The Longest Web Page of the internet
The influence of social capital through social media: a study of the creation of value in shopping behaviour
ABSTRACT When consumers access information from groups through social network sites (SNSs), they develop social capital in the form of bonding and bridging ties with these groups. The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of these bonding and bridging behaviours on consumers’ use of the social network information (SNI) gained from SNSs in their purchasing decisions. The study integrates constructs from the Technology Acceptance Model and the concept of flow to examine how these behaviours influence consumers’ perceptions of how useful the SNI is, of how easy the SNI is to use, and how they engage with SNI. The study utilizes structural equation modelling to examine questionnaire data from a random sample of social network users. The findings demonstrate that bonding and bridging ties influence consumers’ perceptions of the usefulness and ease of use of the information provided by SNSs, and therefore influence their use of the information when making shopping decisions. In addition, consumers who access SNI through bonding ties are likely to have flow experiences which further contribute to their use of the information. This study makes a theoretical contribution by expanding knowledge of the social capital influences on consumers’ perceptions of the value of the social media shopping experience.
Introduction
Consumers’ purchasing decisions can be influenced by online interactions with people that they know or that they have met through social network sites (SNSs) (Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe 2007; Felix, Rauschnabel, and Hinsch 2017). SNSs can provide consumers with ways to interact with each other, thereby accessing social network information (SNI) that can help them with purchase decisions (Bilal, Ahmed, and Shazad, 2014; Heinrichs et al. 2011; John et al. 2017). When consumers access information and relationship resources through SNSs, the resources take the form of social capital which constitutes ties between groups of consumers (Paxton 1999). These ties are distinguished according to (a) whether they constitute bonding between consumers with existing, close emotional ties and (b) whether they constitute bridging ties with new and diverse groups (Putnam 2000). SNSs are a viable medium for individuals to accumulate and activate their online bridging and bonding social capital (Phua, Jin, and Kim 2017). Previous research (Cao et al. 2013) has determined that consumers’ strong bonding ties with family and friends constitute key information resources when accessing SNSs to make shopping decisions and that bridging ties facilitate the diffusion of information through these SNSs (Burt 2001; Putnam 2000). There has been significant research attention directed to the factors associated with the use of SNSs (Shin and Kim 2008, Venkatesh, Morris, and Davis 2003), the effects of different types of social capital on the use of SNSs (Hoyman and Faricy 2009), the effects of SNSs on the development of social capital (Ahn 2012; Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe 2007; Kavanaugh et al. 2005), and the effects of social capital on the integration of information (Choi and Scott 2013; Choi and Chung 2013; Newell, Tansley, and Huang 2004). However, there has been minimal attention paid to the effects of both kinds of social capital on consumers’ perceptions of the value of the information garnered from SNSs (i.e. SNI) for the purposes of shopping. The purpose of this study is twofold: First, this study investigates the influence of bonding and bridging behaviours on consumers’ perceptions of SNI. Second, this study examines the influence of these behaviours on consumers’ perceptions of SNI’s usefulness, their perceptions of how easy SNI is to use, their engagement or flow with SNI experiences, and ultimately on their use of SNI when shopping. This study contributed to the expansion of previous studies on the effect of social capital on consumers’ perceptions of SNI. Furthermore, this study provides guidelines for understanding how different types of social capital (i.e. bonding and bridging capital) affect consumers’ shopping behaviours according to various aspects of SNI experiences (i.e. ease of use, usefulness, and flow)
Theoretical background
An SNS represents ‘a virtual community in which people with shared interests can communicate by posting and exchanging information about themselves’ (Shin 2010, 428). This research is grounded in the perspective that SNSs are sociotechnical systems and thereby attends to the social and technical components of SNSs. Prior research provides a number of theoretical frameworks from which constructs can be integrated to build this study’s conceptual model. Social capital theory (Putnam 2000) underpins the examination of social dimensions related to SNI use. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis 1989) and the concept of flow (Csikszentmihalyi 1997) provide ways to examine the technical aspects of SNI usage.
Social capital through bridging and bonding behaviour
This study adopts the definition of social capital as ‘social networks and the associated norms of reciprocity’ (Putnam 2000, 6). These social networks can provide value for members which can then be mobilized for action (Beaudoin 2009) and which is linked to the information and influence that the networks provide (Adler and Kwon 2002). Forms of social capital vary along bonding (i.e. internal) and bridging (i.e. external) dimensions. Bonding social capital is bonds of connectedness formed within homogenous groups and bridging social capital is the bonds that are formed across diverse social groups (Putnam 2000). Bonding refers to ‘the interpersonal solidarity that is often present among people who associate in small groups, local communities, and other settings over extended periods of time’ (Wuthnow 2002, 670). Bonding forms of social capital are represented by networks of people who have strong levels of associability and trust, so that they can pursue collective goals (Leana and Van Buren 1999). Bonding is based on dense networks and occurs most easily when group membership is homogeneous (Leonard and Onyx 2003; Putnam 2000). Bonding social capital provides four benefits that help improve overall performance: knowledge sharing, complementarity, quality control, and conflict resolution (Okoli and Oh 2007). Whereas bonding ties are related to bonds of trust and solidarity with homogeneous members, bridging ties are based on forging ties with the broader society (Paxton 1999). Bridging relationships develop among acquaintances who know each other but who are not deeply invested in the relationship. In particular, bridging social capital is suited for diffusing SNI (Putnam 2000), and researchers have examined how bridging social capital is accrued (Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe 2007). These bridging ties help to advance goals, and span gaps in networks (Burt 2001; Putnam 2000). In particular, bridging capital provides benefits in the form of accessing diverse information and controlling disconnected actions (Cao et al. 2013; Burt 2001).
Perceptions of SNS: ease of use, usefulness, and flow
SNSs are online platforms which allow individuals to connect with others, and as Weinberg (2009, 149) states, ‘are generic terms for sites that are used to connect users with similar backgrounds and interests’. These platforms generally have the following characteristics: users (1) have uniquely identifiable profiles that consist of user-supplied content, content provided by other users, and/or system-level data; (2) can publicly articulate connections that can be viewed and traversed by others; and (3) can consume, produce, and interact with streams of user-generated content provided by their connections on the site (Ellison and Boyd 2013, 158). These SNSs are built upon peoples’ existing social ties (i.e. friends, family, and acquaintances) and allow them to publicly engage with people they know and with people with whom they expect to share interests. Although researchers recognize the importance of specifying the particular attributes of different SNSs (Ellison and Boyd 2013), the attributes of particular SNSs are subject to dynamic rates of change in their infrastructures. This is particularly true in the retailing and marketing context in which this research is situated. This context is characterized by multichannel operations, and retailers and marketers are keenly interested in managing the flow of information and advertising across these channels. Given that retailers strategize to develop customer relationships through multiple SNSs (Shin, Pang, and Kim 2015), they are particularly interested in understanding how consumers’ value perceptions and purchasing behaviours are affected by their interactions with these platforms (Watson et al. 2015). As a result, this research takes an integrated perspective of consumers’ use of SNSs (i.e. including various and/or multiple SNSs) (Ngai, Tao, and Moon 2015) and examines their interactions with multiple sources of SNI.
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) provides a way to examine the influences on peoples’ attitudes towards using technologies like SNSs. TAM asserts that perceived usefulness and ease of use are major influences on peoples’ attitudes towards using technologies and ultimately towards their actual use (Davis 1989). Perceived usefulness is defined by Davis (1989) as the extent to which a person believes that using a technology will enhance their task performance and perceived ease of use is the extent they believe that using it will be free of effort. These constructs have been widely studied and show that they mediate people’s intention to use technologies (Venkatesh and Davis 2000), and also their intentions to buy from the web (Cheung et al. 2003). Researchers have also integrated constructs from TAM with constructs from flow theory to examine individuals’ behaviours towards information technologies based on their subjective experiences with the technologies (Siekpe 2005). The concept of flow was originally characterized by Csikszentmihalyi (1997) as an intrinsically motivated optimal state. Characteristics of a flow state include (a) the integration of a clear goal, (b) feedback, (c) the matching of challenges with skills, (d) concentration, (e) focus, (f) control, (g) loss of self-consciousness, (h) transformation of time, and (i) the autotelic nature of an activity. A positive flow state has been empirically confirmed to be a predictor of attitude towards information generated from a system and the extent of use of the system (Trevino and Webster 1992). In particular, researchers have linked the state of flow to online information searches and found that consumers’ attitudes towards firms’ websites and brands are enhanced when the experience is engaging and enjoyable (Mathwick and Rigdon 2004). When researchers have incorporated TAM and flow constructs, they have found that there are linkages between flow, characteristics of the technology, and purchase intentions (Hsu and Lu 2003; Sanchez-Franco 2006; Siekpe 2005). For example, Agarwal and Karahanna’s model (2000) conceptualizes flow as cognitive absorption and incorporates the TAM (Davis 1989). They theorize that flow is a precursor of greater usefulness and perceived ease of use, which then leads to behavioural intention to use. The subjective nature of these purchase intentions is related to the value that consumers attach to their decision-making (Woodruff 1997). Hoffman and Novak (2009) therefore advocated the use of the concept of flow to better understand subjective purchase and repurchase intentions from the web (Cheung et al. 2003). They argue that flow could affect navigation and usage patterns in online shopping (Novak, Hoffman, and Yung 2000; Hoffman and Novak 2009).
Review of literature
Previous research (Hossain and deSilva 2009; Choi and Chung 2013) has determined that social ties affect users’ usage behaviour of SNSs, and researchers have also argued that social factors should be considered when explaining the effects of the technological aspects on usage (Rau, Gao, and Ding 2008; Venkatesh, Morris, and Davis 2003). Accordingly, researchers have examined relationships between TAM constructs, social capital, and knowledge sharing, and have determined that both types of social capital (i.e. bridging and bonding) have positive impacts on users’ perceptions of information quality (Cao et al. 2013). For example, Yen, Chiang, and Chang (2014) found that for SNS users within an organization, there is a positive relationship between social capital development and users’ intentions to use and share SNI. Building upon these findings,this research examines the particular relationships between the antecedents of bridging and bonding social ties and mediators of perceptions of the ease of use, the usefulness, and the experience flow in the actual usage of SNI.
