IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i15p8489-d604238.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding the Potential Influence of WeChat Engagement on Bonding Capital, Bridging Capital, and Electronic Word-of-Mouth Intention

Author

Listed:
  • Hua Pang

    (School of New Media and Communication, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China
    College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China)

  • Jingying Wang

    (College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China)

  • Xiang Hu

    (Department of Psychology, University of Constance, 78464 Constance, Germany)

Abstract

As the most prevalent social media platform in mainland China, WeChat enables interpersonal communication among users and serves as an innovative marketing platform for enterprises to interact with consumers. Although numerous studies have investigated the antecedents of electronic word-of-mouth (e-WOM), WeChat users’ specific behaviors still receive limited academic attention. Drawing from social capital theory and social exchange theory, this article develops a model to systematically explore three differentiated types of WeChat behaviors and their association with users’ social capital and e-WOM intention. The conceptual model is explicitly evaluated by utilizing web-based data gathered from 271 young people. Obtained results demonstrate the path effects indicating that: (1) WeChat use behaviors such as seeking, sharing, and liking can positively influence bonding social capital, while only the impacts of sharing and liking on bridging social capital are significant; (2) bonding and bridging social capital are both significant predictors of e-WOM intention, and bonding social capital is the more influential of the two; (3) bonding social capital partially mediates the effect of seeking on e-WOM intention. These findings are eloquent for researchers and operators to further grasp the increasing importance of WeChat adoption and social capital on young generations’ e-WOM intention in the evolving digital age.

Suggested Citation

  • Hua Pang & Jingying Wang & Xiang Hu, 2021. "Understanding the Potential Influence of WeChat Engagement on Bonding Capital, Bridging Capital, and Electronic Word-of-Mouth Intention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-17, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8489-:d:604238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8489/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8489/
    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. Ryu, Sann & Park, JungKun, 2020. "The effects of benefit-driven commitment on usage of social media for shopping and positive word-of-mouth," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    3. Mishra, Anubhav & Maheswarappa, Satish S. & Maity, Moutusy & Samu, Sridhar, 2018. "Adolescent's eWOM intentions: An investigation into the roles of peers, the Internet and gender," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 394-405.
    4. MacKenzie, Scott B. & Podsakoff, Philip M., 2012. "Common Method Bias in Marketing: Causes, Mechanisms, and Procedural Remedies," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 88(4), pages 542-555.
    5. Brown, Jacqueline Johnson & Reingen, Peter H, 1987. "Social Ties and Word-of-Mouth Referral Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 14(3), pages 350-362, December.
    6. Reimer, Thomas & Benkenstein, Martin, 2016. "When good WOM hurts and bad WOM gains: The effect of untrustworthy online reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 5993-6001.
    7. David Constant & Lee Sproull & Sara Kiesler, 1996. "The Kindness of Strangers: The Usefulness of Electronic Weak Ties for Technical Advice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 119-135, April.
    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. Pang, Hua & Ruan, Yang, 2023. "Determining influences of information irrelevance, information overload and communication overload on WeChat discontinuance intention: The moderating role of exhaustion," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    2. Mohammad Al-Khasawneh & Shafig Al-Haddad & Abdel-Aziz Ahmad Sharabati & Hebatallah Hisham Al Khalili & Lana Laith Azar & Farah Waleed Ghabayen & Leen Mazen Jaber & Mariam Husam Ali & Ra’ed Masa’deh, 2023. "How Online Communities Affect Online Community Engagement and Word-of-Mouth Intention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-23, August.

    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. Zhang, Hao & Liang, Xiaoning & Qi, Chenyue, 2021. "Investigating the impact of interpersonal closeness and social status on electronic word-of-mouth effectiveness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 453-461.
    2. Wang, Le & Luo, Xin (Robert) & Li, Han, 2022. "Envy or conformity? An empirical investigation of peer influence on the purchase of non-functional items in mobile free-to-play games," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 308-324.
    3. 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.
    4. Tata, Sai Vijay & Prashar, Sanjeev & Gupta, Sumeet, 2020. "An examination of the role of review valence and review source in varying consumption contexts on purchase decision," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    5. Azer, Jaylan & Ranaweera, Chatura, 2022. "Former customers’ E-WOM in social media platforms: An investigation of motives, network size and social ties," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 118-133.
    6. 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.
    7. Maduku, Daniel K. & Mpinganjira, Mercy & Rana, Nripendra P. & Thusi, Philile & Ledikwe, Aobakwe & Mkhize, Njabulo Happy-boy, 2023. "Assessing customer passion, commitment, and word-of-mouth intentions in digital assistant usage: The moderating role of technology anxiety," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    8. Yang, Liu & Dong, Shaozeng, 2018. "Rebate strategy to stimulate online customer reviews," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 99-107.
    9. Kunz, Werner & Seshadri, Sukanya, 2015. "From virtual travelers to real friends: Relationship-building insights from an online travel community," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(9), pages 1822-1828.
    10. Sangmi Chai & Bomi Choi & Minkyun Kim & T. C. E. Cheng, 2023. "Why do people speak about products online? The role of opinion leadership," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1-17, March.
    11. Bartschat, Maria & Cziehso, Gerrit & Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, 2022. "Searching for word of mouth in the digital age: Determinants of consumers’ uses of face-to-face information, internet opinion sites, and social media," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 393-409.
    12. Sangjae Lee & Byung Gon Kim, 2020. "The Impact of Individual Motivations and Social Capital on the Continuous Usage Intention of Mobile Social Apps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-30, October.
    13. Donthu, Naveen & Kumar, Satish & Pandey, Neeraj & Pandey, Nitesh & Mishra, Akanksha, 2021. "Mapping the electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) research: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 758-773.
    14. Li Jie & Xue Wenyi & Yang Fang & Li Yakun, 2017. "An Integrated Research Framework for Effect of EWOM," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 5(4), pages 343-355, August.
    15. Sam Ransbotham & Gerald C. Kane & Nicholas H. Lurie, 2012. "Network Characteristics and the Value of Collaborative User-Generated Content," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 387-405, May.
    16. Andrew E. Wilson & Michael D. Giebelhausen & Michael K. Brady, 2017. "Negative word of mouth can be a positive for consumers connected to the brand," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 534-547, July.
    17. 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.
    18. M. Max Evans & Ilja Frissen & Anthony K. P. Wensley, 2018. "Organisational Information and Knowledge Sharing: Uncovering Mediating Effects of Perceived Trustworthiness Using the PROCESS Approach," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-29, March.
    19. Ting Chi & Olabisi Adesanya & Hang Liu & Rebecca Anderson & Zihui Zhao, 2023. "Renting than Buying Apparel: U.S. Consumer Collaborative Consumption for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-16, March.
    20. Youn Kue Na & Sungmin Kang, 2018. "Sustainable Diffusion of Fashion Information on Mobile Friends-Based Social Network Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-23, May.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8489-:d:604238. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.