Post on 06-Jul-2015
transcript
Online Persuasion:How the Written Word Drives WOMEvidence from Consumer-Generated Product Reviews(Mar,2011)
Jin LiLingjing Zhan
Introduction & Background
• Importance of word of mouth in marketing
• Development of Word of mouth on Internet
• To examine how the language style, organizational structure, and other content features of consumer-generated, online product reviews affect review adoption.
PURPOSE
Studies
• Study 1 : the authors analyzed a data set of online product reviews regarding a consumer electronic device and identified the content features that positively or negatively influenced review adoption.
• Study 2 : used an experimental approach to probe the boundary conditions under which some effects observed in study 1 may or may not have occurred.
Study 1
Methodology• STEP 1 Determine the platform and product
that can apply the research
PLATFORM Product
WHY AMAZON?
• Each reviewer can provided an overall evaluation using a 1- to 5-star scale and a qualitative product review. Readers also could evaluate the helpfulness of a review on a dichotomous scale (“Yes” or “No”), and they could post comments after the review as well
Review usefulness
Review content
Why kindle?
•People are more likely to consult other buyers’ views when they consider purchasing high involved product(Riegner, 2007).
•Kindle is a brand new product
STEP 2 SAMPLEING
• Sampling
They use the review on Amazon. But only the reviews that had been
evaluated by at least 50 readers (i.e., in the statement “m of n people found the following review helpful,” n ≥ 50) were selected, for a total of 737 reviews for analysis.
Methodology
• The distribution of early product ratings The distribution of early product ratings was fairly balanced. Of the 737 reviews studied by the authors, 217 rated the Kindle with “five stars,” 67 with “four stars,” 78 with “three stars,” 100 with “two stars,” and 275 with “one star.”
217 67 78 100 275
Methodology•STEP 3 determine Theoretical Framework of wording
ELM MODEL(Petty and Cacioppo,1986)
Ease of
comprehension
Evidence Presence
Opposing Viewpoints
Comprehens-iveness
ARGUMENT QUALITY
Perceived
review
helpfulness
ELM MODEL
Product Usage
Language Intensity
SOURCE CREDIBILITY
Ease of comprehension
Evidence presence
Study 1:論點品質的衡量
– Average paragraph length– Average sentence length– Point format used (yes or no)
Evidence presence (yes or no)
ARGUMENT QUALITY
Opposing viewpoints
Balance
UnbalancePositive
Negative
Opposing viewpoints ( D1 , D2 )
Positive ( 1 , 0 )
Negative ( 0 , 1 )
Balance ( 0 , 0 )
ARGUMENT QUALITY
Comprehensiveness
Study 1:論點品質的衡量ARGUMENT QUALITY
• Review length expressed in number ofwords
• Number of product features discussedin the review
Ease of
comprehension
Evidence Presence
Opposing Viewpoints
Comprehens-iveness
ARGUMENT QUALITY
Perceived
review
helpfulness
Product Usage
Language Intensity
SOURCE CREDIBILITY
Product Usage
Language Intensity
Study 1:來源可信度的衡量
Whether use kindle or not
• Exclaim icon usage
• Positive attitude
• Negative attitude
SOURCE CREDIBILITY
Develop experiment
Independent variable
• Argument quality
• Source credibility
Dependent variable
• Review helpfulness
STEP 4 ENCODING the reviewMethodology
•WHY?Have to determine whether the independent variable appeared or not(like emotion, evidence appeared, opposing view point)
•HOW?Two native-English speakers were recruited as independent judges.
STEP 5 determine statistic model
j
k
kikjijii xβxβxββη0
110 )1...(...
The independent variables are written as (i = 1, …, 737 ,j = 1, …, 13)jix
)2...(737,...,1),,(~ ipabinomialya iiii
yi:Number of readers
iy
ai:Percentage of helpfulness
ia
)3....(1 i
i
η
η
ie
ep
Linear Predictor
Distribution Assumption)
Link Function
Decide product&
platform
Sampling the product review
Encoding product
review into theoraticalframework
Run statistic
OVERVIEW OF THE WHOLE RESEARCH
RESULT
Ease of comprehension
Independent variables parameter
Average paragraph length –0.244***
Average sentence length –0.212
Point format used 0.120
Evidence presence
Independent variables parameter
Evidence presence 0.992**
Means significant
Opposing Viewpoints
Independent variables parameter
Positive 1.118***
Negative –0.107
Comprehensiveness
Independent variables parameter
Review length 0.677***
Product feature 0.280**
Means significant
Product Usage
Independent variables parameter
Product Usage 1.038***
Language Intensity
Independent variables parameter
Exclaim icon usage –0.381***
Positive attitude 0.545**
Negative attitude –0.358***
Means significant
FINALIZED THE RESULT
The results indicate that helpful reviews exhibit five discernable characteristics:
• They were comprehensive and easy to read.• They were provided by reviewers who have usage experience with
the product.• They presented supporting evidence for arguments.• They provided positive information about the product.• They may have contained strong positive emotions but not strong
negative emotions.
Conclusion
ADVANTAGE of the research method
1. Happened in a totally natural situation
DISADVANTAGE of the research method
1.Sample not drawn from the regular population
2.Encoding subjectively
3.Inability theoretical framework
4.Argument quality and source credibility are not observable from online reviews
5. Ethic issue(?)
Marketing implication• Companies can increase the usefulness of message on their
Web sites
• Companies can identifying the most influential voices in the community.
• Help to create a good testimonial ads
• Use short sentences• Offer evidence for claims• Provide information on as many important
features as possible• Avoid the use of exclamation marks.
What should a good
Thank for your you attention!