Relationship between bonding and bridging social capital
Research examining the bonding and bridging ties associated with SNS use has shown that engagement with SNSs maintains peoples’ existing ties and provides the basis for forming new connections (Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe 2007). Research on the relationship between bonding and bridging has been conducted in voluntary organizations (Leonard and Onyx 2003), healthcare organizations (Kim, Subramanian, and Kawachi 2006; Mitchell and LaGory 2002), and enterprise resource planning teams (Newell, Tansley, and Huang 2004). Researchers have determined that there is a close relationship between bonding and bridging social capital (Weisinger and Salipante 2005; Newell, Tansley, and Huang 2004). Without bridging social capital, bonding groups may become isolated, and likewise, without bonding social capital, bridging groups may not become cohesive (Newell, Tansley, and Huang 2004). In particular, SNSs provide visible traces of social relationships (i.e. comments, posts, @replies, ‘liking’ and ‘sharing’ content) which enable interactions between people in individuals’ networks who have not been previously connected (Ellison and Vitak 2015). These interactions thereby enable the formation of bridging ties through individuals’ previously established bonding ties. Therefore, this study hypothesizes that Previous research has examined the relationships between bridging social capital and perceptions of SNS usefulness. Researchers have found that bridging relationships are positively related to useful benefits such as higher volumes of information, fewer redundancies, and better control (Cao et al. 2013; Kavanaugh et al. 2005; Putnam 2000). Gilewicz’s (2009) study of LinkedIn users found that ease of use was positively related to the development of bridging social capital. Furthermore, Choi and Chung (2013) found that users’ perceptions of social capital are predictors of their perceptions of SNS’ perceived ease of use and usefulness. Likewise, Lampe, Vitak, and Ellison (2013) found that there were positive relationships between bridging capital and perceptions of SNSs. Their study of Facebook users found that users with perceptions of high bridging capital from its use also perceived that it was highly useful. Researchers have also identified positive relationships between social capital and users’ experiences of flow with SNS. Hsu and Lin’s (2008) study of blogging found that ease of use, enjoyment, and information sharing were positively related to users’ social identification and their intention to use SNI. Their research underscored the importance of enjoyment in users’ SNS interactions. This research, therefore, contends that there are positive relationships between bridging social capital and users’ perceptions of ease of use, usefulness and flow experiences with SNI.
Bonding social capital
Bonding social capital affords consumers with useful benefits in terms of information exchange in the following three ways: knowledge sharing, trust establishment, and conflict resolution (Cao et al. 2013; Coleman 1988). Research has determined that bonding ties positively influence SNI users’ perceptions of ease of use of SNI (Cao et al. 2013). For example, users are more likely to expect that SNI is accessible to them if it is recommended by people with whom they have close ties. The flow of users’ experiences with SNI is also positively influenced by the nature of bonding ties. Given that these ties are characterized by close relationships with others on SNSs, it is understandable that the related SNI producing interactions are engaging (Barker et al. 2013). Therefore, this study claims that there are positive relationships between consumers’ bonding social capital and their perceptions of the usefulness of SNI, its ease of use, and the flow of their SNI experience.
Perceived ease of use of SNI for shopping
Numerous studies have identified the positive relationship between consumers’ perceptions about ease of use and usefulness of SNI (Choi and Chung 2013). For example, consumers are more likely to think that information is useful if they have been able to find it easily. This research therefore hypothesizes that Past research has demonstrated the relationship between perceived ease of use and flow experience. The ease of use plays an important role in forming flow experiences (Hsu and Lu 2004). Agarwal and Karahanna (2000) have identified that flow is positively related to users’ perceptions of the ease of use of SNSs. These perceptions are particularly important when users are assessing how to satisfy their SNI needs. This research builds upon these findings and hypothesizes that H9: Consumers’ perception of the ease of use of SNI has a positive impact on the flow of their experience with SNI. Researchers have determined that ease of use is more important for intrinsic tasks, like information searches, than for operational tasks, like purchase transactions (Agarwal and Karahanna, 2000; Gefen and Straub 2000; Venkatesh, Morris, and Davis 2003). Previous studies have demonstrated that perceived ease of use has a positive effect on the intention to use SNI in shopping context (Lee, Lee, and Kwon 2005; Ramayah 2006; Kuo and Lee 2009). Also, Willis (2008) has found positive effects between perceived ease of use and flow experience on usage of SNS. This research therefore hypothesizes that Previous research has determined that perceived usefulness is an important factor when consumers make a shopping decision to actually use a product or service (Pikkarainen et al. 2004). For example, Saadé and Bahli (2005) found that perceived usefulness has a positive effect on consumers’ intention to use online learning services. Also, Nysveen, Pedersen, and Thorbjørnsen (2005) identified that perceived usefulness has a strong impact on consumers’ intention to use services they purchase. Likewise, this study hypothesizes that Consumers’ reactions to social media are also related to their experiences with ‘flow opportunities’ where the consumer is ‘completely engaged with his or her interaction with the computer’ (Hoffman and Novak 2009). In particular, researchers have determined that flow directly influences the use of online environments for purchases (Bridges and Florsheim 2008; Hoffman and Novak 2009; Sanchez-Franco 2006). Hoffman and Novak (2009) have called for studies of the effect of flow when consumers access SNSs during their purchase decisions, and Koufaris (2002) found that consumers’ perceptions of SNI being both useful and enjoyable positively influence their propensity to use the information with shopping activities
Discussion and conclusions
Consumers’ decisions to actually use SNI when shopping is directly influenced by their perceptions of the potential usefulness of SNI, of the ease of use of the SNI, and of the Table 4. Structural models results. Structural path Coefficient t- 11 flow experience they have with the SNI (Venkatesh, Morris, and Davis 2003). Additionally, this study shows that consumers’ perceptions of the potential usefulness of SNI and of the related flow experience are influenced by their perceptions of the ease of use of the SNI. In other words, the SNI’s ease of use affects perceptions of how useful the information is and of how enjoyable the SNI experience is, and is therefore an important influence on consumers’ actual use of the information for shopping decisions. This study also shows that consumers’ perceptions of how easy to use, useful, and enjoyable the SNIs are affect the value they ascribe to the social ties they have with the groups affiliated with the related sites. In particular, the value of consumers’ bridging ties is increased when consumers perceive that the information they access through their expanded exposure to SNSs is useful and easy to use. Additionally, this study shows that consumers’ perception of the usefulness and ease of use of SNI influence their perceptions of the value of bonding ties when it relates to their shopping behaviour. Previous research (Cao et al. 2013) has determined that consumers’ strong bonding ties with family and friends constitute key information resources when accessing SNI to make shopping decisions. This study shows that their perception of the usefulness and ease of use of the SNI influences their perceptions of the value of these ties when it relates to their shopping behaviour. This study’s findings suggest that there are nuances in the influence of bonding ties on consumers’ use of SNI when purchasing. Keeping with previous research (Boyd and Ellison 2007; Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe 2007), these findings confirm that consumers’ bonding ties to their existing SNS contacts provide the foundation for bridging with other groups. Moreover, consumers are also likely to experience flow with the SNI referred through bonding ties, which further influences their intention to use the information. This finding is in contrast to their flow experiences with SNI referred through bridging ties, which are not as likely to influence their intention to use the information. In keeping with Koufaris (2002) finding, consumers are therefore more likely to enjoy the SNI experiences when they have been referred by family and friends. As determined in prior research (Hoffman and Novak 2009; Sanchez-Franco 2006), because these flow experiences directly influence consumers’ propensity to use SNI when purchasing, bonding ties have significant influences on consumers use of SNI. Additionally, consumers are more likely to perceive that the SNI referred through bonding ties is more enjoyable than the information received through bridging ties, and that, for this reason, they are more inclined to use the information from bonding ties when purchasing. This study makes a theoretical contribution by expanding knowledge about the effects of social capital on consumers’ perception of SNI when making purchasing decisions. In particular, this study expands understanding by showing how different types of social capital directly influence shopping behaviour, according to the influences of different aspects of the SNI experience (i.e. including ease of use, usefulness, and flow). These findings show that the influence of bonding ties on purchasing decisions is mediated by consumers’ perceptions of the SNI related to ease of use, usefulness, and flow. Additionally, perceptions of flow are mediated by the nature of social ties with the people who refer SNI. These findings have practical implications for marketing managers. They should understand how consumers are socially connected through their online platforms. In 12 H. HYUN ET AL. particular, data analysis of brand-specific SNS usage should discern patterns of social relationships between purchasers. The nature of these relationships are important when determining approaches to analysing customer relationship management issues, including customer churn (Verbeke, Martens, and Baesens 2014), and marketing and advertising across multiple channels. In particular, managers should focus on ensuring that the SNI derived from bonding communities is both easy to use and enjoyable. How does the structure of social networks’ interfaces lead to a fluid and engaging experience? Additionally, interrelationships between multiple SNS should also be examined for patterns in the social ties of participants. For example, how does the combined use of Facebook and Instagram reflect bonding and bridging ties? This study was limited by the nature of the self-reported descriptive information provided by the participants. Although the current sample provides demographic information, there is no corresponding information about the type of SNSs that they utilize, the types of groups that are involved with the sites, the time that they have been associated with the SNSs, and the nature of their affiliation with the group(s). Keeping with the recommendations of Ellison and Vitak (2015), this information would have provided a more granular examination of the social capital relationships related to particular SNS attributes. In addition, this research is limited by the size of the sample and a larger sample would provide the basis for a deeper investigation. Further research should consider the demographics of the users and the types of SNS platforms they used. Studies about the vagaries related to the usage of different types of SNSs in different retail sectors or with different product purchases would also contribute to a broader understanding of the nature of network influences. Finally, further research should also investigate the nature of the social capital related to SNI use. Given that this study demonstrates the influence of bonding and bridging ties on perceptions of SNI characteristics, more granular and qualitative studies should examine the nuances of the processes (relationship and temporal) that constitute the development of SNS social capital in relation to purchasing behaviour. These studies should investigate the size of the social networks, the types of relationships involved, and the stages of development of the social networks.
