The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Twitter power: Tweets as electronic word of mouth
Abstract
In this paper we report research results investigating microblogging as a form of electronic word‐of‐mouth for sharing consumer opinions concerning brands. We analyzed more than 150,000 microblog postings containing branding comments, sentiments, and opinions. We investigated the overall structure of these microblog postings, the types of expressions, and the movement in positive or negative sentiment. We compared automated methods of classifying sentiment in these microblogs with manual coding. Using a case study approach, we analyzed the range, frequency, timing, and content of tweets in a corporate account. Our research findings show that 19% of microblogs contain mention of a brand. Of the branding microblogs, nearly 20% contained some expression of brand sentiments. Of these, more than 50% were positive and 33% were critical of the company or product. Our comparison of automated and manual coding showed no significant differences between the two approaches. In analyzing microblogs for structure and composition, the linguistic structure of tweets approximate the linguistic patterns of natural language expressions. We find that microblogging is an online tool for customer word of mouth communications and discuss the implications for corporations using microblogging as part of their overall marketing strategy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1002/dir.10073 · Cited by 5,916
Muniz, A. M., & O'Guinn, T. C. (2001) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/319618 · Cited by 3,998
Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of explanations.
Skowronski, J. J., & Carlston, D. E. (1989) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.105.1.131 · Cited by 1,550
Psychological foundations of incentives
Fehr, E., & Falk, A. (2002) · European Economic Review · doi:10.1016/s0014-2921(01)00208-2 · Cited by 1,240 · cited 1×
“Additionally, altruistic behavior of sharing expertise with others has also been shown to motivate positive WOM (Fehr & Falk, 2002; Richins, 1984).”
Background
Cited by
De Veirman, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2017) · International Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/02650487.2017.1348035 · Cited by 2,548
Predicting the future with social media
Asur, S., & Huberman, B. A. (2010) · 2010 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology · doi:10.1109/wi-iat.2010.63 · Cited by 2,081
How Does Brand-related User-generated Content Differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter?
Smith, A. N., Fischer, E., & Yongjian, C. (2012) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2012.01.002 · Cited by 1,044
Social big data: recent achievements and new challenges
Bello-Orgaz, G., Jung, J. J., & Camacho, D. (2016) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2015.08.005 · Cited by 846
“[94] Twitter as eWOM advertising mechanism Sentiment analysis”
MethodAffective News and Networked Publics: The Rhythms of News Storytelling on #Egypt
Papacharissi, Z., & de Fatima Oliveira, M. (2012) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01630.x · Cited by 803
Detecting Automation of Twitter Accounts: Are You a Human, Bot, or Cyborg?
Chu, Z., Gianvecchio, S., Wang, H., & Jajodia, S. (2012) · IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing · doi:10.1109/tdsc.2012.75 · Cited by 634
Boerman, S. C., Willemsen, L. M., & Van Der Aa, E. P. (2017) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2016.12.002 · Cited by 581
Ratkiewicz (2011) · doi:10.1145/1963192.1963301 · Cited by 541
Ghiassi, M., Skinner, J., & Zimbra, D. (2013) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2013.05.057 · Cited by 485
Chae, B. (. (2015) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.12.037 · Cited by 481
Tweet sentiment analysis with classifier ensembles
da Silva, N. F. F., Hruschka, E. R., & Hruschka, E. R. (2014) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2014.07.003 · Cited by 431
Luo, Q., & Zhong, D. (2015) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2014.07.007 · Cited by 374
Colicev, A., Malshe, A., Pauwels, K., & O'Connor, P. (2018) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jm.16.0055 · Cited by 370
A topology of Twitter research: disciplines, methods, and ethics
Zimmer, M., & Proferes, N. J. (2014) · Aslib Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1108/ajim-09-2013-0083 · Cited by 257
Assessing the bias in samples of large online networks
González-Bailón, S., Wang, N., Rivero, A., Borge-Holthoefer, J., & Moreno, Y. (2014) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2014.01.004 · Cited by 238
Sentiment analysis on tweets for social events
Zhou, X., Tao, X., Yong, J., & Yang, Z. (2013) · Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 17th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD) · doi:10.1109/cscwd.2013.6581022 · Cited by 124
Drivers and Outcomes of Brand Relationship Quality in the Context of Online Social Networks
Pentina, I., Gammoh, B. S., Zhang, L., & Mallin, M. (2013) · International Journal of Electronic Commerce · doi:10.2753/jec1086-4415170303 · Cited by 111
Working Together Apart: Collaboration over the Internet
Olson, J. S., & Olson, G. M. (2014) · Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics · doi:10.2200/s00542ed1v01y201310hci020 · Cited by 95
The Economy of the Digital Gift: From Socialism to Sociality Online
Romele, A., & Severo, M. (2016) · Theory, Culture & Society · doi:10.1177/0263276415619474 · Cited by 42
Building customer equity through trust in social networking sites: A perspective from Thai consumers
Kananukul, C., Jung, S., & Watchravesringkan, K. (2015) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-03-2014-0019 · Cited by 42
Handling consumer messages on social networking sites: Customer service or privacy infringement?
Demmers, J., van Dolen, W. M., & Weltevreden, J. W. J. (2018) · International Journal of Electronic Commerce · doi:10.1080/10864415.2018.1396110 · Cited by 33
Explore the Effects of Emoticons on Twitter Sentiment Analysis
Wegrzyn-Wolska, K., Bougueroua, L., Yu, H., & Zhong, J. (2016) · Computer Science & Information Technology ( CS & IT ) · doi:10.5121/csit.2016.61006 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Jansen, B. J., Zhang, M., Sobel, K., & Chowdury, A.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-07-06
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 2169-2188
- ISSN
- 1532-2882 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-2890
- OpenAlex
- W4255173720
- Cited by
- 1,642
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 180.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
