IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aes/icmbdj/v2y2016i1p61-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Importance of Similarity and Expertise of the Information Source in the Word-Of-Mouth Communication Process

Author

Listed:
  • Jolanta Tkaczyk

    (Kozminski University)

Abstract

Credibility is the extent to which the recipient sees the source as having appropriate knowledge, skills and experience and believe it as the transferor impartial, objective information. Source perceived as credible in addition to having a proficiency in a specific area, is more convincing than something less knowledgeable. However it must also be more robust - honest, ethical and trustworthy. Research clearly support the hypothesis that sources with the specific knowledge and / or reliability are increasingly more appealing and efficient than those with less knowledge or less reliability. Harrison-Walker (2001) and Mazzarol, Sweeney, and Soutar (2007) treat WOM as the process, under which the discussion is held, around an organisation and its offerings, and during these discussions recommendations may appear. The participants of the WOM process may act as the source (sender/originator) of the message, its recipient, and also the intermediary; they can take an active or passive role in the process. Most consumers, when are looking for the best available offer on the market, are interested in opinions of other customers and their past experiences. Source credibility in the process of word-of mouth may depend on its characteristics - similarities and professionalism (Wangenheim, Bayon 2003). The aim of the article is to verify the hypothesis by which a consumer engaged in a particular product category will be more likely to use the expert’s opinion rather than the opinion of a person like himself in the product decision making process. Verification of the hypothesis will be based on the analysis of the results of research conducted on sample of 1,000 Polish consumers, chosen at random. The study was carried out by CAWI method. The involvement in the product category and the propensity to use expert’s opinion rather than the opinion of consumers similar to the respondents were investigated in 15 product categories. The project was funded by the National Science Centre on the basis of the decision DEC-2012/07/D/HS4/01761.

Suggested Citation

  • Jolanta Tkaczyk, 2016. "The Importance of Similarity and Expertise of the Information Source in the Word-Of-Mouth Communication Process," International Conference on Marketing and Business Development Journal, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, vol. 2(1), pages 61-71, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:aes:icmbdj:v:2:y:2016:i:1:p:61-71
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mbd.ase.ro/RePEc/aes/icmbdj/2016/ICMBD_V2_2016_25.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Filieri, Raffaele, 2015. "What makes online reviews helpful? A diagnosticity-adoption framework to explain informational and normative influences in e-WOM," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1261-1270.
    3. Chris Forman & Anindya Ghose & Batia Wiesenfeld, 2008. "Examining the Relationship Between Reviews and Sales: The Role of Reviewer Identity Disclosure in Electronic Markets," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 291-313, September.
    4. Rajagopal, 2015. "Social Psychology of Consumers," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: The Butterfly Effect in Competitive Markets, chapter 9, pages 223-247, Palgrave Macmillan.
    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. Zheng, Lili, 2021. "The classification of online consumer reviews: A systematic literature review and integrative framework," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 226-251.
    2. Moradi, Masoud & Dass, Mayukh & Kumar, Piyush, 2023. "Differential effects of analytical versus emotional rhetorical style on review helpfulness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    3. Yani Wang & Jun Wang & Tang Yao, 2019. "What makes a helpful online review? A meta-analysis of review characteristics," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 257-284, June.
    4. 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.
    5. Yi Feng & Yunqiang Yin & Dujuan Wang & Lalitha Dhamotharan & Joshua Ignatius & Ajay Kumar, 2023. "Diabetic patient review helpfulness: unpacking online drug treatment reviews by text analytics and design science approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 328(1), pages 387-418, September.
    6. Raffaele Filieri & Elisabetta Raguseo & Claudio Vitari, 2018. "What moderates the influence of extremely negative ratings? The role of review and reviewer characteristics," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) halshs-01923196, HAL.
    7. Raffaele Filieri & Elisabetta Raguseo & Claudio Vitari, 2018. "When are extreme ratings more helpful? Empirical evidence on the moderating effects of review characteristics and product type," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) halshs-01923243, HAL.
    8. Raffaele Filieri & Elisabetta Raguseo & Claudio Vitari, 2018. "When are extreme ratings more helpful? Empirical evidence on the moderating effects of review characteristics and product type," Post-Print halshs-01923243, HAL.
    9. Onofrei, George & Filieri, Raffaele & Kennedy, Lorraine, 2022. "Social media interactions, purchase intention, and behavioural engagement: The mediating role of source and content factors," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 100-112.
    10. Yucheng Zhang & Zhiling Wang & Lin Xiao & Lijun Wang & Pei Huang, 2023. "Discovering the evolution of online reviews: A bibliometric review," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-22, December.
    11. Muhammad Rifki Shihab & Audry Pragita Putri, 2019. "Negative online reviews of popular products: understanding the effects of review proportion and quality on consumers’ attitude and intention to buy," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 159-187, March.
    12. S. Cicognani & P. Figini & M. Magnani, 2016. "Social Influence Bias in Online Ratings: A Field Experiment," Working Papers wp1060, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    13. Book, Laura A. & Tanford, Sarah & Chang, Wen, 2018. "Customer reviews are not always informative: The impact of effortful versus heuristic processing," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 272-280.
    14. Sergio M. Fernández-Miguélez & Miguel Díaz-Puche & Juan A. Campos-Soria & Federico Galán-Valdivieso, 2020. "The Impact of Social Media on Restaurant Corporations’ Financial Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-14, February.
    15. Azer, Jaylan & Anker, Thomas & Taheri, Babak & Tinsley, Ross, 2023. "Consumer-Driven racial stigmatization: The moderating role of race in online consumer-to-consumer reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    16. Kaushik, Kapil & Mishra, Rajhans & Rana, Nripendra P. & Dwivedi, Yogesh K., 2018. "Exploring reviews and review sequences on e-commerce platform: A study of helpful reviews on Amazon.in," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 21-32.
    17. Guo, Yue & Barnes, Stuart J. & Jia, Qiong, 2017. "Mining meaning from online ratings and reviews: Tourist satisfaction analysis using latent dirichlet allocation," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 467-483.
    18. Guha Majumder, Madhumita & Dutta Gupta, Sangita & Paul, Justin, 2022. "Perceived usefulness of online customer reviews: A review mining approach using machine learning & exploratory data analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 147-164.
    19. Boccali, Filippo & Mariani, Marcello M. & Visani, Franco & Mora-Cruz, Alexandra, 2022. "Innovative value-based price assessment in data-rich environments: Leveraging online review analytics through Data Envelopment Analysis to empower managers and entrepreneurs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    20. Dongpu Fu & Yili Hong & Kanliang Wang & Weiguo Fan, 2018. "Effects of membership tier on user content generation behaviors: evidence from online reviews," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 457-483, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    word-of-mouth; desicion making process; consumer behaviour; credibility;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M30 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:aes:icmbdj:v:2:y:2016:i:1:p:61-71. 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: Lucian Onisor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aseeero.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.