18-09-2014, 03:11 PM
Measuring the impact of positive and negative word of mouth on brand
purchase probability
Measuring.pdf (Size: 401.36 KB / Downloads: 98)
ABSTRACT
Article history:
First received in February 22, 2008 and was
under review for 5 months
Keywords:
Word of mouth
Impact
Brand commitment
Familiarity
NPS
Using two methods, three measures, and data covering a large number of categories, we present findings on
the respondent-assessed impact of positive and negative word of mouth (PWOM, NWOM) on brand purchase
probability.
For familiar brands, we find that:
1. The impact of PWOM is generally greater than NWOM. The pre-WOM probability of purchase tends
to be below 0.5, which gives more latitude for PWOM to increase purchase probability than for NWOM to
reduce it.
2. The impact of both PWOM and NWOM is strongly related to the pre-WOM probability of purchase,
the strength of expression of the WOM, and whether the WOM is about the respondent's preferred brand.
3. PWOM and NWOM appear to be similar forms of advice-giving behavior, except for their opposed
effects on choice.
4. Respondents resist NWOM on brands they are very likely to choose, and resist PWOM on brands
they are very unlikely to choose.
In the Discussion section, we show how our methods could be used to construct a word-of-mouth metric.
1. Introduction
1.1. Defining the field
Word of mouth (WOM) is informal advice passed between
consumers. It is usually interactive, swift, and lacking in commercial
bias. WOM is a powerful influence on consumer behavior. Keaveney
(1995) noted that 50% of service provider replacements were found in
this way. WOM may be positive (PWOM), encouraging brand choice,
or negative (NWOM), discouraging brand choice
Conclusion
We used role-play experiments and survey methods and found
that PWOM usually had more effect than NWOM. We explained why
this was found, adapting the explanation that is often cited in support
of the belief that NWOM has more impact than PWOM. We showed
that the impact of both PWOM and NWOM had the same
determinants with closely similar beta weights, which suggests that
these two forms of WOM are similar behaviors. This makes it less
likely that our findings are distorted by differential recall bias. In this
way, we present a persuasive case that PWOM usually has more
impact than NWOM