impacts on customer decision

making and marketing efforts throughout a word-of-mouth

communication to many people and groups. The extent to

which an individual is able to influence other individuals'

attitudes informally or disclose behavior in a preferred

way with relatively frequency and the ability to be a

reference for information and guidance even in small issues

is considered to be opinion leadership. Managers have been

considering opinion leaders to be of an important crucial

factor for their interests for a long time for the fact

14

that they are influential in flourishing marketing

strategies. The propensity of the consumer market to rely

on the success of new products commonly lie with opinion

leaders as they have a direct influence on consumers by

giving advice, recommendation and verbal direction for

exploration, search, purchase, and use. (Sarathy and Patro,

2013: 128).

Robert C. and Brooks Jr. (1957: 157) pointed out that the

existence of opinion leadership inside groups is a major

significant factor in "word-of-mouth" advertising. Also,

it’s of huge importance to the direction of the promotion

effort of the firm. Furthermore, opinion leaders want to

assist listeners. They want to recommend, suggest something

tocthe listener, or to express love, care or friendship, or

even enjoy the products’ benefits (Gildin, 2002: 96).

2.3.4 Reference groups:

Činjarević and Alić (2012: 596) Defined reference groups as

a person or a group of people that have a noteworthy and

considerable impact on an individual’s behavior. He also

mentioned a broad definition for reference groups that they

are “groups, persons and institutions whom one looks to for

guidance for one's own behavior and values, and whose

opinion about oneself is valued”. Childers and Rao (1992:

198) added that from the perspective of a consumer behavior

15

it seems that brands and products that individuals choose

and select can be affected by reference groups. Individuals

seem to perform, operate in a way that is consistent with

the social group with which they belong to and identify.

Reference produced by the groups to which individuals fit

in is a long-accepted and sound principle. (Bearden and

Etzel, 1982: 184) Found that consumers apply reflective and

comparative assessment in product alternatives. Meaning

that, they participate in direct, verbal interaction to

find out the reference group's assessment including

observation of the behavior of members of the reference

groups regarding the decision under deliberation. Reference

group concepts have been used by advertisers and marketers

in their efforts to influence, motivate consumers to

purchase brands and products knowing their significant

influence on consumers. (Bearden and Etzel, 1982: 184).

Moreover, Činjarević and Alić (2012: 596) gave example for

reference groups mentioning that it includes family

members, friends, relatives, religious and ethnic groups,

colleagues from work, spare time groups, trade unions,

teachers, sports and amusement figures and finally

neighborhoods.

2.4 Interpersonal dimensions that affect word of

mouth:

16

personal contacts in word of mouth appear to be mainly

effective in causing changes in attitude, opinion and

behavior of customers’ purchase decisions (Brooks Jr.,

Robert C., 1957: 155).

2.4.1 Closeness:

WOM is a social phenomenon accordingly; close social

relations characteristics and properties are likely to play

a considerable, important role in WOM behavior (Brown et

al. 1987: 251). In addition, (Vázquez-Casielles et al.

2013:47) stated that the recommendation and suggestion

sources of word of mouth can be categorized according to

the parties similarity and the nearness or closeness of the

relationship between the WOM receiver who must make the

decision and the WOM sender.

2.4.2 Intimacy:

The relationship’s tie strength is observed to be high when

receiver knows the sender personally. (Vázquez-Casielles et

al. 2013:47). The stronger the tie, the more the WOM sender

and receiver will be more familiar with each other, and the

receiver will assign greater trustworthiness and

reliability to the sender. In addition, the receiver will

be more likely to initiate an active search for

information. Moreover, as (Vázquez-Casielles et al.

17

2013:47) assumed that the higher the intimacy between

consumers, the more stronger their effect can be on each

others’ purchase/resist decisions resulted from the word of

mouth communication. For example if a friend suggests a

movie, or a CD to you. Probably, you are more likely to go for

the suggestion of a friend or family member than to a business

communication. (Gildin, 2002: 98).

