The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conceptualizing word‐of‐mouth activity, triggers and conditions: an exploratory study
Abstract
Purpose: Organizations continually seek new ways to achieve competitive advantage and word of mouth (WOM) represents such an opportunity because it has a powerful influence on consumers' attitudes and behaviors. However, prior research offers little insight into what WOM really means. The present study aims to investigate the complexities of the WOM concept and simultaneously examine the triggers that motivate people to offer WOM and the conditions that enhance the chance of WOM occurring. Design/methodology/approach: A series of six focus groups were undertaken with consumers, these were supplemented by more than 100 critical incident questionnaires. Findings: Two key WOM themes, termed “richness of message” and “strength of implied or explicit advocacy”, were identified, as well as various triggers and conditions that affect WOM occurrence. Research limitations/implications: The study was based on two kinds of qualitative research, but quantitative research is required to fully test the derived WOM model. Further, the study focused on WOM from a giver's point of view. Research into WOM from a receiver's viewpoint is also needed. Practical implications: The present study suggested that WOM activity is more complex than previous research has argued. Managers should consider various WOM facets and, in particular, recognize WOM will be most favorable when it is positive, richly described and conveyed in a strong manner. Originality/value: The paper developed a WOM model that incorporates these additional themes and provides a basis for future quantitative research into WOM.
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
SERVQUAL: A multiple-Item Scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1988) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14579729 · Cited by 21,118
The Behavioral Consequences of Service Quality
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1251929 · Cited by 12,003
Product/Consumption-Based Affective Responses and Postpurchase Processes
Westbrook, R. A. (1987) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378702400302 · Cited by 2,462
Harrison-Walker, L. J. (2001) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/109467050141006 · Cited by 1,583
Cited by
I Have Paid Less Than You! The Emotional and Behavioral Consequences of Advantaged Price Inequality
Gelbrich, K. (2011) · Journal of Retailing · doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2011.03.003 · Cited by 132
Giving electronic word of mouth (eWOM) as a prepurchase behavior: The case of online group buying
Lim, W. M., Ahmed, P. K., & Ali, M. Y. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.093 · Cited by 79
Qualitative Marketing Research: The State of Journal Publications
Petrescu, M., & Lauer, B. (2017) · The Qualitative Report · doi:10.46743/2160-3715/2017.2481 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Mazzarol, T., Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N.
- Venue
- European Journal of Marketing
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2007-11-20
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 11/12
- Pages
- 1475-1494
- ISSN
- 0309-0566 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2084882049
- Cited by
- 366
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 18.06
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Conceptualizing word‐of‐mouth activity, triggers and conditions: an exploratory study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/03090560710821260
- The paper
- Mazzarol, T., Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2007). Conceptualizing word‐of‐mouth activity, triggers and conditions: an exploratory study. European Journal of Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560710821260
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.