The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Relationships Between Blogs as EWOM and Interactivity, Perceived Interactivity, and Parasocial Interaction
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to examine the effects of a political candidate’s blog-a form of eWOM (electronic Word-of-Mouth)-on attitudes toward the website, attitudes toward the political candidate, and intentions to vote. The results showed that interactivity in the form of a blog significantly influenced attitude toward the website, but not attitudes toward the candidate or voting intention. However, perceived interactivity influenced all three dependent variables, but did not interact with interactivity, suggesting that these are two separate constructs. The effects were mediated by parasocial interaction.
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
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
Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence
Steuer, J. (1992) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992.tb00812.x · Cited by 5,459
The Uses-and-Gratifications Perspective of Media Effects
(2002) · Media Effects · doi:10.4324/9781410602428-24 · Cited by 882
Interactivity: a concept explication
Kiousis, S. (2002) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/146144480200400303 · Cited by 666
Cited by
Ashley, C., & Tuten, T. (2015) · Psychology & Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.20761 · Cited by 1,462
Labrecque, L. I. (2014) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2013.12.003 · Cited by 971
Electronic word of mouth (eWOM): How eWOM platforms influence consumer product judgement
Lee, M., & Youn, S. (2009) · International Journal of Advertising · doi:10.2501/s0265048709200709 · Cited by 662
Hwang, K., & Zhang, Q. (2018) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.029 · Cited by 639
Yuan, S., & Lou, C. (2020) · Journal of Interactive Advertising · doi:10.1080/15252019.2020.1769514 · Cited by 543
Tsai, W.-H. S., Liu, Y., & Chuan, C.-H. (2021) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-12-2019-0200 · Cited by 394
What makes followers loyal? The role of influencer interactivity in building influencer brand equity
Jun, S., & Yi, J. (2020) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-02-2019-2280 · Cited by 340
Tsai, W.-H. S., & Men, L. R. (2017) · Journal of Marketing Communications · doi:10.1080/13527266.2014.942678 · Cited by 233
de Bérail, P., Guillon, M., & Bungener, C. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.05.007 · Cited by 191
Yoo, C. W., Kim, Y. J., & Sanders, G. L. (2015) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2015.03.001 · Cited by 152
Gross, J., & von Wangenheim, F. (2022) · Journal of Interactive Advertising · doi:10.1080/15252019.2022.2123724 · Cited by 88
“While liking and commenting can be conceptually regarded as digital and consumer engagement (Rodgers and Thorson 2018; Thorson and Rodgers 2006; Yoon et al. 2018), the level of engagement expressed with these social media actions is highly dependent on context platform.”
BackgroundBellur, S., & Sundar, S. S. (2017) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/hcre.12094 · Cited by 69
Metadata
- Authors
- Thorson, K. S., & Rodgers, S.
- Venue
- Journal of Interactive Advertising
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-03
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 5-44
- ISSN
- 1525-2019 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1998630814
- Cited by
- 364
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 13.83
- 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.