2.4.3 Support:

When two individuals share a credited, reliable and

intimate relation like kinship for example, they engage in

a priority set of commitment to lend support, assistance

and share resources. on the other hand, two individuals can

build up social capital in a friendship tie by fulfilling

higher levels of trust , faith, reliance and better

willingness to lend support as a result of their preceding,

subsequent interactions. (Frenzen and Davis, 1990: 2).

2.5 Sender’s experience and strengths will affect the

way word of mouth is perceived:

The experience of the word of mouth sender will feasibly

have an impact on the way the WOM is perceived. (Vázquez-

Casielles et al. 2013:47).

2.5.1 Convincing argumens:

18

Hoeken et al. (2012: 394-396) conducted that the quality of

the argument is believed to decide the outcome of the

persuasion process if the audience spends the necessary

effort to critically assess those arguments; more than a

few meta-analyses have exposed that the quality of the

argument significantly affects the acceptance of a

message’s claim. In models of the process of persuasion the

ratio of positive and negative thoughts suggested by

arguments is believed to determine the persuasion’s process

outcome, consequently, this process leads to defining high-

quality arguments as convincing ones, and low-quality

arguments as unconvincing ones. Many arguments aspire to

change the behaviors of individuals. For example, stop

smoking, buy a specific brand of cars or take the bus as an

alternative of one’s car. (Hoeken et al. 2012: 394-396).

Moreover, according to (Vázquez-Casielles et al. 2013:48),

convincing arguments influence the way WOM is perceived,

the more the sender is capable of convincing the receiver,

the more he is affected towards a certain behavior,

decision depending on the communication of the word of

mouth, whether to convince the receiver to embrace or

resist a certain product or service.

2.5.2 Knowledge:

The strength of word of mouth sender’s expression and

knowledge will directly have an effect on the impacts of

19

the positive and negative WOM communication on the shift in

the future purchase probability of the receiver. The

greater the strength of word of mouth sender’s expression,

knowledge and experience the greater the shift in the

consumer’s purchase probability towards positive or

negative word of mouth. (Vázquez-Casielles et al. 2012:

48). In addition, ( Podnar and Javernik, 2012: 153) states

that when he receiver is about to decide the validity of

the word of mouth, he mainly considers the sender’s about

the product or brand. On the other hand, consumers tend to

not engage in positive or negative word-of- mouth when they

think senders are rude, do not have product or service

knowledge. (Gildin, 2002: 97).

2.5.3 Education:

According to (Vázquez-Casielles et al. 2012: 48), the more

educated the sender of the word of mouth communication the

more he is able to affect the receiver’s purchase decision

positively. Therefore, marketers should have valuable

information for better marketing decision making, promoting

and advertising influence. For example, for new products,

examining word of mouth might be essential for discovering

and studying what product traits and aspects are

emphasized, what product uses are highlighted, what

drawbacks or problems are discussed, and what is the

20

attitude toward the product because knowing the answer of

those questions might help affecting customer’s purchase

probability towards word of mouth positively. (Gildin,

2002: 104).

2.5.4 Competence:

Martinez and Gutiérrez (2013: 66) defined Competences as

the amount of information, knowledge, abilities, skills or

resources and characteristics that permit an individual to

complete actions. When individuals use language, they use a

great deal other than just words. For a conversation to be

successful, it requires presenters to select language

structures and forms that make sense and are suitable to a

certain context. To be appropriate and suitable, speakers

must be aware of the social expectations that rule a

context such as the formality level and taboos. They should

use their grammatical knowledge and information to

accurately organize their ideas in comprehensible, logical

and reasonable phrases and sentences. They must use

intonations, inflection, tone and stresses that support

intended meaning of their words and they must continuously

understand verbal and non-verbal response and feedback in

order to choose the utterances of their next set (Costin,

2011: 16-18 ; Martinez and Gutiérrez, 2013: 66 ).

