The DOI matches its Crossref record; 79 of the 81 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Effect of Electronic Word of Mouth on Sales: A Meta-Analytic Review of Platform, Product, and Metric Factors
Open accessAbstract
The increasing amount of electronic word of mouth (eWOM) has significantly affected the way consumers make purchase decisions. Empirical studies have established an effect of eWOM on sales but disagree on which online platforms, products, and eWOM metrics moderate this effect. The authors conduct a meta-analysis of 1,532 effect sizes across 96 studies covering 40 platforms and 26 product categories. On average, eWOM is positively correlated with sales (.091), but its effectiveness differs across platform, product, and metric factors. For example, the effectiveness of eWOM on social media platforms is stronger when eWOM receivers can assess their own similarity to eWOM senders, whereas these homophily details do not influence the effectiveness of eWOM for e-commerce platforms. In addition, whereas eWOM has a stronger effect on sales for tangible goods new to the market, the product life cycle does not moderate the eWOM effectiveness for services. With respect to the eWOM metrics, eWOM volume has a stronger impact on sales than eWOM valence. In addition, negative eWOM does not always jeopardize sales, but high variability does.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Indeed, online WOM has been—and, we contend, will continue to be—important in marketing (e.g., in the meta-analysis by Babić Rosario et al. 2016 the authors found, on average, a positive correlation between online WOM and sales).”
From The future of social media in marketing (2020) · cites this paper as Babić Rosario et al. 2016
Citations
Cites
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
(1993) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/0002-8223(93)91697-o · Cited by 18,452
Wasserman, S. S., Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1988) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164953 · Cited by 10,377
A Simple Model of Herd Behavior
Banerjee, A. V. (1992) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2118364 · Cited by 6,556
The Effect of Word of Mouth on Sales: Online Book Reviews
Chevalier, J. A., & Mayzlin, D. (2006) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.43.3.345 · Cited by 6,003
The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis
(2019) · doi:10.7758/9781610448864 · Cited by 4,553
The psychology of social impact
Latané, B. (1981) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.36.4.343 · Cited by 2,864
Social Ties and Word-of-Mouth Referral Behavior
Brown, J. J., & Reingen, P. H. (1987) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209118 · Cited by 2,388
Consumer Choice between Hedonic and Utilitarian Goods
Dhar, R., & Wertenbroch, K. (2000) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.18718 · Cited by 2,239
Feldman, J. M., & Lynch, J. G. (1988) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.73.3.421 · Cited by 2,070
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Hiura Kazuki, 2010, Journal of eBusiness, 10, 38
- Lipsey Mark W., 2001, Applied Social Research Methods Series Practical Meta-Analysis
- Rosenthal Robert, 1988, Applied Social Research Methods Series Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research
- Zeithaml Valarie A., 1981, Marketing of Services, 186
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,101–1,112 of 1,112
Saxena, J. M., Medhekar, D. A. A., Kumar, D. R., & Deshpande, D. S. (2026) · IOSR Journal of Business and Management · doi:10.9790/487x-28090197105
Jha, S., Mahar, K., C, S. B., Kumar, A., & Shekhar, M. (2026) · Computer and decision making. · doi:10.1922/comdem.v3i4s.18671
Yang, X., Lin, Z., & Cai, Y. (2026) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2026/19632
Zhang, Y. (2026) · Exploring Science Academic Conference Series · doi:10.70267/icrafm.202617476484
User-Generated Short-Form Video and the Attention–Action GapPreprint
Lee, J., & Ahn, Y. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.7665657
Saxena, J. M., Medhekar, D. A. A., Kumar, D. R., & Deshpande, D. S. (2026) · IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science · doi:10.9790/0837-3109018492
Video Oyunlarında Ticari Başarının Pazarlama Temelli Belirleyicileri
Par, A. (2026) · MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi · doi:10.33206/mjss.1887178
Maria, A., & Rilantiana, R. (2026) · JURNAL ECONOMIC RESOURCE · doi:10.57178/jer.v9i1.2307
The Power of Review Contiguity: How Sequential Viewing Shapes Consumer Judgment
Kim, W., Nelson, N. M., & Attari, A. (2026) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.70299
Maruyama, Y. (2026) · Quarterly Journal of Marketing · doi:10.7222/marketing.2027.006
Yadav, K. P., Singh, P., & Kiesel, S. (2026) · Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · doi:10.3390/jtaer21110396
Gkarane, S. K. (2026) · Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · doi:10.3390/jtaer21110409
Metadata
- Authors
- Babić Rosario, A., Sotgiu, F., De Valck, K., & Bijmolt, T. H. A.
- Affiliations
- HEC Paris
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
- Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen
- Paris
- Corresponding author
- Sotgiu, Francesca
- Bijmolt, Tammo H.A.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-06
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 297-318
- ISSN
- 0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7193
- OpenAlex
- W2239794783
- Cited by
- 1,073
- References
- 81
- Citations by year
- 2026: 99 · 2025: 85 · 2024: 108 · 2023: 141 · 2022: 143 · 2021: 124 · 2020: 117 · 2019: 110 · 2018: 83 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 23
- FWCI
- 161.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Marketing Research (publishedVersion)
- Digital Commons - DU (University of Denver) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- VU Research Portal (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Agence Nationale de la Recherche (LABX-0047, ANR-11-IDEX-0003, ANR-11-LABX-0047, ANR-11-IDEX)
- Fondation HEC (ANR‐11‐IDEX‐0003/Labex Ecodec/ANR‐11‐LABX‐0047, Ecodec/ANR-11-LABX-0047, ANR-11-IDEX-0003/Labex, F1307)
- Labex Ecodec (ANR-11-IDEX-0003/Labex Ecodec/ANR-11-LABX-0047, ANR - 11-LABX-0047, ANR-11-IDEX-0003/Labex, Ecodec/ANR-11-LABX-0047, ANR-11-IDEX-0003)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Digital Marketing and Social Media
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing
- Keywords
- electronic word of mouth, sales, social networking sites, e-commerce platforms, homophily, product life cycle, tangible goods, service, purchase decision
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