Cited by 43Technology Adoption and User BehaviourInnovation Diffusion and ForecastingDigital Marketing and Social Media

The Impact of Word of Mouth Sources on the Perceived Usefulness of an Innovation

Kawakami, Tomoko, Parry, Mark E.·2013·Journal of Product Innovation Management

Abstract

This paper examines the role of three indirect mechanisms linking word‐of‐mouth communication with one of the most important innovation attributes influencing the adoption decision: perceived usefulness. The authors hypothesize that word‐of‐mouth (WOM) communication impacts perceived usefulness by influencing potential adopter perceptions of the credibility of innovation information, the size of the adopter population, and the availability of complementary products. To test these hypotheses, the authors analyze the survey responses of over 550 potential adopters of e‐readers and smartphones. In both product samples, the perceived credibility of WOM information is positively related with perceived usefulness, which is positively related with purchase intent. Consistent with theoretical arguments regarding the importance of access to expert information sources, findings indicate that, relative to personal WOM, written and virtual WOM have stronger relationships with consumer perceptions of the credibility of innovation information. In addition, in both samples, perceived usefulness is positively related with the perceived availability of complementary products, which is positively related with both personal and written word‐of‐mouth. Finally, perceived usefulness has (1) a direct relationship with the perceived size of the local adopter population in the e‐reader sample and (2) an indirect relationship with the same variable that is mediated by the perceived availability of complementary products in both samples. In turn, the perceived size of the local adopter population is positively related with exposure to personal word‐of‐mouth.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jpim.12049

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kawakami, T., & Parry, M. E.
Affiliations
  • Kansai University (JP)
  • University of Missouri–Kansas City (US)
Corresponding author
Kawakami, Tomoko
Venue
Journal of Product Innovation Management
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-07-07
Volume
30
Issue
6
Pages
1112-1127
ISSN
  • 0737-6782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-5885
OpenAlex
W1850453578
Cited by
43
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
6.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Product Innovation Management (publishedVersion)
Funders
Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Marketing and Social Media
Keywords
word of mouth, perceived usefulness, technology adoption, diffusion of innovations, information credibility, complementary products, e-readers, smartphones, purchase intention

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