Accordingly, sender’s competence is a significant factor in

a affecting how word of mouth is perceived, competence

21

affect sender’s message positively. (Vázquez-Casielles et

al. 2012: 48).

2.6 Shift in purchase probability:

Podnar and Javernik, (2012: 147) stated that word of mouth

has long been perceived as a significant influence on the

attitudes, beliefs and behaviors of consumers. (Vázquez-

Casielles et al. 2012: 51) agreed with (Podnar and

Javernik, 2012: 147) that word of mouth affect respondents’

attitudes toward the product and their purchase

probability. Also, that positive and negative word of mouth

have a crucial effect on consumers’ on the purchase

probability of consumers. Consistent with the perceptions

and views of previous authors (Chung lo, 2012: 191) that

word of mouth has a huge impact on affecting the consumer’s

purchase decision.

2.6.1 Motivation in proceeding the purchase process:

The greater the persuasion of the sender and the more he is

capable to have a strength of expression, the more his

arguments are convincing his knowledge and competence are

considered to be reliable, credible and influential to the

receiver, the more the receiver is convinced and persuaded

by the sender’s word of mouth communication and the greater

the impact, motivation towards proceeding the purchase

22

process. (Vázquez-Casielles et al. 2012: 51). In addition,

(Podnar and Javernik, 2012: 151) had the same perception of

(Vázquez-Casielles et al. 2012: 51) that positive word of

mouth can have a powerful, significant and considerable

impact on the awareness of brands, expectations,

perceptions, attitudes, mind-sets, purchase intentions,

purchase behavior and therefore motivate the consumer to

proceed the purchase process.

2.6.2 Resistence to starting/completing the purchase

process:

Negative word of mouth is commonly believed to have a

stronger influence than positive word of mouth (Podnar and

Javernik, 2012 : 152 ; Chevalier and Mayzlin 2006, 347).

Gildin (2002: 97) also stated that in general, positive

experiences are predictable, expected and tends to be

forgotten as soon as they happen, while the unsolved

negative ones tends to make people angry, aggravated and

invigorate negative word-of-mouth which make people have

negative advices, recommendations and suggestions about

products, brands or even services leading to the resistance

of the receivers of those suggestions, advices to start or

complete their purchase process.

2.7 Creation/Existence of uncontrollable new word of

mouth marketing:

23

Gildin (2002: 97) mentioned that sufficient predictor of

how many people a consumer will tell about his experience

is the emotional involvement he had with the product, if

the consumer was involved in a satisfied, good experience

he will mostly share positive word of mouth with his social

network, on the other hand if he was involved in a

dissatisfied, bad experience with the product or service,

he would commonly share negative word of mouth with his

social network (Richins, 1883: 68 ; Gildin, 2002: 97).

Therefore, Marketers should be aware of negative word of

mouth and its effects, also they should try as much as

possible to take immediate action to stop and prevent this

type of word-of-mouth communication and start to create

positive image that leads to that uncontrollable

advertising for their products, brands and services.

(Gildin, 2002: 103). Moreover, in order for companies to

keep and sustain the positive flow of word of mouth as it’s

a substantial need for them, companies should try to

maintain the senders’ satisfaction by providing a good-

quality of products or services, keeping the sender-

centered relationship marketing effective. In this

perspective, the programs of word of mouth must generate

experiences for consumers and communicate, transmit

information that supports dominant, powerful and

influential individuals or groups to talk freely,

24

liberally, confidently, and convincingly with others

(Vázquez-Casielles et al. 2012: 55).

