IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/pkk/meb016/153-170.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Difference among Personality Types in Comment-Writing Behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Melinda Majláth

    (Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management)

Abstract

The higher penetration of internet usage in the society makes it more important to understand how and why people are ready to generate information on the net and what the common features are of those who are ready to post comments. Here special focus is on the members of Y generation, who are adults now and get used to use internet on a daily basis. This study tries to find relationship between personality types and frequency of commentwriting activity. According to our hypothesis, among Keirsey’s personality types, the intuiting Rationals and Idealists are supposed to write more comments than their Artisan and Guardian counterparts. Social attitude of the respondents is also examined: we would like to know whether the extravert people write more comments or the introvert ones. It is also expected that Rationals show the most positive attitude toward expressing their opinion and they are also ready to express negative opinion in a higher proportion than other temperament types. The analysis of the 992 usable questionnaire of university students supports the hypotheses.

Suggested Citation

  • Melinda Majláth, 2016. "Difference among Personality Types in Comment-Writing Behaviour," Proceedings- 11th International Conference on Mangement, Enterprise and Benchmarking (MEB 2016),, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:pkk:meb016:153-170
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://kgk.uni-obuda.hu/sites/default/files/11_Majlath.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gupta, Pranjal & Harris, Judy, 2010. "How e-WOM recommendations influence product consideration and quality of choice: A motivation to process information perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(9-10), pages 1041-1049, September.
    2. Moldovan, Sarit & Goldenberg, Jacob & Chattopadhyay, Amitava, 2011. "The different roles of product originality and usefulness in generating word-of-mouth," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 109-119.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Melinda Majláth, 2014. "Does Reading Comments Depend on Personality? - Results of an Empirical Study," Proceedings- 11th International Conference on Mangement, Enterprise and Benchmarking (MEB 2014),, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    2. Harun Gumus & Vedat Bal, 2016. "Analysis Of The Effect Of Quality Components Of Web 2.0 Enabled E-Commerce Websites On Electronic Word-Of-Mouth Marketing (Ewom) And On Customer Loyalty," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(1), pages 979-986, July.
    3. Dubey, Subodh & Sharma, Ishant & Mishra, Sabyasachee & Cats, Oded & Bansal, Prateek, 2022. "A General Framework to Forecast the Adoption of Novel Products: A Case of Autonomous Vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 63-95.
    4. Juan Shi & Kin Keung Lai & Ping Hu & Gang Chen, 2018. "Factors dominating individual information disseminating behavior on social networking sites," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 121-139, June.
    5. Philp, Matthew & Ashworth, Laurence, 2020. "I should have known better!: When firm-caused failure leads to self-image concerns and reduces negative word-of-mouth," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 283-293.
    6. Barta, Sergio & Belanche, Daniel & Fernández, Ana & Flavián, Marta, 2023. "Influencer marketing on TikTok: The effectiveness of humor and followers’ hedonic experience," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    7. He, Yi & You, Ya & Chen, Qimei, 2020. "Our conditional love for the underdog: The effect of brand positioning and the lay theory of achievement on WOM," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 210-222.
    8. Raffaele Filieri & Elisabetta Raguseo & Claudio Vitari, 2018. "What moderates the influence of extremely negative ratings? The role of review and reviewer characteristics," Post-Print halshs-01923196, HAL.
    9. Son, Youngdoo & Kim, Wonjoon, 2023. "Development of methodology for classification of user experience (UX) in online customer review," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    10. Heejae Shin & Wirawan Dahana, 2017. "Asymmetric Persuasive Effects of Gain- and Loss-related Messages in Electronic Word of Mouth," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(12), pages 1-82, November.
    11. Agnieszka Zablocki & Bodo Schlegelmilch & Michael J. Houston, 2019. "How valence, volume and variance of online reviews influence brand attitudes," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 9(1), pages 61-77, June.
    12. Yen-Liang Chen & Chia-Ling Chang & An-Qiao Sung, 2021. "Predicting eWOM’s Influence on Purchase Intention Based on Helpfulness, Credibility, Information Quality and Professionalism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-19, July.
    13. Nguyen, Hang T. & Chaudhuri, Malika, 2019. "Making new products go viral and succeed," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 39-62.
    14. Bin Guo & Shasha Zhou, 2017. "What makes population perception of review helpfulness: an information processing perspective," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 585-608, December.
    15. Ana Babić Rosario & Kristine Valck & Francesca Sotgiu, 2020. "Conceptualizing the electronic word-of-mouth process: What we know and need to know about eWOM creation, exposure, and evaluation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 422-448, May.
    16. Rishikesh Bhaiswar & N. Meenakshi & Deepak Chawla, 2021. "Evolution of Electronic Word of Mouth: A Systematic Literature Review Using Bibliometric Analysis of 20 Years (2000–2020)," FIIB Business Review, , vol. 10(3), pages 215-231, September.
    17. Liu, Zhiwei & Park, Sangwon, 2015. "What makes a useful online review? Implication for travel product websites," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 140-151.
    18. Chen, Jie & Teng, Lefa & Yu, Ying & Yu, Xueer, 2016. "The effect of online information sources on purchase intentions between consumers with high and low susceptibility to informational influence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 467-475.
    19. Supratim Kundu & Swapnajit Chakraborti, 2022. "A comparative study of online consumer reviews of Apple iPhone across Amazon, Twitter and MouthShut platforms," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 925-950, September.
    20. Pescher, Christian & Reichhart, Philipp & Spann, Martin, 2014. "Consumer Decision-making Processes in Mobile Viral Marketing Campaigns," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 43-54.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pkk:meb016:153-170. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Alexandra Vécsey (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gkbmfhu.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.