References
Adler, P., and S. W. Kwon. 2002. “Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept.” Academy of Management Review 27 (1): 17–40. doi:10.5465/amr.2002.5922314. Agarwal, R., and E. Karahanna. 2000. “Time Flies When You’re Having Fun: Cognitive Absorption and Beliefs about Information Technology Usage.” MIS Quarterly 24 (4): 665–694. doi:10.2307/ 3250951. Ahn, J. 2012. “Teenagers’ Experiences with Social Network Sites: Relationships to Bridging and Bonding Social Capital.” The Information Society 28 (2): 99–109. doi:10.1080/ 01972243.2011.649394. Anderson, J., and D. Gerbing. 1988. “Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach.” Psychological Bulletin 103 (3): 411–423. doi:10.1037/0033- 2909.103.3.411. Bagozzi, R. P., and Y. Yi. 1988. “On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 16 (1): 74–94. doi:10.1007/BF02723327. Barker, V., D. M. Dozier, A. S. Weiss, and D. L. Borden. 2013. “Facebook “Friends”: Effects of Social Networking Site Intensity, Social Capital Affinity, and Flow on Reported Knowledge-Gain.” The Journal of Social Media in Society 2: 2. Beaudoin, C. E. 2009. “Bonding and Bridging Neighborliness: An Individual-Level Study in the Context of Health.” Social Science & Medicine 68 (12): 2129–2136. doi:10.1016/j. socscimed.2009.04.015. Boyd, D. M., and N. B. Ellison. 2007. “Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13 (1): 210–230. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x. Bridges, E., and R. Florsheim. 2008. “Hedonic and Utilitarian Shopping Goals: The Online Experience.” Journal of Business Research 61 (4): 309–314. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.06.017. Burt, R. S. 2001. “Structural Holes versus Network Closure as Social Capital.” In Social Capital: Theory and Research, ed. N. Lin, K. S. Cook, and R. S. Burt, 2. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine de Gruyter. Cao, Q., Y. Lu, D. Dong, Z. Tang, and Y. Li. 2013. “The Roles of Bridging and Bonding in Social Media Communities.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 (8): 1671–1681. doi:10.1002/asi.2013.64.issue-8. Cheung, C. M. K., L. Zhu, T. Kwong, G. W. W. Chan, and M. Limayem 2003. “Online Consumer Behavior: A Review and Agenda for Future Research.” 16th Bled eCommerce Conference eTransformation, Bled, Slovenia. Choi, G., and H. Chung. 2013. “Applying the Technology Acceptance Model to Social Networking Sites (SNS): Impact of Subjective Norm and Social Capital on the Acceptance of SNS.” International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 29 (10): 619–628. doi:10.1080/ 10447318.2012.756333. Choi, J. H., and J. E. Scott. 2013. “Electronic Word of Mouth and Knowledge Sharing on Social Network Sites: A Social Capital Perspective.” Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research 8 (1): 69–82. doi:10.4067/S0718-18762013000100006. Coleman, J. S. 1988. “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.” American Journal of Sociology 94: 95–120. doi:10.1086/228943. Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1997. Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books. Davis, F. D. 1989. “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology.” MIS Quarterly 13 (September): 318–339. doi:10.2307/249008. Ellison, N. B., and D. M. Boyd. 2013. “Sociality through Social Network Sites.” In The Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies, edited by Dutton WH, 151–172. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellison, N. B., C. Steinfield, and C. Lampe. 2007. “The Benefits of Facebook “Friends”: Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (4): 1143–1168. doi:10.1111/jcmc.2007.12.issue-4. Ellison, N. B., and J. Vitak. 2015. “Social Network Affordances and Their Relationship to Social Capital Processes.” In The Handbook of the Psychology of Communication Technology, ed. Sundar SS, 206–227. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Felix, R., P. A. Rauschnabel, and C. Hinsch. 2017. “Elements of Strategic Social Media Marketing: A Holistic Framework.” Journal of Business Research 70: 118–126. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.05.001. Field, J., T. Schuller, and S. Baron. 2000. “Capital and Human Capital Revisited.” In Social Capital: Critical Perspectives, ed. T. Schuller, 243–264. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gefen, D., and D. Straub. 2000. “The Relative Use of Perceived Ease of Use in IS Adoption: A Study of E-Commerce Adoption.” Journal of the Association for Information Systems 1 (8): 1–28. doi:10.17705/1jais.00008. Gilewicz, N. 2009. “Factors Affecting Building Social Capital in On-Line Professional Networks: An Exploratory Study of Social Capital Formation on Linked.” Masters Diss. Toronto: Ryerson University Hair, J., R. L. Tatham, R. E. Anderson, and W. Black. 2006. Multivariate Data Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Heinrichs, J. H., S. U. Jeen, J. Lim, and K. Lim. 2011. “Influence of Social Networking Site and User Access Method on Social Media Evaluation.” Journal of Consumer Behaviour 10 (6): 347–355. doi:10.1002/cb.377. Hoffman, D. L., and T. P. Novak. 2009. “Flow Online: Lessons Learned and Future Prospects.” Journal of Interactive Marketing 23 (1): 23–34. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2008.10.003. Hossain, L., and A. deSilva. 2009. “Exploring User Acceptance of Technology Using Social Networks.” Journal of High Technology Management Research 20 (1): 1–18. doi:10.1016/j. hitech.2009.02.005. Hoyman, M., and C. Faricy. 2009. “It Takes A Village: A Test of the Creative Class, Social Capital, and Human Capital Theories.” Urban Affairs Review 44 (3): 311–333. doi:10.1177/1078087408321496. Hsu, C., and H. Lu. 2003. “Why Do People Play On-Line Games? an Extended TAM with Social Influences and Flow Experience.” Information and Management 41 (7): 853–868. doi:10.1016/j.im.2003.08.014. Hsu, C. L., and J. C. C. Lin. 2008. “Acceptance of Blog Usage: The Roles of Technology Acceptance, Social Influence and Knowledge Sharing Motivation.” Information & Management 45 (1): 65–74. doi:10.1016/j.im.2007.11.001. Hsu, C. L., and H. P. Lu. 2004. “Why Do People Play On-Line Games? an Extended TAM with Social Influences and Flow Experience.” Information & Management 41 (7): 853–868. doi:10.1016/j. im.2003.08.014. Watson IV, GF, S. Worm, P. Rw, and S. Ganesan. 2015. “The Evolution of Marketing Channels: Trends and Research Directions.” Journal of Retailing (xxx, 2015). doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2015.04.002. John, L. K., O. Emrich, S. Gupta, and M. I. Norton. 2017. “Does “Liking” Lead to Loving? the Impact of Joining a Brand’s Social Network on Marketing Outcomes.” Journal of Marketing Research 54 (1): 144–155. Kavanaugh, A. L., D. D. Reese, J. M. Carroll, and M. B. Rosson. 2005. “Weak Ties in Networked Communities.” The Information Society 21 (2): 119–131. doi:10.1080/01972240590925320. Kim, D., S. V. Subramanian, and I. Kawachi. 2006. “Bonding versus Bridging Social Capital and Their Associations with Self-Rated Health: A Multilevel Analysis of 40 US Communities.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 60 (2): 116–122. doi:10.1136/jech.2005.038281. Koufaris, M. 2002. “Applying the Technology Acceptance Model and Flow Theory to Online Consumer Behavior.” Information Systems Research 13 (2): 205–223. doi:10.1287/isre.13.2.205.83. Kuo, R. Z., and G. G. Lee. 2009. “KMS Adoption: The Effects of Information Quality.” Management Decision 47 (10): 1633–1651. doi:10.1108/00251740911004727. Kwon, O., and Y. Wen. 2010. “An Empirical Study of the Factors Affecting Social Network Service Use.” Computers in Human Behavior 26 (2): 254–263. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.04.011. Lampe, C., J. Vitak, and N. Ellison 2013. “Users and Nonusers: Interactions between Levels of Adoption and Social Capital.” In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work, San Antonio, TX (pp. 809–820). ACM. Leana, C. R., and H. J. Van Buren. 1999. “Organizational Social Capital and Employment Practices.” Academy of Management Review 24 (3): 538–555. doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2202136. Lee, H., Y. Lee, and D. Kwon. 2005. “The Intention to Use Computerized Reservation Systems: The Moderating Effects of Organizational Support and Supplier Incentive.” Journal of Business Research 58 (11): 1552–1561. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2004.07.008. Leonard, R., and J. Onyx. 2003. “Networking through Loose and Strong Ties: An Australian Qualitative Study.” Voluntas 14 (2): 189–203. doi:10.1023/A:1023900111271. Mathwick, C., and E. Rigdon. 2004. “Play.” Flow, and the Online Search Experience. Journal of Consumer Research 31 (2): 324–332. Mitchell, C. U., and M. LaGory. 2002. “Social Capital and Mental Distress in an Impoverished Community.” City & Community 002 (1): 199–222. doi:10.1111/1540-6040.00017. Newell, S., C. Tansley, and J. Huang. 2004. “Social Capital and Knowledge Integration in an ERP Project Team: The Importance of Bridging and Bonding.” British Journal of Management 15 (1): 43–57. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2004.00405.x. Ngai, E. W. T., S. S. C. Tao, and K. K. L. Moon. 2015. “Social Media Research: Theories, Constructs, and Conceptual Frameworks.” International Journal of Information Management 35: 33–44. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.09.004. Novak, T. P., D. L. Hoffman, and Y. F. Yung. 2000. “Measuring the Customer Experience in Online Environments: A Structural Modeling Approach.” Marketing Science 19 (1): 22–42. doi:10.1287/ mksc.19.1.22.15184. Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill. Nysveen, H., P. E. Pedersen, and H. Thorbjørnsen. 2005. “Intentions to Use Mobile Services: Antecedents and Cross-Service Comparisons.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 33 (3): 330–346. doi:10.1177/0092070305276149. Okoli, C., and W. Oh. 2007. “Investigating Recognition-Based Performance in an Open Content Community: A Social Capital Perspective.” Information and Management 44 (3): 240–252. doi:10.1016/j.im.2006.12.007. Paxton, P. 1999. “Is Social Capital Declining in the United States? A Multiple Indicator Assessment.” American Journal of Sociology 105 (1): 88–127. doi:10.1086/210268. Phua, J., S. V. Jin, and J. J. Kim. 2017. “Uses and Gratifications of Social Networking Sites for Bridging and Bonding Social Capital: A Comparison of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat.” Computers in Human Behavior 72: 115–122. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.041. Pikkarainen, T., K. Pikkarainen, H. Karjaluoto, and S. Pahnila. 2004. “Consumer Acceptance of Online Banking: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model.” Internet Research 14 (3): 224–235. doi:10.1108/10662240410542652. Putnam, R. D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster. Ramayah, T. 2006. “Interface Characteristics, Perceived Ease of Use and Intention to Use an Online Library in Malaysia.” Information Development 22 (2): 123–133. doi:10.1177/0266666906065575. Rau, P. L. P., Q. Gao, and Y. Ding. 2008. “Relationship between the Level of Intimacy and Lurking in Online Social Network Services.” Computers in Human Behavior 24 (6): 2757–2770. doi:10.1016/j. chb.2008.04.001. Saadé, R., and B. Bahli. 