The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Networked Narratives: Understanding Word-of-Mouth Marketing in Online Communities
Abstract
Word-of-mouth (WOM) marketing—firms’ intentional influencing of consumer-to-consumer communications—is an increasingly important technique. Reviewing and synthesizing extant WOM theory, this article shows how marketers employing social media marketing methods face a situation of networked coproduction of narratives. It then presents a study of a marketing campaign in which mobile phones were seeded with prominent bloggers. Eighty-three blogs were followed for six months. The findings indicate that this network of communications offers four social media communication strategies—evaluation, embracing, endorsement, and explanation. Each is influenced by character narrative, communications forum, communal norms, and the nature of the marketing promotion. This new narrative model shows that communal WOM does not simply increase or amplify marketing messages; rather, marketing messages and meanings are systematically altered in the process of embedding them. The theory has definite, pragmatic implications for how marketers should plan, target, and leverage WOM and how scholars should understand WOM in a networked world.
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
Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036 · Cited by 14,779
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
Muniz, A. M., & O'Guinn, T. C. (2001) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/319618 · Cited by 3,998
The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts
Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209380 · Cited by 3,811 · cited 2×
“Prior marketing theories that psychologically account for consumers’ resistance are based on a view of marketers who clearly and directly seek to influence the attitudes and purchases of consumers (e.g., Friestad and Wright 1994).”
How Brand Community Practices Create Value
Schau, H. J., Muñiz, A. M., & Arnould, E. J. (2009) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.73.5.30 · Cited by 2,444
Can a Retail Web Site Be Social?
Wang, L. C., Baker, J., Wagner, J. A., & Wakefield, K. (2007) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.71.3.143 · Cited by 672
Marcoux, J.-S. (2009) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/600485 · Cited by 166
Cited by
How Brand Community Practices Create Value
Schau, H. J., Muñiz, A. M., & Arnould, E. J. (2009) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.73.5.30 · Cited by 2,444
Erkan, I., & Evans, C. (2016) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.003 · Cited by 1,188
Lamberton, C., & Stephen, A. T. (2016) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jm.15.0415 · Cited by 1,127
How Does Brand-related User-generated Content Differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter?
Smith, A. N., Fischer, E., & Yongjian, C. (2012) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2012.01.002 · Cited by 1,044
Leung, F. F., Gu, F. F., & Palmatier, R. W. (2022) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-021-00829-4 · Cited by 580
Metadata
- Authors
- Kozinets, R. V., De Valck, K., Wojnicki, A. C., & Wilner, S. J. S.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2010-03
- Volume
- 74
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 71-89
- ISSN
- 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7185
- OpenAlex
- W1510762207
- Cited by
- 1,278
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 150.25
- 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.