IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cbu/jrnlec/y2015v5p160-169.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Segmentation Of Facebook Users From Romania By Wom Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • ANA RALUCA CHIOSA

    (AL. I. CUZA UNIVERSITY, IASI, ROMANIA)

  • BOGDAN ANASTASIEI

    (AL. I. CUZA UNIVERSITY, IASI, ROMANIA)

Abstract

The novelty of the research is the study of the Facebook eWOM behavior of Romanian users. The study was conducted on 640 respondents aged between 19 and 45 years old and it is representative for the population of internet users in urban areas of Romania. Statistical analysis aimed to identify the profile of Facebook users by grouping them into clusters. The analysis was performed in the SPSS software. The most important variable is “the actual process of using Facebook to seek product recommendation is pleasant” (cluster 1), followed by “seeking product recommendation on Facebook is enjoyable” (cluster 2). Dayly time spent on Facebook (cluster 3) is the variable with the slightest importance. The research results showed two consumer segments with different characteristics regarding eWOM behavior on Facebook. This information will help the marketing manager to adapt the social media communication and the promotion strategy according to the profile of each target. The companies should pay attention to their brand pages, to interact with users and to encourage them to recommend their products. Facebook brand page managers can launch creative contests or promotions, initiate interesting discussions or interactive activities, offer coupons or gifts.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana Raluca Chiosa & Bogdan Anastasiei, 2015. "The Segmentation Of Facebook Users From Romania By Wom Behavior," Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 5, pages 160-169, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cbu:jrnlec:y:2015:v:5:p:160-169
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.utgjiu.ro/revista/ec/pdf/2015-05/25_Chiosa%20Anastasei.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. King, Robert Allen & Racherla, Pradeep & Bush, Victoria D., 2014. "What We Know and Don't Know About Online Word-of-Mouth: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 167-183.
    2. Lee, Michael S.W. & Motion, Judith & Conroy, Denise, 2009. "Anti-consumption and brand avoidance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 169-180, February.
    3. Jonah Berger & Raghuram Iyengar, 2013. "Communication Channels and Word of Mouth: How the Medium Shapes the Message," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 40(3), pages 567-579.
    4. Kristine de Valck & Roberts V. Kozinets & Andrea C. Wojnicki & Sarah J.S. Wilner, 2010. "Networked Narratives: Understanding Word-of-Mouth Marketing in Online Communities," Post-Print hal-00458424, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bogdan Anastasiei & Ana Raluca Chiosa, 2018. "Antecedents of Word-of-Mouth Communication and Purchase Intention on Facebook," Journal of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Markets, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 2(8), pages 33-45.

    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. Marchand, André & Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten & Wiertz, Caroline, 2017. "Not all digital word of mouth is created equal: Understanding the respective impact of consumer reviews and microblogs on new product success," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 336-354.
    2. Curina, Ilaria & Francioni, Barbara & Hegner, Sabrina M. & Cioppi, Marco, 2020. "Brand hate and non-repurchase intention: A service context perspective in a cross-channel setting," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    3. Wee-Kheng Tan & Ching-Hsiang Lin, 2021. "Why do individuals word-of-mouth destinations they never visited?," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 15(1), pages 131-149, March.
    4. Bastos, Wilson, 2020. "“Speaking of Purchases”: How Conversational Potential Determines Consumers' Willingness to Exert Effort for Experiential Versus Material Purchases," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 1-16.
    5. Eelen, Jiska & Özturan, Peren & Verlegh, Peeter W.J., 2017. "The differential impact of brand loyalty on traditional and online word of mouth: The moderating roles of self-brand connection and the desire to help the brand," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 872-891.
    6. 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.
    7. Sheng, Jie, 2019. "Being Active in Online Communications: Firm Responsiveness and Customer Engagement Behaviour," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 40-51.
    8. Ana Raluca CHIOSA & Bogdan ANASTASIEI, 2018. "What Takes Consumers To Develop Brand Advocacy On Facebook," Network Intelligence Studies, Romanian Foundation for Business Intelligence, Editorial Department, issue 12, pages 131-140, December.
    9. Rietveld, Robert & van Dolen, Willemijn & Mazloom, Masoud & Worring, Marcel, 2020. "What You Feel, Is What You Like Influence of Message Appeals on Customer Engagement on Instagram," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 20-53.
    10. Motoki, Kosuke & Suzuki, Shinsuke & Kawashima, Ryuta & Sugiura, Motoaki, 2020. "A Combination of Self-Reported Data and Social-Related Neural Measures Forecasts Viral Marketing Success on Social Media," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 99-117.
    11. Ina Garnefeld & Sabrina Helm & Ann-Kathrin Grötschel, 2020. "May we buy your love? psychological effects of incentives on writing likelihood and valence of online product reviews," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(4), pages 805-820, December.
    12. Xingyu Chen & Xing Li & Dai Yao & Zhimin Zhou, 2019. "Seeking the support of the silent majority: are lurking users valuable to UGC platforms?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 986-1004, November.
    13. Pramono Hari Adi & Faizal Wihuda & Wiwiek Rabiatul Adawiyah, 2017. "The Role of Social Media Browsing Intention for Behavioral Outcomes of Young Consumers," Tržište/Market, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, vol. 29(1), pages 39-57.
    14. Haase, Janina & Wiedmann, Klaus-Peter & Labenz, Franziska, 2022. "Brand hate, rage, anger & co.: Exploring the relevance and characteristics of negative consumer emotions toward brands," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 1-16.
    15. Choo Yeon Kim & Seong Soo Cha, 2023. "Effect of SNS Characteristics for Dining Out on Customer Satisfaction and Online Word of Mouth," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    16. Carmela Milano, 2015. "Democratization or else vulgarization of cultural capital? The role of social networks in theater’s audience behavior," Working Papers CEB 15-004, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    17. 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.
    18. Irina Heimbach & Oliver Hinz, 2018. "The Impact of Sharing Mechanism Design on Content Sharing in Online Social Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 592-611, September.
    19. Nenycz-Thiel, Magda & Romaniuk, Jenni, 2011. "The nature and incidence of private label rejection," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 93-99.
    20. M. Narciso, 2022. "The Unreliability of Online Review Mechanisms," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 349-368, September.

    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:cbu:jrnlec:y:2015:v:5:p:160-169. 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: Ecobici Nicolae (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fetgjro.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.