Research Gap:

From exploring the previous literature review, we found a

huge gap in investigating the impact of positive and

negative word of mouth in social issues and campaigns, e.g.

smoking or health in general, harassment, respecting

traffic signs, poverty and education. Word of mouth was

said by many authors to be a powerful, influential tool

that could be used to achieve progress in many areas,

however, researchers explored and investigated word of

mouth sufficiently in the marketing, sales area and didn’t

investigate word of mouth in the perspective of solving

social issues though, it would definitely have a huge

influence, impact in this area too. For instance spreading

negative word of mouth about smoking and how harmful it is,

mentioning how many people, friends and relatives died or

had serious, considerable health problems could have

prevented many smokers from continuing to smoke. On the

other hand, spreading positive word of mouth about

education and how important it is for individuals would

have influenced many illiterate people to learn and become

educated. Consequently, the research question that this

study seeks to is:

25

“Exploring how word-of-mouth can be a double edged weapon

in social problems and issues”.

The type of this research is “Exploratory research”.

References:

Bearden, W. O., & Etzel, M. J. (1982). Reference Group

Influence on Product and Brand Purchase Decisions. Journal

Of Consumer Research, vol. 9, No 2, pp. 183-194.

Bolen, W. H. (1994). The Role of Word-of-Mouth

'Advertising' in Retailing. American Business Review, vol.

12, No 2, pp. 11-14.

Brooks Jr., R. C. (1957). "WORD-OF-MOUTH" ADVERTISING IN

SELLING NEW PRODUCTS. Journal Of Marketing, vol. 22, No 2,

pp. 154-161.

Brown, T. J., Barry, T. E., Dacin, P. A., & Gunst, R. F.

(2005). Spreading the Word: Investigating Antecedents of

Consumers' Positive Word-of-Mouth Intentions and Behaviors

in a Retailing Context. Journal Of The Academy Of Marketing

Science, vol. 33, No 2, pp. 123-138.

26

Buttle, F. A. (1998). Word of mouth: understanding and

managing referral marketing. Journal Of Strategic

Marketing, vol. 6, No 3, pp. 241-254.

Chevalier, J. A., & Mayzlin, D. (2006). The Effect of Word

of Mouth on Sales: Online Book Reviews. Journal Of

Marketing Research (JMR), vol. 43, No 3, pp. 345-354.

Childers, T. L., & Rao, A. R. (1992). The Influence of

Familial and Peer-based Reference Groups on Consumer

Decisions. Journal Of Consumer Research, vol. 19, No 2, pp.

198-211.

Činjarević M, Alić A. TO SEEK A STATUS OR TO MAKE A CALL?!

INTERPLAY OF MATERIALISM, REFERENCE GROUP INFLUENCES AND

STATUS CONSUMPTION. Conference Proceedings: International

Conference Of The Faculty Of Economics Sarajevo (ICES)

[serial online]. January 2012;:592-607. Available from:

Business Source Complete, Ipswich, MA. Accessed November

11, 2014.

27

Costin, A. F. (2011). COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE - A MAIN

GOAL IN FOREIGN LANGUAGES TEACHIN. Review Of Management &

Economic Engineering, vol. 10, No 2, pp. 15-22.

De Angelis, M., Bonezzi, A., Peluso, A. M., Rucker, D., &

Costabile, M. (2011). On Braggarts and Gossips: Why

Consumers Generate Positive But Transmit Negative Word of

Mouth. Advances In Consumer Research, 2011, vol. 39, No 2,

pp. 616-617.

Dien, M., Basu Swastha, D., & B. M., P. (2013). Antecedents

to Intention to Engage in the Online Negative Word-of-Mouth

Communication. Gadjah Mada International Journal Of

Business, vol. 15, No 2, pp. 113-132.

East, R., Hammond, K., & Lomax, W. (2008). Measuring the

impact of positive and negative word of mouth on brand

purchase probability. International Journal Of Research In


Gildin, S. Z. (2003). Understanding The Power Of Word-Of-

Mouth. Revista De Administração Mackenzie, vol. 4, No 1,

pp. 91-106.

28

Hoeken, H., Timmers, R., & Schellens, P. (2012). Arguing

about desirable consequences: What constitutes a convincing

argument ?. Thinking & Reasoning, vol. 18, No 3, pp. 394-416.

