The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Word‐of‐mouth communication in the service marketplace
Abstract
Word‐of‐mouth communication (WOM) is a dominant force in the marketplace for services. However, the current body of research provides little insight into the nature of WOM in the service marketplace. Reports the results of a content‐analytic study that provides insight into WOM’s content and the catalysts by which it is stimulated. The goal was to capture a series of “grounded events” from which broader patterns could be discerned. These grounded events were actual incidents of WOM as described by the recipients of a communication. Three content categories and ten catalyst categories are identified. Implications for managers are addressed.
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. (2017) · Aldine (Routledge reprint) · doi:10.4324/9780203793206 · Cited by 25,789
Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298805200302 · Cited by 18,292
The critical incident technique.
Flanagan, J. C. (1954) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0061470 · Cited by 8,191
Weber, R. (1990) · doi:10.4135/9781412983488 · Cited by 7,750
(2007) · Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.4135/9781412952651.n55 · Cited by 5,287
The Service Encounter: Diagnosing Favorable and Unfavorable Incidents
Bitner, M. J., Booms, B. H., & Tetreault, M. S. (1990) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1252174 · Cited by 4,860
Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment.
Cherniak, C., Nisbett, R., & Ross, L. (1983) · The Philosophical Review · doi:10.2307/2184495 · Cited by 4,196
Customer Switching Behavior in Service Industries: An Exploratory Study
Keaveney, S. M. (1995) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1252074 · Cited by 2,905
Miller, G. A., & Cantor, N. (1982) · Social Cognition · doi:10.1521/soco.1982.1.1.83 · Cited by 2,816
Bither, S. W., Howard, J. A., & Sheth, J. N. (1971) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1250571 · Cited by 2,795
Cited by
Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix
Mangold, W. G., & Faulds, D. J. (2009) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2009.03.002 · Cited by 4,111
Self-citationThe Critical Incident Technique in Service Research
Gremler, D. D. (2004) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670504266138 · Cited by 1,078
What We Know and Don't Know about Online Word-of-Mouth: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature
King, R. A., Racherla, P., & Bush, V. D. (2014) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2014.02.001 · Cited by 1,017
e‐WOM Scale: word‐of‐mouth measurement scale for e‐services context
Goyette, I., Ricard, L., Bergeron, J., & Marticotte, F. (2010) · Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration · doi:10.1002/cjas.129 · Cited by 698
Measuring the impact of positive and negative word of mouth on brand purchase probability
East, R., Hammond, K., & Lomax, W. (2008) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.04.001 · Cited by 629
Metadata
- Authors
- Glynn Mangold, W., Miller, F., & Brockway, G. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Services Marketing
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 1999-02-01
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 73-89
- ISSN
- 0887-6045 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2026014527
- Cited by
- 473
- References
- 36
- FWCI
- 22.79
- 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: Word‐of‐mouth communication in the service marketplace. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/08876049910256186
- The paper
- Glynn Mangold, W., Miller, F., & Brockway, G. R. (1999). Word‐of‐mouth communication in the service marketplace. Journal of Services Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/08876049910256186
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.
