CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 135Digital Marketing and Social MediaMarketing and Advertising StrategiesConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing

Spillover Effects in Seeded Word-of-Mouth Marketing Campaigns

Open access
Chae, Inyoung, Stephen, Andrew T., Bart, Yakov, Yao, Dai·2017·Marketing Science
DOI 10.1287/mksc.2016.1001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Seeded marketing campaigns (SMCs) involve firms sending products to selected customers and encouraging them to spread word of mouth (WOM). Prior research has examined certain aspects of this increasingly popular form of marketing communication, such as seeding strategies and their efficacy. Building on prior research, this study investigates the effects of SMCs that extend beyond the generation of WOM for a campaign’s focal product by considering how seeding can affect WOM spillover effects at the brand and category levels. The authors introduce a framework of SMC-related spillover effects, and empirically estimate these with a unique data set covering 390 SMCs for products from 192 different cosmetics brands. Multiple spillover effects are found, suggesting that while SMCs can be used primarily to stimulate WOM for a focal product, marketers must also account for brand- and category-level WOM spillover effects. Specifically, seeding increases conversations about that product among nonseed consumers, and, interestingly, decreases WOM about other products from the same brand and about competitors’ products in the same category as the focal product. These findings indicate that marketers can use SMCs to focus online WOM on a particular product by drawing consumers away from talking about other related, but off-topic, products. Data, as supplemental material, are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2016.1001 .

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/mksc.2016.1001

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Related

Authors
Chae, I., Stephen, A. T., Bart, Y., & Yao, D.
Affiliations
  • Emory University (US)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Northeastern University (US)
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
Corresponding author
Stephen, Andrew T.
ORCID
Venue
Marketing Science
Publisher
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
Published
2017-01
Volume
36
Issue
1
Pages
89-104
ISSN
  • 0732-2399 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-548X
DOI
10.1287/mksc.2016.1001
OpenAlex
W3123222058
Semantic Scholar
adc509a12a01ef3c519dc143314ad201fd7a74d2
Cited by
135
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 2
FWCI
21.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Marketing Science (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Texas at Austin
  • Imperial College London
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Marketing and Social Media
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Marketing and Advertising Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Keywords
word-of-mouth marketing, spillover effects, cosmetics brands, electronic word of mouth

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