Iyengar, R., Van den Bulte, C., Eichert, J., West, B., &

Valente, T. W. (2011). HOW SOCIAL NETWORKS AND OPINION

LEADERS AFFECT THE ADOPTION OF NEW PRODUCTS. Gfk-Marketing

Intelligence Review, vol. 3, No 1, pp. 16-25.

Jie, Z., & Daugherty, T. (2009). Third-Person Effect and

Social Networking: Implications for Online Marketing and

Word-of-Mouth Communication. American Journal Of Business

(American Journal Of Business), vol. 24, No 2, pp. 53-63.

Jin, S. A., & Phua, J. (2014). Following Celebrities’

Tweets About Brands: The Impact of Twitter-Based Electronic

Word-of-Mouth on Consumers’ Source Credibility Perception,

Buying Intention, and Social Identification With

Celebrities. Journal Of Advertising, vol. 43, No 2, pp.

181-195.

Kietzmann, J., & Canhoto, A. (2013). Bittersweet!

Understanding and Managing Electronic Word of Mouth.

29

Journal Of Public Affairs (14723891), vol. 13, No 2, pp.

146-159.

Laczniak, R. N., DeCarlo, T. E., & Ramaswami, S. N. (2001).

Consumers' Responses to Negative Word-of-Mouth

Communication: An Attribution Theory Perspective. Journal

Of Consumer Psychology (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), vol.

11, No 1, pp. 57-73.

Mowen, J. C., & Brown, S. W. (1981). ON EXPLAINING AND

PREDICTING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CELEBRITY ENDORSERS.

Advances In Consumer Research, vol. 8, No 1, pp. 437-441.

Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and Validation of a Scale

to Measure Celebrity Endorsers' Perceived Expertise,

Trustworthiness, and Attractiveness. Journal Of

Advertising, vol. 19, No 3, pp. 39-52.

Podnar, K., & Javernik, P. (2012). The Effect of Word of

Mouth on Consumers’ Attitudes Toward Products and Their

Purchase Probability. Journal Of Promotion Management, vol.

18, No 2, pp. 145-168.

30

Richins, M. L. (1983). Negative Word-Of-Mouth By

dissatisfied consumers: A pilot study. Journal Of


Sainio, L. (2010). Social Media and Word of Mouth

communication as a part of

communication mix in education technology industry Case

Company X. Bachelor Thesis. Lappeenranta University Of

Technology: Europe.

Sarathy, P. S., & Patro, S. K. (2013). The Role of Opinion

Leaders in High-Involvement Purchases: An Empirical

Investigation. South Asian Journal of Management, vol. 20,

No 2, pp. 127-145.

Sheng Chung, L. (2012). CONSUMER DECISIONS: THE EFFECT OF WORD-OF-MOUTH. International Journal Of Organizational Innovation, 4(3), 188-196.

Journal Of Organizational Innovation, vol. 4, No 3, pp.

188-196.

Sundaram, D. S., Mitra, K., & Webster, C. (1998). Word-of-

Mouth Communications: A Motivational Analysis. Advances In

Consumer Research, vol. 25, No 1, pp. 527-531.

31

Szu-Yuan, S., & Li-Shan, C. (2014). Exploring The Servicing

Effectiveness Of Social Media In Customers' Electronic Word

Of Mouth (eWOM). International Journal Of Organizational

Innovation, vol. 6, No 3, pp. 63-67.

Vázquez-Casielles, R., Suárez-Álvarez, L., & del Río-Lanza,

A. (2013). The Word of Mouth Dynamic: How Positive (and

Negative) WOM Drives Purchase Probability: An Analysis of

Interpersonal and Non-Interpersonal Factors. Journal Of

Advertising Research, vol. 53, No 1, pp. 43-60.

32

Literature Review

Documents

Transcript of Literature Review