Cited by 162Digital Marketing and Social MediaMarketing and Advertising StrategiesConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing

What Are Likes Worth? A Facebook Page Field Experiment

Mochon, Daniel, Johnson, Karen, Schwartz, Janet, Ariely, Dan·2017·Journal of Marketing Research

Abstract

Despite the tremendous resources devoted to marketing on Facebook, little is known about its actual effect on customers. Specifically, can Facebook page likes affect offline customer behavior, and if so, how? To answer these questions, the authors conduct a field experiment on acquired Facebook page likes and find them to have a positive causal effect on offline customer behavior. Importantly, these likes are found to be most effective when the Facebook page is used as a platform for firm-initiated promotional communications. No effect of acquired page likes is found when customers interact organically with the firm's page, but a significant effect is found when the firm pays to boost its page posts and thus uses its Facebook page as a platform for paid advertising. These results demonstrate the value of likes beyond Facebook activity itself and highlight the conditions under which acquiring likes is most valuable for firms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1509/jmr.15.0409

Cites

44 of 44 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.

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?

  • Acquiring "likes" on social media might have no effect on consumers' attitudes or behaviors.

    “academic research shows that acquiring “likes” on social media might have no effect on consumers’ attitudes or behaviors (John et al. 2017; Mochon et al. 2017).”

    From The future of social media in marketing (2020) · cites this paper as Mochon et al. 2017

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mochon, D., Johnson, K., Schwartz, J., & Ariely, D.
Affiliations
  • A.B. Freeman School of Business, Tulane University
  • University of the Witwatersrand (ZA)
  • Tulane University (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Johnson, Karen
  • Schwartz, Janet
  • Ariely, Dan
Venue
Journal of Marketing Research
Published
2017-04
Volume
54
Issue
2
Pages
306-317
ISSN
  • 0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-7193
OpenAlex
W2417728493
Cited by
162
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 5
FWCI
32.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Marketing Research (publishedVersion)
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
social media marketing, promotional communication, field experiments

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