2005. “The Impact of Cognitive Absorption on Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use in On-Line Learning: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model.” Information & Management 42 (2): 317–327. doi:10.1016/j.im.2003.12.013. Sanchez-Franco, M. J. 2006. “Exploring the Influence of Gender on Web Usage via Partial Least Squares.” Behavior and Information Technology 25 (1): 19–36. doi:10.1080/01449290500124536. Shin, D., and W. Kim. 2008. “Applying the Technology Acceptance Model and Flow Theory to Cyworld User Behavior: Implication of the Web2.0 User Acceptance.” CyberPsychology & Behavior 11 (3): 378–382. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0117. Shin, D. H. 2010. “Analysis of Online Social Networks: A Cross-National Study.” Online Information Review 34 (3): 473–495. doi:10.1108/14684521011054080. Shin, W., A. Pang, and H. Kim. 2015. “Building Relationships through Integrated Online Media: Global Organizations’ Use of Brand Web Sites, Facebook, and Twitter.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication 29 (2): 184–220. doi:10.1177/1050651914560569. Siekpe, J. S. 2005. “An Examination of the Multidimensionality of Flow Construct in a Computer-Mediated Environment.” Journal of Electronic Commerce Research 6 (1): 31–43. Thong, J. Y., W. Hong, and K. Y. Tam. 2002. “Understanding User Acceptance of Digital Libraries: What are the Roles of Interface Characteristics, Organizational Context, and Individual Differences?” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies57, no. 3: 215–242. doi:10.1016/ S1071-5819(02)91024-4. Trevino, L. K., and J. Webster. 1992. “Flow in Computer-Mediated Communication.” Communication Research 19 (5): 539–573. doi:10.1177/009365092019005001. Venkatesh, V., and F. D. Davis. 2000. “A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies.” Management Science 46 (2): 186–204. doi:10.1287/ mnsc.46.2.186.11926. Venkatesh, V., M. G. Morris, and G. B. Davis. 2003. “User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View.” MIS Quarterly 27 (3): 425–478. doi:10.2307/30036540. Verbeke, W., D. Martens, and B. Baesens. 2014. “Social Network Analysis for Customer Churn Prediction.” Applied Soft Computing Journal 14 (Part C): 431–446. doi:10.1016/j. asoc.2013.09.017. Weinberg, T. 2009. The New Community Rules: Marketing on the Social Web. Sebastopol, CA.: O’Reilly Media. Weisinger, J. Y., and P. F. Salipante. 2005. “A Grounded Theory for Building Ethnically Bridging Social Capital in Voluntary Organizations.” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 34 (1): 29–55. doi:10.1177/0899764004270069. Williams, D. 2006. “On and off the Net: Scales for Social Capital in an Online Era.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11 (2).article 11. DOI:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00029.x. Willis, T. J. 2008. An Evaluation of the Technology Acceptance Model as a Means of Understanding Online Social Networking Behavior.Theses and Dissertations Paper 568. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/568 Woodruff, R. B. 1997. “Customer Value: The Next Source for Competitive Edge.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 25 (2): 139–153. doi:10.1007/BF02894350. Wuthnow, R. 2002. “Religious Involvement and Status-Bridging Social Capital.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 41 (4): 669–675. doi:10.1111/1468-5906.00153. Yen, C., M. C. Chiang, and C. M. Chang (2014). “Understanding Collaborative Stickiness Intention in Social Network Sites from the Perspective of Knowledge Sharing.” Accessed 1 November 2015. http://www.pacis-net.org/file/2014/2186.pdf
Hyowon Hyun, Frances Gunn & Jungkun Park To cite this article: Hyowon Hyun, Frances Gunn & Jungkun Park (2019): The influence of social capital through social media: a study of the creation of value in shopping behaviour, The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, DOI: 10.1080/09593969.2018.1555543 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2018.1555543.
This is a paragraph! Here's how you make a link: Neocities.
Here's how you can make bold and italic text.
Here's how you can add an image:
Here's how to make a list:
- 1Money Moves that you should be thankful for
Take these steps to enhance your finances now.
There is no time just like the present to start out improving your finances. “Procrastination is that the No. 1 reason people fail in retirement,” says Luke Lloyd, wealth advisor and investment strategist with Strategic Wealth Partners in Independence, Ohio.
However, it’s not just your retirement which will enjoy being proactive about finances. you'll economize on debt, eliminate headaches for your heirs and release cash for the items you would like by making the subsequent 14 expert-backed money moves.
Budget for future expenses.
A budget is at the inspiration of excellent personal finance, and if you don’t have one already, it should be your first priority. Don’t just plan for normal monthly expenses either. Rather, check out the large picture. “If we've any debt, have we done anything to manage that?” asks Aaron Bell, a wealth management advisor with Northwestern Mutual in ny City.
In addition to extra debt payments, plan for quarterly and annual expenses like insurance premiums, vacations and holiday spending. Track your spending by using an app like Mint or PocketGuard. once you hit the budgeted limit for every category, stop buying.
Max out your 401(k) match.
If your employer offers a 401(k) plan, you ought to contribute the maximum amount as possible. Traditional 401(k) plans offer an instantaneous tax write-off on contributions while Roth 401(k) plans will allow you to remove money tax-free in retirement. In 2020, the contribution limit to a 401(k) account is $19,500.
Many employers will match some of worker contributions, up to a particular amount. “I’m surprised in my practice what percentage people don’t even put in their 401(k) what their employer matches,” says Steve Azoury, financial representative and owner of Azoury Financial in Troy, Michigan. If you are not sure what proportion to contribute to a 401(k), confirm you're a minimum of depositing enough to urge the utmost employer match.
Consider refinancing your home equity loan.
In the past, homeowners could deduct the interest on home equity loans on their federal tax return. However, the tax code changes enacted within the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated that deduction for several people. to stay deducting the interest, you'll refinance your main mortgage and appear the balance of the house equity loan.
Even if you don’t have a home equity loan, it's going to add up to refinance a mortgage immediately . “We are during a historically low rate of interest environment,” Lloyd says. to attenuate the prices related to refinancing, see if your current lender offers any streamline options which will waive or reduce fees.
Keep your home equity loan deduction.
Despite tax reform changes, some homeowners might still be ready to deduct the interest from a home equity loan. consistent with the IRS website, interest is deductible for home equity loans and features of credit that are wont to "buy, build or substantially improve the taxpayer's home that secures the loan."
Interest on home loans totaling up to $750,000 are deductible for couples and single taxpayers while the limit is $375,000 for a married taxpayer filing a separate return. People should carefully document how they spent the cash from a home equity loan in order that they can justify the deduction if audited.
Refinance or minimize your student loans.
Refinancing student loans might be a sensible money move for a few people. Extending the loan to a extended term could reduce payments and release cash while a shorter term will save on total interest cost. However, those with federal student loans got to think twice before refinancing. Doing so could make them ineligible for state debt forgiveness programs.
If you or a toddler are avoiding to school , avoid removing loans beyond what's needed to hide necessary expenses. for instance , don’t use loans to buy an upscale apartment when lower-cost housing options are available. “This can cause a really dangerous situation,” says Lisa Zeiderman, an attorney and member of Savvy Ladies, a nonprofit that gives free financial education. “I have seen people run up huge school loans that can’t be discharged in bankruptcy and must be paid off.”
Open a 529 plan.
For years, families have opened 529 plans to fund their kids' college educations. Money deposited into 529 accounts grows tax-free and may be withdrawn without a tax penalty for qualified education expenses. Some states, like Michigan and Illinois, also provides a state tax write-off for qualified contributions.
Under the new tax code, money in these accounts also can be wont to pay tuition for college kids in kindergarten through 12th grade. for folks who decide to send their children to a personal grade school or highschool , this is often another reason to open a tax-advantaged 529 plan.
Rebalance your portfolio.
After an extended period of sustained economic process , the markets have swung widely in 2020. meaning portfolios may now be unbalanced as aggressive and conservative funds have grown and contracted at different rates. now's an honest time to reevaluate fund balances. “That are often the foremost basic housekeeping strategy (for investments),” Bell says.
For stock allocations, a rule of thumb is to subtract your age from 100; the result's the share of cash you ought to consider keeping in equities. However, a financial planner could also be ready to provide a more nuanced recommendation supported your risk tolerance and private goals.
Harvest your investment losses.
Investments made outside 401(k) and IRA accounts are subject to capital gains tax, which maxes out at 20%. However, if investments are sold for a loss, that quantity are often wont to offset any capital gains or tax . Savvy investors can dump losing stocks and use them to scale back their tax burden.
However, remember of the wash-sale rule, which prohibits investors, their spouses or their personal companies from buying a substantially identical stock within 30 days before or after a purchase . Doing so will eliminate the likelihood of a tax write-off for the loss.
Shop for new insurance.
Insurance rates can vary between companies, and it's worthwhile to buy for brand spanking new rates per annum or two. Compare quotes from several companies to ascertain if cheaper insurance for auto, homeowner and life policies is out there . an easy thanks to lower rates is to boost your deductibles, Azoury says. However, make certain to possess a replacement plan before canceling your old coverage.
