Social and attitudinal determinants of viral marketing dynamics

0747-5632/$ see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. A doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.07.008 ⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 983 42 33 32; fax E-mail addresses: camarero@eco.uva.es (C. Cam (R. San José). 1 Tel.: +34 983 42 39 51; fax: +34 983 42 38 99. At this time of uncertainty, viral marketing is emerging as one of the most intriguing communication strategies, due to low cost and the results it obtains. However, the success of this kind of practice depends on a range of factors including what we explore and refer to in the present research as the individual’s ‘‘viral dynamics’’. We thus propose a causal model in which viral dynamics is determined by the individual’s social capital and prior attitudes. Based on a survey of young adults, the authors test the effects of structural and relational capital as well as attitudes on viral dynamics. The results evidence that the individual’s connectedness in the email network does not impact viral dynamics, whereas the individual’s integration and relationship with the network and the attitudes towards viral messages prove critical to the individual involved in the receiving-forwarding process. 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

[1]  Andrew J. Czaplewski,et al.  eWOM: The impact of customer-to-customer online know-how exchange on customer value and loyalty , 2006 .

[2]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[3]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior , 1980 .

[4]  Jyh-Jeng Wu,et al.  Factors affecting members' trust belief and behaviour intention in virtual communities , 2008, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[5]  J. Coleman Foundations of Social Theory , 1990 .

[6]  Jason Ho,et al.  Viral marketing: Motivations to forward online content , 2010 .

[7]  Katherine Gallagher,et al.  A Tale of Two Studies: Replicating ‘Advertising Effectiveness and Content Evaluation in Print and on the Web’ , 2001, Journal of Advertising Research.

[8]  A. Lindgreen,et al.  Why Pass on Viral Messages? Because They Connect Emotionally , 2007 .

[9]  Dee T. Allsop,et al.  Word-of-Mouth Research: Principles and Applications , 2007, Journal of Advertising Research.

[10]  Oliviane Brodin LES COMMUNAUTÉS VIRTUELLES: Un potentiel marketing encore peu exploré , 2000 .

[11]  D. Mackinnon,et al.  Equivalence of the Mediation, Confounding and Suppression Effect , 2000, Prevention Science.

[12]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  Consumer Acceptance of Electronic Commerce: Integrating Trust and Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model , 2003, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[13]  Jane Klobas,et al.  Adults Learning To Use the Internet: A Longitudinal Study of Attitudes and Other Factors Associated with Intended Internet Use , 2000 .

[14]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[15]  Eric T. G. Wang,et al.  Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories , 2006, Decis. Support Syst..

[16]  N. Lee,et al.  Word of mouth communication within online communities: Conceptualizing the online social network , 2007 .

[17]  Tung-Ching Lin,et al.  Factors affecting pass-along email intentions (PAEIs): Integrating the social capital and social cognition theories , 2009, Electron. Commer. Res. Appl..

[18]  Cate Riegner Word of Mouth on the Web: The Impact of Web 2.0 on Consumer Purchase Decisions , 2007, Journal of Advertising Research.

[19]  Andrew D. Gershoff,et al.  Recommendation or Evaluation? Task Sensitivity in Information Source Selection , 2001 .

[20]  Katherine Gallagher,et al.  The Medium Is Not the Message: Advertising Effectiveness and Content Evaluation in Print and on the Web , 2001, Journal of Advertising Research.

[21]  Hung-Pin Shih,et al.  An empirical study on predicting user acceptance of e-shopping on the Web , 2004, Inf. Manag..

[22]  Mee-Shew Cheung,et al.  Revisiting Word-of-Mouth Communications: A Cross-National Exploration , 2007 .

[23]  Emanuel Rosen,et al.  The Anatomy of Buzz: How to Create Word of Mouth Marketing , 2000 .

[24]  Clive Sanford,et al.  The roles of self-concept clarity and psychological reactance in compliance with product and service recommendations , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[25]  James R. Coyle,et al.  Reconsidering Models of Influence: The Relationship between Consumer Social Networks and Word-of-Mouth Effectiveness , 2007, Journal of Advertising Research.

[26]  M.H.P. Kleijnen,et al.  Knowledge Creation Through Mobile Social Networks and Its Impact on Intentions to Use Innovative Mobile Services , 2009 .

[27]  P. Lance,et al.  From Subservient Chickens to Brawny Men , 2006 .

[28]  B. Pan,et al.  A retrospective view of electronic word-of-mouth in hospitality and tourism management , 2017 .

[29]  Chun-Ming Chang,et al.  Knowledge sharing behavior in virtual communities: The relationship between trust, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations , 2007, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[30]  P. Bourdieu Forms of Capital , 2002 .

[31]  Robert K. Plice,et al.  Toward a Sustainable Email Marketing Infrastructure , 2008 .

[32]  J. Kirby,et al.  Connected Marketing: The Viral, Buzz And Word Of Mouth Revolution , 2007 .

[33]  Ronald E. Goldsmith,et al.  Application of the personal involvement inventory in marketing , 1993 .

[34]  James R. Gould,et al.  How Consumers Generate Clickstreams through Web Sites , 2002 .

[35]  G. Lilien,et al.  A multi-stage model of word-of-mouth influence through viral marketing , 2008 .

[36]  Jyh-Jeng Wu,et al.  Trust factors influencing virtual community members: A study of transaction communities , 2010 .

[37]  R. East The Impact of Positive and Negative Word of Mouth on Brand Choice , 2005 .

[38]  Susan J. Winter,et al.  Electronic Word-of-Mouth in Online Environments , 2006 .

[39]  Susan Wiedenbeck,et al.  On-line trust: concepts, evolving themes, a model , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[40]  Bin Wang,et al.  From virtual community members to C2C e-commerce buyers: Trust in virtual communities and its effect on consumers' purchase intention , 2010, Electron. Commer. Res. Appl..

[41]  R. Cialdini,et al.  Running head : ONLINE PERSUASION AND COMPLIANCE Online Persuasion and Compliance : Social Influence on the Internet and Beyond , 2004 .

[42]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[43]  Dwayne D. Gremler,et al.  Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the Internet? , 2004 .

[44]  Pascale G. Quester,et al.  Modélisation de la structure sociale des groupes de discussion sur Internet: Implications pour le contrôle du marketing viral , 2007 .

[45]  David K. Perry,et al.  Viral Marketing or Electronic Word-of-Mouth Advertising: Examining Consumer Responses and Motivations to Pass Along Email , 2004, Journal of Advertising Research.

[46]  K. Chan,et al.  Understanding consumer-to-consumer interactions in virtual communities : the salience of reciprocity , 2010 .

[47]  Mark S. Granovetter T H E S T R E N G T H O F WEAK TIES: A NETWORK THEORY REVISITED , 1983 .

[48]  Tomás Bayón,et al.  The effect of word of mouth on services switching , 2004 .

[49]  Peter H. Reingen,et al.  Social Ties and Word-of-Mouth Referral Behavior , 1987 .

[50]  Shiu-Wan Hung,et al.  Fostering the determinants of knowledge sharing in professional virtual communities , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[51]  Fiona Sussan,et al.  THE ADDED-VALUE OF ONLINE WORD-OF-MOUTH (eWOM) TO ADVERTISING IN NEW PRODUCT ADOPTION: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE MOVIE INDUSTRY , 2005 .