IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ijrema/v34y2017i4p872-891.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Eelen, Jiska
  • Özturan, Peren
  • Verlegh, Peeter W.J.

Abstract

Marketers increasingly seek to build brand advocacy not only via traditional word of mouth (in-person WOM) but also by engaging their (loyal) customers via online media (eWOM). In a survey and three follow-up experiments, however, we show that brand loyalty is less positively related to spreading eWOM than in-person WOM (Studies 1–3). We find that loyal consumers' willingness to engage in eWOM increases when they are motivated to signal their identity through a brand (i.e., high self-brand connection in Studies 1–3) or to help a brand (Study 4). Our findings support the notion that online communication spreads faster and is less spontaneous and more deliberate than face-to-face communication. In turn, loyal consumers need strong motivation tied to the brand to engage in eWOM.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ijrema:v:34:y:2017:i:4:p:872-891
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2017.08.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167811617300551
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2017.08.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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. Dost, Florian & Sievert, Jens & Kassim, David, 2016. "Revisiting firm-created word of mouth: High-value versus low-value seed selection," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 236-239.
    3. Hinz, Oliver & Skiera, Bernd & Barrot, Christian & Becker, Jan, 2011. "Seeding Strategies for Viral Marketing: An Empirical Comparison," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 56543, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    4. Andreas Klein & Helfried Moosbrugger, 2000. "Maximum likelihood estimation of latent interaction effects with the LMS method," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 65(4), pages 457-474, December.
    5. Jennifer Edson Escalas & James R. Bettman, 2005. "Self-Construal, Reference Groups, and Brand Meaning," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 32(3), pages 378-389, December.
    6. Edward F. McQuarrie & Jessica Miller & Barbara J. Phillips, 2013. "The Megaphone Effect: Taste and Audience in Fashion Blogging," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 40(1), pages 136-158.
    7. Yoo, Boonghee & Donthu, Naveen, 2001. "Developing and validating a multidimensional consumer-based brand equity scale," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 1-14, April.
    8. Ali Faraji-Rad & Michel Tuan Pham, 2017. "Uncertainty Increases the Reliance on Affect in Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(1), pages 1-21.
    9. David Godes & Dina Mayzlin, 2009. "Firm-Created Word-of-Mouth Communication: Evidence from a Field Test," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 721-739, 07-08.
    10. 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.
    11. Rik Pieters, 2017. "Meaningful Mediation Analysis: Plausible Causal Inference and Informative Communication," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(3), pages 692-716.
    12. Bernritter, Stefan F. & Verlegh, Peeter W.J. & Smit, Edith G., 2016. "Why Nonprofits Are Easier to Endorse on Social Media: The Roles of Warmth and Brand Symbolism," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 27-42.
    13. Hollenbeck, Candice R. & Kaikati, Andrew M., 2012. "Consumers' use of brands to reflect their actual and ideal selves on Facebook," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 395-405.
    14. Barbara Carroll & Aaron Ahuvia, 2006. "Some antecedents and outcomes of brand love," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 79-89, April.
    15. Pauwels, Koen & Aksehirli, Zeynep & Lackman, Andrew, 2016. "Like the ad or the brand? Marketing stimulates different electronic word-of-mouth content to drive online and offline performance," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 639-655.
    16. Stephen, Andrew T. & Lehmann, Donald R., 2016. "How word-of-mouth transmission encouragement affects consumers' transmission decisions, receiver selection, and diffusion speed," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 755-766.
    17. 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. 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.
    2. Inyoung Chae & Andrew T. Stephen & Yakov Bart & Dai Yao, 2017. "Spillover Effects in Seeded Word-of-Mouth Marketing Campaigns," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 89-104, January.
    3. Vineet Kumar & K. Sudhir, 2019. "Can Friends Seed More Buzz and Adoption"," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2178, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    4. Gil Appel & Lauren Grewal & Rhonda Hadi & Andrew T. Stephen, 2020. "The future of social media in marketing," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 79-95, January.
    5. Shakeel ul Rehman & Rafia Gulzar & Wajeeha Aslam, 2022. "Developing the Integrated Marketing Communication (IMC) through Social Media (SM): The Modern Marketing Communication Approach," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May.
    6. 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).
    7. Reckmann, Tobias, 2017. "Intellectual Structure and Emancipation of Word of Mouth Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of a Multidisciplinary Research Field," EconStor Preprints 179913, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    8. Eigenraam, Anniek W. & Eelen, Jiska & van Lin, Arjen & Verlegh, Peeter W.J., 2018. "A Consumer-based Taxonomy of Digital Customer Engagement Practices," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 102-121.
    9. Vineet Kumar & K. Sudhir, 2019. "Can Random Friends Seed More Buzz and Adoption? Leveraging the Friendship Paradox," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2178R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Oct 2021.
    10. 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.
    11. Yaping Chang & You Li & Jun Yan & V. Kumar, 2019. "Getting more likes: the impact of narrative person and brand image on customer–brand interactions," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 1027-1045, November.
    12. 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.
    13. Anwar Sadat Shimul, 2022. "Brand attachment: a review and future research," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 29(4), pages 400-419, July.
    14. Shir-Way Siew & Michael S. Minor & Reto Felix, 2018. "The influence of perceived strength of brand origin on willingness to pay more for luxury goods," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 25(6), pages 591-605, November.
    15. Claus, Bart & Geyskens, Kelly & Millet, Kobe & Dewitte, Siegfried, 2012. "The referral backfire effect: The identity-threatening nature of referral failure," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 370-379.
    16. Hemant C. Sashittal & Avan R. Jassawalla, 2020. "The personal influence of Instagram bloggers on consumer–brand interactions: brands as tribal artifacts," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(6), pages 679-690, November.
    17. Golossenko, Artyom & Pillai, Kishore Gopalakrishna & Aroean, Lukman, 2020. "Seeing brands as humans: Development and validation of a brand anthropomorphism scale," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 737-755.
    18. 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.
    19. Li, You & Chang, Yaping & Liang, Zhehao, 2022. "Attracting more meaningful interactions: The impact of question and product types on comments on social media advertisings," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 89-101.
    20. Fernando Oliveira Santini & Wagner Junior Ladeira & Claudio Hoffmann Sampaio & Diego Costa Pinto, 2018. "The brand experience extended model: a meta-analysis," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 25(6), pages 519-535, November.

    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:eee:ijrema:v:34:y:2017:i:4:p:872-891. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-research-in-marketing/ .

    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.