Don't forget you furthermore may have an annual open enrollment period to buy for a replacement insurance policy. no matter whether you get your insurance through an employer, Medicare or the govt marketplace, use this point to match plans and find one with the simplest network and lowest out-of-pocket costs for your medical needs.
Open a health bank account .
Those with qualified, high-deductible insurance plans are eligible to open health savings accounts. These accounts are eligible for triple tax benefits. Money deposited into the account is tax deductible, funds grow tax-free and withdrawals are tax-free when used for health care expenses. People with individual insurance policies can contribute up to $3,500 to a health bank account in 2020. Family plans have a contribution limit of $7,100, and people age 55 and older can make a further $1,000 catch-up contribution.
Money during a health bank account rolls over annually and may be invested. “This also can assist you plan beforehand for things like your child’s braces or other items which will be needed within the future,” says Tara Rivera, vice chairman of finance at DentalPlans.com. “The money are going to be there once you need it, helping you avoid debt.”
Reassess and negotiate monthly bills.
You'll have extra money in your pocket if you're taking time to trim monthly bills. Cable, streaming services, cellphone and internet service are all prime places to save lots of , because of a competitive market. In some cases, you'll not even need to change companies to urge better rates. Contact current providers to ask if you'll get a reduced price in exchange for your continued business.
Don’t forget to also search for lower prices on financial products. “One of the simplest ways to save lots of money on debt is to undertake to require advantage of zero interest alternatives or personal loans if the speed is best than your current credit cards,” Rivera says.
Be strategic with charitable donations.
For the 2020 tax year, the quality tax write-off for a marriage is $24,800. meaning not many of us are likely to itemize their deductions. Since charitable donations can only be written off by those that itemize, people may need to be strategic about once they give to urge a deduction now.
One strategy is to maneuver up donations that might typically tend in January to December. Or taxpayers may find it best to form larger contributions every other year. Just remember that you simply can generally only itemize contributions of up to 60% of your adjusted gross income.
Update beneficiary information.
Your loved ones are going to be grateful if you're taking time to review beneficiaries. These are the people designated to receive money from life assurance policies, retirement funds and bank accounts after your death. So you'll be wanting to review your beneficiaries on a minimum of an annual basis.
A beneficiary designation overrides the other directive you've given about your finances. as an example , if you divorce and forget to get rid of your ex-spouse as your life assurance beneficiary, they're going to get the benefit no matter what it says in your will. If a beneficiary isn’t named, an estate may need to undergo an upscale and long probate process before the funds are often released to heirs. However, avoiding that headache is straightforward , consistent with Azoury. “It could have all been solved by one signature (on a beneficiary form),” he says.
Conduct an annual review.
It's easier to form smart money moves if you've got an honest understanding of your overall financial picture. “I recommend couples mark each day or evening to take a seat down a minimum of once per annum to guage their assets, liabilities and expenses, including mastercard debt, and any investments or retirement accounts they could have,” Zeiderman says.
As a part of that process, review your credit reports and credit score. Consumers are entitled to at least one free credit report annually from each of the main credit bureaus: Experian, Equifax and TransUnion. These are often requested at AnnualCreditReport.com. Meanwhile, credit scores are often checked for free of charge through mastercard issuers like Discover or services like CreditWise from Capital One. Monitoring your credit score and credit reports ensures errors don't slip through and adversely affect your chances of approval for a loan or lower rate of interest . What's more, it can assist you spot fraud early..
- 2Face coverings, N95 masks and surgical masks: Who they're for and how to use them
The CDC says that everybody should wear non-medical face coverings whenever you're interacting with others during the coronavirus pandemic. But how do those differ from medical-grade face masks?
Face masks, hand washing and social distancing became the quality advice for reducing the spread of the coronavirus. "It's getting to be critical to still embrace the principles of social distancing, hand hygiene, and wearing a face covering publicly ," said Robert Redfield, the director of the CDC during an appointment on June 12, when talking about what it'll fancy reopen the US. We are already seeing this become standard practice -- in many nations across the country, it's mandatory to wear a face covering when you're publicly , or going into a business.
But it is vital to know that face masks and face coverings are available several different forms, from sterile medical-grade masks to handmade cloth face coverings.
Medical-grade masks include disposable surgical face masks and N95 respirators. Surgical face masks are wont to block large particles and respiratory droplets (which are sent into the air when someone coughs or sneezes) from entering or exiting your mouth. Tight-fitting N95 respirator masks are designed to filter smoke, small particles and airborne viruses.
Non-medical face coverings include reusable cloth masks, bandanas and scarves, and are utilized in an equivalent way as a surgical mask, to guard you against large particles and respiratory droplets. Research suggests that these face coverings can reduce the forward distance travelled by an individual's breath by over 90% (and more thereon later), and thus are an appropriate protective measure against transmitting the coronavirus.
Here's what you would like to understand about how each of those masks and face coverings protect you.
Surgical mask vs. face covering vs. N95 respirator
If you have ever been to the dentist, surgical face masks will look familiar -- health care professionals use them to stop the splashing of fluids into their mouths. They're loose-fitting and permit airborne particles in. People commonly wear face masks in East Asian countries to guard themselves from smog and respiratory diseases, but these masks aren't designed to dam tiny particles from the air.
Again, a surgical face mask's main purpose is to stay out the liquid of an infected person's sneeze or cough from entering your mouth or nose (gross, I know). Wearing one can protect you from getting sick if you're in close contact with someone who is ill and will also help prevent you from spreading your illness to somebody else , so it's normal practice for medical professionals to wear them around sick patients.
Face coverings
Face coverings are meant to guard you within the same way that disposable surgical masks do, by blocking large particles and respiratory droplets. The CDC doesn't provide specific samples of what should be used as a face covering, but government health officials within the San Francisco Bay Area recommend using bandanas, fabric masks and neck gaiters.
According to the California Department of Public Health, face coverings should cover the nose and mouth and may be made up of a spread of materials , including cotton, silk or linen. you'll prefer to buy a premade cloth mask, or fashion one from home items like scarfs, T-shirts, sweatshirts or towels.
These face coverings should be washed in predicament and dried on high heat during a dryer between uses to kill any bacteria or viruses that get on them. The CDC does tell make certain to scrub your hands before and after handling your face covering because it's going to have harmful viruses or bacteria on its surface. you furthermore may shouldn't touch your face or face covering while wearing it call at public.
Both disposable and reusable face masks can help prevent hand-to-mouth viral transmissions, because you cannot directly touch your own mouth while wearing one. Viruses, however, are often transmitted through your nose or eyes and virologists say that surgical face masks cannot block airborne viruses from entering your body.
As far as protecting yourself et al. from the coronavirus, there's some promising data showing that face coverings -- including all masks without an outlet, from medical grade to homemade -- can help contain the spread of the virus. Preliminary research from the University of Edinburgh published May 21, 2020 suggests that face coverings cut the forward distance travelled by an individual's exhale by quite 90% -- meaning how far your breath travels after it leaves your mouth or nose.
However, jets of air can still escape sideways and backwards, especially with coughing or heavy breathing. Plus, researchers found that only masks with a decent seal around one's face prevent the spread of fluid particles carrying an epidemic . Still, this is often excellent news regarding how widespread use of face coverings can help us hamper the spread of the novel coronavirus.
N95 respirators
That's where a respirator, a tight-fitting protective device worn round the face, comes in. When people say "respirator," they're usually pertaining to the N95 respirator, which gets its name from the very fact that it blocks a minimum of 95% of small particles, including viruses. Several brands manufacture N95 respirators, and that they are available all different sizes. These are the masks people are most strongly requested to save lots of for medical professionals, so it's recommended that everybody not leave and buy them.
You should also know that N95 respirators are available two varieties, ones with an external one-way air valve and ones without it (also called surgical N95 respirators). With both sorts of respirators, the mask itself filters out the air your inhale , protecting you from contaminants within the air. Respirators with a one-way valve help keep the mask cool and fewer stuffy because the nice and cozy air you exhale escapes more easily.
However, consistent with the CDC, meaning that respirators with a valve also allow unfiltered air to flee and spread into the air around you. this is often typically only a priority in sterile environments, like an OR , but it's led to some cities banning the utilization of N95 respirators with a valve in an attempt to prevent the spread of the coronavirus.
The local governments within the San Francisco Bay Area are telling residents that N95s with a valve aren't compliant with the regions's health orders that need wearing a face covering publicly . that's supported the thought that if you're sick, or think that you simply could be a carrier of the coronavirus, these sorts of respirators could still potentially spread the virus.
Do masks and face coverings actually prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus?
The answer to the present is technically yes, but the precise effect is difficult to define -- especially on an outsized scale. Studies have shown that N95 masks are highly effective in preventing viral illnesses, but only in people that actually wear the masks correctly, which is rare.
N95 masks are difficult to place on for people that aren't medical professionals. If you've put the mask on right, it gets hot and stuffy, so tons of individuals take it off before it can do any good. In fact, some medical professionals believe these masks actually create a more suitable environment for viruses to develop.
Another study showed that respiratory masks are helpful in preventing viral infections, but only combined with frequent hand washing. Dr. Michael Hall, a CDC vaccine provider, told CNET that while N95 respirators are the foremost protective, surgical masks can help protect you from other people's coughs and sneezes.
While face coverings don't filter particles within the same way an N95 mask does, they're now recommended as an efficient way of slowing the spread of the coronavirus, especially among people that have the virus, but are asymptomatic and still going call at public to urge food or supplies. The CDC says:
"The coronavirus can spread between people interacting in close proximity -- for instance , speaking, coughing or sneezing -- albeit those people aren't exhibiting symptoms. In light of this new evidence, CDC recommends wearing cloth face coverings publicly settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to take care of (e.g., grocery stores and pharmacies) especially in areas of serious community-based transmission."
Bear in mind that nonmedical face coverings are only effective against spreading the virus if you still take social distancing measures and basic hygiene seriously. If you are doing follow wear face coverings outside, don't let it function a false sense of security.
