Cited by 434Digital Marketing and Social MediaConsumer Behavior and Marketing InfluenceMedia and Digital Communication

Does Twitter matter? The impact of microblogging word of mouth on consumers’ adoption of new movies

Open access
Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, Wiertz, Caroline, Feldhaus, Fabian·2015·Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11747-014-0388-3

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Positive word of mouth has little to no effect on consumer preferences, while negative word of mouth can have a negative effect on consumer preferences.

    “Hennig-Thurau et al. (2015), show that while garnering positive WOM has little to no effect on consumer preferences, negative WOM can have a negative effect on consumer preferences.”

    From The future of social media in marketing (2020) · cites this paper as Hennig-Thurau et al. (2015)

    The Discussion and implications section reports that negative Twitter word of mouth affected early adoption of 105 movies, while positive word of mouth did not. That supports the claimed contrast for opening-weekend movie choices, but the study does not establish little or no effect of positive word of mouth on consumer preferences generally; the Why MWOM could affect early adoption section instead proposes that positive reviews increase preference. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hennig-Thurau, T., Wiertz, C., & Feldhaus, F.
Affiliations
  • City, University of London (GB)
  • University of Münster (DE)
Corresponding author
Wiertz, Caroline
Venue
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
Published
2014-06-01
Volume
43
Issue
3
Pages
375-394
ISSN
  • 0092-0703 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7824
OpenAlex
W3124914435
Cited by
434
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 54 · 2017: 49 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 1
FWCI
89.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Marketing and Social Media
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
Keywords
negativity bias, purchase decision

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