The bottom line? If worn correctly and combined with other virus prevention methods, surgical face masks, N95 respirators and face coverings can help lower the danger of spreading viruses, including the novel coronavirus. But medical-grade protection should be reserved for medical professionals or those that are actively sick and wish to go away the house to urge medical aid . the remainder folks should just cover with a bandana or cloth.
- 3Best Gift ideas for homeowners
WHETHER YOU’RE attending a housewarming party or sending a present to a replacement homeowner from a distance, finding the right item to welcome your loved ones into their new space might not be easy. A bottle of wine can feel cliche, or maybe out of line if they don’t drink alcohol. So how does one provides a celebratory gift that's memorable and useful?
The key's trying to form those final parts of occupation easier. “Anything you'll prefer to make a rough process easier is great,” says Julie Schechter, founding father of care package startup Small Packages, based in ny City.
Key Holder
Consider gifting a tray, bowl or set of hooks to function a catch-all or drop spot for keys by the most entryway. A key holder may be a simple but useful gift and is probably going to return in handy if the person remains getting into their first home. By selecting a tray or hooks, however, take care to not capture a design aesthetic which will not appeal to your beloved . “Design style is extremely subjective,” says Morgan Falevai, digital marketing manager for Brilliant Gifts, a care package company based in Kaysville, Utah.
Customized Return Addresses
Have address labels or a address stamp created to suit your loved one’s new location. This gift could seem small, but will remain handy for years as your friend or loved one sends holiday cards, personal thank-you notes or the occasional legal document via mail .
Personalized Doormat
A doormat at a front entrance will always help a replacement home feel more complete, and there are many online businesses which will print a customized message to form it feel phenomenal . you'll have a mat customized together with your friend's surname , for instance , or a frequently used phrase or design that might appeal to them. Dozens of outlets on Etsy offer doormat-customizing services, or inspect ready-made designs from Target, HomeGoods and other home furnishing stores.
Tools for Hosting
Especially if you’re buying for a few who married within the previous couple of years, there’s an honest chance they won’t need new dishes, knives or other standard kitchen utensils, because they likely received those items as wedding gifts. Instead, Falevai recommends a present which will make hosting guests a touch more fun. for instance , Brilliant Gifts sells a tapas care package that has plates and utensils for serving small dishes also as a tapas cookbook, otherwise you could gift a slate cheese board with chalk to label different cheeses or hors d'oeuvres.
Home or DIY Book
Offer the gift of data about getting into a replacement home by tapping the expertise of execs who have written about it. Consider gifting the book of a favourite HGTV personality like “Homebody” by Joanna Gaines or a classy guide like “The Home Edit,” by Clea Shearer and Joanna Teplin. It’s not ideal to recommend an organizing or homeownership basics book to someone you aren’t particularly close with, but if you recognize your friend or relative is seeking the simplest thanks to tidy or maintain their home, books are often a useful resource and helpful gift.
Gourmet Condiments or Food Items
Moving into a replacement home typically means you’ll need to restock the refrigerator and pantry with staples. help a replacement resident by gifting some fun food items which may not be a flavor or brand they typically devour . In one among the tiny Packages box options for a replacement home, for instance , there are coffee beans, jam and infused salts for seasoning. “The fun thing about getting a gift is that you’re getting something you wouldn’t necessarily buy for yourself,” Schechter says.
Care Package
If you’re celebrating an in depth friend's or relative’s new home and need to supply more personal touches to the gift, consider a care package which will include multiple items for the recipient to enjoy. Companies like Small Packages and Brilliant Gifts concentrate on such gifts, providing options that cater to different personalities, scenarios and budgets. Tools, kitchen utensils, food and scented candles can each be the theme of a care package, or are often included during a larger one. “It seems like you set in effort when actually it’s super easy,” Falevai says.
Local Favorites From Small Businesses
If the housewarming is for people that have moved an extended distance, help welcome them to the world by introducing them to local businesses and area favorites. Treats from an area bakery, a trinket from alittle business down the road or popular snacks that are unique to the region are often a fun thanks to introduce them to their new home. Schechter says a present card to a close-by restaurant are often a useful introduction also while your friends settle in.
Succulent or Cooking Herb Plant
A succulent may be a low-maintenance plant which will add a touch of life to an area , or if your friend likes to cook, a basil or dill plant might be a pleasant gift for him to cultivate his own fresh ingredients. However, Falevai warns against giving plants as a go-to housewarming present. “Plants are a really personal thing to people, and sometimes if you don’t have a green fingers they're going to die very quickly,” she says.
Wine Stopper or opener With a private Touch
Anticipate the influx of wine or beer bottles from other housewarming guests by gifting a wine stopper or opener that references a favourite sports team, college, animal or pattern. during a few the tiny Packages boxes designed for recipients who have moved into a replacement home, a opener within the shape of a pineapple is included. It’s something which will are available handy, Schechter says, and its pineapple shape also invokes a standard symbol of hospitality.
Coasters
For a housewarming party especially , coasters are often put to use directly to assist protect coffee tables and other furniture from the ring of water that forms from a glass. If you’ve followed any renovations or decorating your friends have done, get coasters to match the colour scheme or design style in order that they slot in the space well and are more likely to be used often.
Tool Set
Help a first-time homeowner steel oneself against simple DIY projects by providing them with a tool set with a hammer, wrench, tape , level and more. Many basic tool kits are available at any home improvement or home goods store.
[ READ: the way to Build a fireplace Pit in Your Backyard: a Step-by-Step Guide ]
Step Stool
If you wish the thought of giving a present with a touch more utility, consider alittle stool that helps new homeowners reach a high shelf or light fixture to vary a lightbulb. If you’re handy, make it a private and custom gift by building the stool yourself. Or buy a folding stool which will be easy to slip into a closet for behind furniture when not in use.
Candles
You can choose a candle (or set of candles) associated with the season that the homeowner is occupation , supported his or her favorite scent or drawn from the choice at an area business. Candles don’t go bad, so it’s OK if they’re not used directly . counting on where you purchase them, they will even be budget-friendly alternatives to larger gifts.
Hummingbird Feeder
Hummingbirds are found in most parts of the U.S., and spotting the small birds from a porch or window is usually a fun treat throughout the day. Help attract hummingbirds to your loved one’s home by gifting a feeder they will hang outside. Hummingbird feeders are available a spread of designs and costs and may be found on Amazon, at Walmart or any home improvement or wildlife store, ranging in price from $10 to $50 or more..
- 4Social media or shopping websites? The influence of eWOM on consumers’ online purchase intentions
ABSTRACT
This study empirically tests and compares the influence of friends’ recommendations on social media and anonymous reviews on shopping websites in the context of online purchase intention. For this purpose, we analyse the impacts of these two platforms based on the components of information adoption model (IAM) which are borrowed as information quality, information credibility, information usefulness and information adoption. We conduct a survey and find anonymous reviews as more influential on consumer’ online purchase intentions than friends’ recommendations on social media. However, as this result was contrary to that expected, we conduct another study through in-depth interviews in order to enlighten our results found in the first study. In Study 2, we find the reasons why consumers prefer anonymous reviews rather than friends’ recommendations. Information quantity, information readiness, detailed information and dedicated information are factors which make shopping websites superior than social media in terms of the impact of electronic word of mouth (eWOM). Academic and managerial implications are discussed.
The influence of electronic word of mouth (eWOM) on purchase intention has long been known (Bickart and Schindler 2001; Chevalier and Mayzlin 2006; Park, Lee, and Han 2007). Previously, the effects of eWOM on discussion forums (Chiou and Cheng 2003; Huang and Chen 2006), consumer review sites (Cheung, Lee, and Rabjohn 2008; Gauri, Bhatnagar, and Rao 2008), blogs (Chu and Kamal 2008; Lin, Lu, and Wu 2012) and shopping websites (Li and Zhan 2011; Park, Lee, and Han 2007) have been studied by researchers. Also, these platforms have been compared in terms of their influence on consumers’ purchase intentions (Lee and Youn 2009). However, due to being relatively new, far less attention was paid to the influence of eWOM in social media (Cheung and Thadani 2012) although there are a few existing studies (See-To and Ho 2014; Wang, Yu, and Wei 2012). Social media has been defined as group of Internet-based applications that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). Users can create content through using variety of facilities provided by social media websites such as pictures and videos. This visually enriched content generated by users can be about anything personal; however, it can also be about brands or their products and services. In fact, this socially extensive environment is considered as a great opportunity to share product-related opinions (Canhoto and Clark 2013; Chu and Kim 2011; Dessart, Veloutsou, and MorganThomas 2015; Tsimonis and Dimitriadis 2014); and recent studies show that consumers increasingly apply social media to obtain information about unfamiliar brands (Naylor, Lamberton, and West 2012; Schivinski and Dabrowski 2016). Social media websites, thus, considered as valuable platforms in terms of eWOM. The emergence of social media, on the other hand, has brought a new aspect to eWOM through enabling Internet users to communicate with people who they already know. While the other online platforms (discussion forums, consumer review sites, blogs, shopping websites) allow eWOM to occur between anonymous users (Dellarocas 2003; Sen and Lerman 2007); people are able to exchange their ideas about products or services with their friends and acquaintances on social media (Chu and Kim 2011; Kozinets et al. 2010) as it encourages users to have online accounts with real identities. Although there is a discussion between researchers about the possible effects of this less anonymity, it has not yet been empirically tested since the social media websites are relatively new eWOM platforms. Some researchers consider the anonymity as an advantage for eWOM since it leads consumers to share their opinions more comfortably (Goldsmith and Horowitz 2006). Anonymity is also regarded as one of the important factors, which ensures higher volume of eWOM (Chatterjee 2001). On the other hand, however, some other researchers argue that social media platforms are more advantageous for the eWOM since the less anonymity has potential to make eWOM information more credible (Chu and Choi 2011; Gillin 2007; Wallace et al. 2009). The latter group of researchers anticipate the eWOM on social media to be more influential on consumers’ purchase intentions as it occurs between friends and acquaintances (Chu and Choi 2011; Moran and Muzellec 2014; Park, Lee, and Han 2007). Indeed, this discussion still has not been elucidated yet. The question of whether the eWOM between anonymous people or the eWOM between people who knows each other was more influential on consumers’ purchase intentions still remains uncertain, although the influence of both types of eWOM were separately tested and found influential (Alhidari, Iyer, and Paswan 2015; Elwalda, Lü, and Ali 2016). This study, therefore, proposed the following question: Is eWOM between people who knows each other on social media or eWOM between anonymous people on other online platforms more influential on consumers’ online purchase intentions? The answer of this question is valuable for practitioners as well as researchers since it will reveal which eWOM platforms are more influential on consumers. In this study, we thus empirically test and compare the influence of friends’ recommendations on social media and anonymous reviews on shopping websites; and we expect the eWOM on social media to be more influential as the above-mentioned latter group of researchers. We analyse the influence of these two platforms on consumers’ online purchase intentions based on the components of information adoption model (IAM; Sussman and Siegal 2003) which are applied as information quality, information credibility, information usefulness and information adoption. We conduct this research through survey. However, as we find completely opposite results than expected, we determine to do another study. We conduct in-depth interviews in order to explain our results found in Study 1 and to provide better understanding for the discussion. In the following sections, we begin with a brief literature review about eWOM on social media and shopping websites, and then we introduce Study 1 and Study 2. Finally, we conclude with the discussion of theoretical and managerial aspects of the findings.
EWOM on social media and other platforms
EWOM is considered as one of the most useful information sources by consumers as it consists of peer opinions and experiences instead of company-generated information (Brown, Broderick, and Lee 2007; Mazzarol, Sweeney, and Soutar 2007; Munnukka, Karjaluoto, and Tikkanen 2015). The Internet has facilitated eWOM communication between customers through a variety of platforms (See Table 1) (Cheung and Thadani 2012). However, there is one major difference between social media and other eWOM platforms; social media allows Internet users to communicate with people who they already know while other platforms enable users to communicate anonymously (Kozinets et al. 2010; Moran and Muzellec 2014). Therefore, consumers are increasingly turning to social media websites for knowledge acquisition about unfamiliar brands (Baird and Parasnis 2011; Goodrich and de Mooij 2014; Naylor, Lamberton, and West 2012; Schivinski and Dabrowski 2016); and social media is considered as an appropriate platform for eWOM (Canhoto and Clark 2013; Erkan and Evans 2014; Knoll and Proksch 2015; Toder-Alon, Brunel, and Fournier 2014). Furthermore, eWOM on social media has been found influential on consumers’ purchase intentions by previous researchers (Iyengar, Han, and Gupta 2009; See-To and Ho 2014; Wallace et al. 2009; Wang, Yu, and Wei 2012). On the other side, other eWOM platforms, consumer review websites (Cheung, Lee, and Rabjohn 2008), discussion forums (Chiou and Cheng 2003), blogs (Lin, Lu, and Wu 2012), have also been found influential on consumers’ purchase intentions. In particular, previous studies have focused on the impacts of eWOM on shopping websites through reviews (Chevalier and Mayzlin 2006; Gu, Park, and Konana 2012; Li and Zhan 2011; Park, Lee, and Han 2007); and findings show that although the reviews are anonymous, they play an important role on purchase intention as with other eWOM platforms. Ultimately, research in this field finds both the eWOM between anonymous users and the eWOM between users who already know each other as effective on purchase intention. However, there is a discussion between researchers about the possible further effects of less anonymous eWOM, which arises with social media websites. In this study, thus, we aim to explore whether the eWOM between anonymous people or the eWOM between people who knows each other was more influential on consumers’ purchase intentions. For this purpose, we choose social media and shopping websites. Social media websites encourage people to communicate with their friends and acquaintances, while shopping websites, like Amazon.com, enable users to communicate anonymously through their online reviews sections; and both types of website allow people to exchange opinions about products and services of brands. Shopping websites were selected among the other anonymous eWOM platforms as reaching users of these websites is more convenient when compared to discussion forums, blogs and reviews sites.
Study 1
In order to compare the influences of eWOM between anonymous people and eWOM between people who knows each other, we first identify the factors of eWOM information which affect consumers’ online purchase intentions and then build the hypotheses of this study based on the identified factors.
Hypotheses development
Information adoption model
EWOM conversations consist of basic information transfer. The influence of the information, however, may change from person to person; the same content can evoke different notions among receivers (Chaiken and Eagly 1976; Cheung, Lee, and Rabjohn 2008). To understand how people internalise the information they receive, previous studies have focused on the information adoption process (Nonaka 1994). In the information systems literature, researchers have applied dual-process theories to define how people are affected in adopting ideas or information (Bhattacherjee and Sanford 2006; Sussman and Siegal 2003). However, Sussman and Siegal (2003) take it further and narrow its scope by proposing IAM. The IAM specifically explains how people are affected by the information on computer-mediated communication platforms. The IAM is proposed by considering the elaboration likelihood model (ELM) which posits that people can be affected by a message in two routes, which are central and peripheral. The central route refers to the essence of arguments, while the peripheral route refers to the issues which are indirectly related to essence of the message (Cheung, Lee, and Rabjohn 2008; Petty and Cacioppo 1986; Shu and Scott 2014). As this model particularly focuses on the influence of information on computer-mediated communication platforms, it has been considered as applicable to eWOM studies by many researchers (Cheung, Lee, and Rabjohn 2008; Cheung and Thadani 2012; Shu and Scott 2014). In particular, Cheung, Lee, and Rabjohn (2008) apply this model within the online discussion forums context, while Shu and Scott (2014) use it within the social media context. As this paper focuses on eWOM in social media and shopping websites, we also find using the IAM appropriate. We apply its components into this study as information quality, information credibility, information usefulness and information adoption. Hypotheses of the study were then developed based on the mentioned factors.
Information quality & Information credibility
As a result of extensive usage of the Internet, eWOM information can now be created by almost everyone; and thus, quality and credibility of information has become more critical for consumers (Reichelt, Sievert, and Jacob 2014; Yoo, Kim, and Lawrence Sanders 2015). Information quality has been defined as the strength of the meaning embedded in a message (Yeap, Ignatius, and Ramayah 2014). It plays an important role on consumers’ evaluation about products and services (Filieri and McLeay 2014). Also, Park, Lee, and Han (2007) have found that the quality of reviews on shopping websites affects consumers’ purchase intentions. However, since the eWOM occurs in social media is less anonymous, we predict the quality of information on social media has a stronger effect on consumers’ online purchase intentions than the quality of eWOM information on shopping websites. On the other hand, previous research has shown the positive relationship between information credibility and consumers’ purchase intentions (Dou et al. 2012; Hsu and Tsou 2011; Park, Lee, and Han 2007; Prendergast, Ko, and Yuen 2010). In fact, Wathen and Burkell (2002), consider information credibility as an initial factor in the consumers’ persuasion process. Therefore, we regard information credibility as one of the factors which affects consumers’ purchase intentions; and, within the context of this study, we predict that the credibility of eWOM information on social media is more influential on consumers’ online purchase intentions than the credibility of eWOM information on shopping websites.
Information usefulness & information adoption
Information usefulness and information adoption are the two other elements which were proposed in the IAM by Sussman and Siegal (2003). Information usefulness indicates consumers’ perceptions that using information will improve their performance (Cheung, Lee, and Rabjohn 2008). The relationship between information usefulness and consumers’ purchase intentions has been found worthy to study by previous researchers (Chiang and Jang 2007); and later on, the influence of information usefulness on purchase intention has been demonstrated in following research (Liu and Zhang 2010; Xia and Bechwati 2008). Therefore, we include information usefulness to this study and hypothesise H3. Lastly, information adoption is considered as another factor which might affect consumers’ purchase intentions (Cheung and Thadani 2012). Consumers who engage and adopt eWOM information are more likely to have purchase intentions. However, the information adoption process may change in different platforms (Cheung et al. 2009; Fang 2014). Therefore, we predict that the adoption of eWOM information in social media and shopping websites could have a different influence on consumers’ purchase intentions. In fact, as eWOM information has been exchanged among friends on social media instead of anonymous people like in shopping websites, we anticipate that the adoption of eWOM information on social media is more influential on consumers’ online purchase intentions than the adoption of eWOM information on shopping websites. Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework of this study.
Method
To test the hypotheses, a survey was conducted with 384 university students in the UK. University students were considered appropriate for this study because of the latest statistics which present people between the ages of 18–29 as being the larger part of social media users; 89% of this age group use social media websites, as of January 2014 (PRC 2014). Younger age groups are also more familiar with online shopping. According to latest reports, 83% of 16–24 year olds and 90% of 25–34 year olds who live in the UK use online shopping (National Statistics 2014). The sample size of 384 is deemed suitable for studies where the population comprises millions (at 95% confidence level and 5% margin of error) (Krejcie and Morgan 1970; Sekaran 2006). Sample characteristics are demonstrated in Table 2.
Measures
The survey was designed using a multi-item approach; a few items were used for measuring each construct in order to enhance validity and reliability. All variables were assessed with a five-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Items were borrowed from previous related literature and specified according to the context of this study. Particularly, information quality was measured with the items developed by Park, Lee, and Han (2007) (α = 0.85, M = 3.37). The items for information credibility were adapted from following scales (Prendergast, Ko, and Yuen 2010; Smith and Vogt 1995; α = 0.89, M = 3.31). Information usefulness was assessed with the items used by following researchers (Bailey and Pearson 1983; Cheung, Lee, and Rabjohn 2008; α = 0.83, M = 3.55). The items for information adoption were adapted from Cheung et al.’s work (2009; α = 0.90, M = 3.47). Lastly, the items for online purchase intention were adopted from Hille, Walsh and Cleveland’ scale (2015; α = 0.90, M = 4.18). Appendix A1 presents all the measures used for this study
Results
Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to test each hypothesis. Multiple regression analysis allows assessing the relative impacts of independent variables on dependent variable (Cohen et al. 2003). Table 3 shows the results of analyses; all models for four hypotheses were found significant (p < 0.001). However, all hypotheses were rejected. The eWOM information on social media was not found more influential than the eWOM information on shopping websites. Conversely, based on multiple regression results, quality of eWOM information on shopping websites (β = 0.358) was found more influential on consumers’ online purchase intentions than quality of eWOM information on social media (β = 0.000). Likewise, credibility of eWOM information on shopping websites (β = 0.307) was found more effective than credibility of eWOM information on social media (β = –0.036); usefulness of eWOM information on shopping websites (β = 0.412) was found more effective than usefulness of eWOM information on social media (β = –0.124); and lastly, adoption of eWOM information on shopping websites (β = 0.430) was found more effective than adoption of eWOM information on social media (β = –0.096) on consumers’ online purchase intentions.
Discussion of study 1
In this study, we compare the influence of eWOM on social media and shopping websites. Previous studies have tested the effect of eWOM on social media (Iyengar, Han, and Gupta 2009; See-To and Ho 2014; Wallace et al. 2009; Wang, Yu, and Wei 2012) and the effect of eWOM on shopping websites (through reviews; Chevalier and Mayzlin 2006; Gu, Park, and Konana 2012; Li and Zhan 2011; Park, Lee, and Han 2007) separately; and they both have been found influential on consumers’ purchase intentions. However, the effects of these two different platforms had not yet been compared, although there is one major difference between them in terms of eWOM. The online platforms, except social media websites, mostly allow eWOM to occur between anonymous people as it is in shopping websites through reviews. Whereas, social media websites have brought a new perspective for eWOM through enabling people to exchange their opinions and experiences with friends and acquaintances (Kozinets et al. 2010; Moran and Muzellec 2014). For this reason, we expect a significant difference regarding the influence of eWOM on these two platforms and propose four hypotheses. Indeed, the differences between these two platforms have clearly emerged and we find significant results. However, contrary to hypotheses of this study, eWOM on social media was not found more influential than eWOM on shopping websites; all the hypotheses were rejected. On the other hand, contrary to expectation, the multiple regression results also show that eWOM on shopping websites was found more influential on consumers’ online purchase intentions than eWOM on social media. One of the critical parts of the results is the clarity of outcomes. EWOM on shopping websites was found more effective in terms of all components which we tested: information quality, information credibility, information usefulness and information adoption. Although some prior studies anticipate the eWOM between people who already know each other as more effective, as we hypothesised, (Chu and Choi 2011; Chu and Kim 2011; Park, Lee, and Han 2007); these results are in line with the findings of Yeap, Ignatius and Ramayah’s study (2014) which conclude the online reviews as the most preferred eWOM source. Results clearly indicate that there should be some reasons which make eWOM on shopping websites more influential than eWOM in social media. In other words, there should be some reason for consumers to prefer eWOM on shopping websites although they are anonymous. Thus, in order to provide better understanding for this discussion and to enlighten our results found in Study 1, we conduct another study for this research.
Study 2
In Study 2 we investigate the factors which lead consumers to prefer anonymous reviews rather than friends’ recommendations on social media. For this purpose, we determine related questions and conduct in-depth interviews.
Method
An exploratory approach was used in Study 2. This approach was chosen in order to explore the comprehensive meaning of results found in Study 1 (Willig 2001). Data were collected in the form of 10 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with university students. A purposive, convenience sampling method was chosen as an appropriate method due to the exploratory nature of this study (Esterberg 2002; Turnbull and Wheeler 2014). Ten students (5 male and 5 female) were selected among the participants of Study 1 to achieve interrelated findings. Interviews reached theoretical saturation (Morse 1994) with interview 10; and the data collection process was completed at this point. The data were initially open coded by researchers during the interviews; the emerged themes were noted. Then, after interviews, voice recordings were transcribed to organise the data. The transcripts were examined through thematic analysis to identify key themes within the data (Braun and Clarke 2006). Finally, selective coding was applied to classify possible quotes to present findings (Fielding 2005).
Findings
In Study 2, four main themes arose from the data. Consumers prefer online reviews on shopping websites rather than friends’ recommendations on social media because of four main reasons which are as follows: information quantity, information readiness, detailed information and dedicated information
Information quantity
Most interviewees expressed the importance of number of the reviews; and they indicated that they do not frequently see friends’ posts about brands or their products and services on social media. However, shopping websites have lots of product reviews and this gives an opportunity to compare the different comments. Therefore, information quantity is one of the reasons for consumers to prefer online reviews. Reviews on social media, from my friends? I don’t see them often, not often at all. Once in a blue moon, that’s why I wouldn’t consider it really … and even if you see, what’s the chances that you’ll have two or three reviews from friends at one time on the same product? (ID: 1) I prefer reviews, because it is more. For example, on Amazon.com, you can see up to 300 reviews; but from friends on social media … it is just one product and it is just one or two friends. This is not really tangible. So, if I want to buy a product, numbers of the reviews gives me that confidence … Because, you know, if 300 people are saying good things, that means, something must be good about this product. (ID: 10) Interviewees also talked about how information quantity helps them to overcome the anonymity issue on online reviews. We of course don’t know the personality of reviewers on shopping websites; he or she can be a person who doesn’t like anything. However, when I continue to read the other reviews, I understand the overall opinion about the product. If there are 5000 comments and if the majority of people like the product, then how can I consider that specific person’s comment? There might a problem with his personal preferences. (ID: 6)
Information readiness
Always being ready is another reason which makes reviews on shopping websites superior to friends’ recommendations on social media. When consumers need information about products, online reviews on shopping websites are always ready to use. However, social media does not provide that convenience for consumers. Reviews are not always available on social media; you can’t find them always. That’s why I follow the other consumers’ reviews. They are easy to find and ready to use. (ID: 5) When I am looking for information about products, shopping websites like Amazon.com is ready for it, reviews are there … but in social media, it is very difficult to find the information that I need. Even if I scroll down and go back to posts shared within last 2 years, it is still not easy to find. (ID: 4)
Detailed information
Interviewees also described the significance of detailed information. They emphasised that the information shared by friends about brands on social media lack detail, while the reviews on shopping websites provide answers for specific questions. You can reach detailed information about products through online reviews. Plus, you can find the comparison of the different products for the same purpose. Reviewers explain his/her personal experience with the product and sometimes you can see how expert they are. However, on social media, comments of my friends usually don’t have details … Also, they don’t compare different products as it in online reviews. That’s why, reviews on shopping websites naturally more satisfying. (ID: 3) I read quite a lot of reviews on shopping websites … because some people take the time to write, you know, sometimes a paragraph or so … and I mean all the while adding up, this is building an image of the product to me and how it works efficiently. I see some products have faults, so these all contribute. (ID: 1) Furthermore, interviewees mention that they find information about both the positive and negative sides of products through online reviews on shopping websites, whereas the eWOM information on social media refers to either the positive or negative sides of products. On social media, sometimes I see very brief positive or negative information about products and services. Rather than detailed information, I can only see suggestions with very short sentences such as ‘Try it, it’s nice’ and ‘I hate it, please avoid’. … However, I can’t see a great evaluation about products with both positive and negative sides … but it is not like this on shopping websites, for example on Amazon.com. (ID: 7)
Conclusion
This study set out with the aim of comparing the influences of friends’ recommendations on social media and anonymous reviews on shopping websites in the context of online purchase intention. In fact, based on the components of IAM, we hypothesised that eWOM information on social media has a stronger effect on consumers’ online purchase intentions than eWOM information on shopping websites. However, in contrast to our expectations, the results of Study 1 showed that eWOM information on shopping websites is more influential on online purchase intention than eWOM information on social media in terms of information quality, information credibility, information usefulness and information adoption. In order to provide better interpretation for these results, we conduct another study through in-depth interviews. Findings of Study 2 enlightened the survey results and explained why anonymous reviews are more influential than friends’ recommendations. Information quantity, information readiness, detailed information and dedicated information are found as key themes which make shopping websites better than social media in terms of the impact of eWOM.
Theoretical and managerial implications
This study contributes eWOM literature through elucidating an uncertainty. Some previous studies consider the anonymity issue as an advantage for eWOM (Chatterjee 2001; Goldsmith and Horowitz 2006), while many others expect the opposite; second group of studies anticipate the eWOM on social media as more effective since it occurs between people who already know each other (Chu and Choi 2011; Moran and Muzellec 2014; Park, Lee, and Han 2007). This study enlightens the mentioned discussion through its empirical approach. Secondly, we provide new constructs for researchers; findings reached through in-depth interviews (information quantity, information readiness, detailed information, dedicated information) can be tested as a component of new theories and models in the future studies. Finally, we intentionally preferred to examine the consumers’ online purchase intentions rather than purchase intentions in order to contribute to the related literature; because there are less studies focused on online purchase intention (Hille, Walsh, and Cleveland 2015; Wen 2009), while there are many studies about purchase intention (Park, Lee, and Han 2007; Prendergast, Ko, and Yuen 2010; See-To and Ho 2014; Wang, Yu, and Wei 2012). On the other hand, in terms of practicality, results of Study 1 shows consumers’ preferred eWOM platforms, which is very valuable for marketers who want to utilise eWOM marketing. Also, findings of Study 2 highlight the aspects of eWOM information that consumers consider; marketers can develop better eWOM marketing strategies by considering consumers’ expectations.
Limitations and future research
Although the paper provides considerable amount of theoretical and managerial implications, the following limitations should be noted. Firstly, this research was conducted with participants who are university students. Although they constitute the majority of social media website users and are more familiar with online shopping websites, they may not precisely reflect the whole population. In addition, since the study was conducted only in UK, it might be difficult to generalise the findings to other countries. Also, this research regards all social media websites together, rather than focusing on one website such as Facebook or Twitter; likewise, in terms of shopping websites. Future research could focus the eWOM on one specific social media website and one specific shopping website. Future research could also focus the eWOM about one specific product type. Finally, further studies could test our findings by adding them to current models and theories as a part of new components, which can bring new theoretical and managerial insights.
Acknowledgements
We thank PhD researchers Erhan Aydın and Abdulaziz Elwalda for their valuable comments and insights into this article. Also, thanks to Dr Chris Evans for encouraging this research..
This is a paragraph! Here's how you make a link: Neocities.
Here's how you can make bold and italic text.
Here's how you can add an image:
Here's how to make a list:
To learn more HTML/CSS, check out these tutorials.