ADVANCES IN GLOBAL BUSINESS RESEARCH

(Vol. 11, No. 1 -- ISSN: 1549-9332)

Proceedings of the 11th Annual World Congress

of the
Academy for Global Business Advancement (AGBA)

Hosted by the
Indian Institute of Technology – New Delhi
On November 21--23, 2014

Edited By

David N. McArthur
Utah Valley University
Orem, Utah, USA

Sushil
Department of Management Studies
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
New Delhi, India

Abid Haleem
Jamia Millia Islamia
New Delhi, India

Zafar U. Ahmed
Academy for Global Business Advancement
Fort Worth, Texas, USA

Volume 11 No. 1
 Advances in Global Business Research
Vol. 11 No. 1 – ISSN 1549-9332

Electronic Word of Mouth (e-WOM) and Brand Equity

Mohd. Sarwar Alam

sarwar800@gmail.com

Bilal Mustafa Khan

khanbilalmustafa@gmail.com

Both of Aligarh Muslim University, India

Abstract

Social Media Platforms has changed the way people interact and communicate. On such platforms,
Word of Mouth (WOM) is something that is making these platforms more relevant among the
Marketers as well as Researchers. There have been traditional methods of WOM but the arrival of
Web 2.0 has introduced a new way of WOM and that is electronic Word of Mouth (e-WOM). Here
the communication medium is Internet and the platforms where such communication takes place are
social media platforms and various websites. WOM is an important factor in consumer decision
making process and has become a favourite tool in form of e-WOM to gather information regarding a
particular product or brand in today’s internet era. In light of such growing interest in the use of e-
WOM by consumers as well as brands this study aims to provide a theoretical analysis of the
effectiveness of e-WOM and its influence on Brand Equity dimensions. We conducted a systematic
review of e-WOM and Brand Equity research to analyse the effectiveness of e-WOM on various
dimensions of Brand Equity. We identified the key factors creating e-WOM and the dimensions
which determine e-WOM adoption. The Paper concludes with various propositions and a conceptual
model of e-WOM and Brand Equity. The study will provide an important foundation for future e-
WOM and Brand Equity research.

Key Words: Word of Mouth, Electronic Word of Mouth, Brand Equity, Brand Equity dimensions,
Social media.

Introduction

After the introduction of Web 2.0, People have got a new kind of platform to communicate and that is
social media. An increasing number of consumers are embracing the internet and spend more
time searching for product information as well as sharing particular product or brand
experiences. With this change in communication platform, WOM has also got a new picture and
it has overcome the traditional WOM with e-WOM. The rise of new media channels during the last
few years has offered fertile ground for electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) communication. In
today’s internet era, consumers often use websites, blogs and social media networks to get
complete information about products. This information may include review of new product
launched in the market, experiences of the users about a particular product or brand and Quality
or price of a particular product. With the widespread usage of the internet, informal sources also
include people who influence one’s consumption via online social networks and other Web forums
(Schiffman & Kanuk, 2010). This new form of word-of-mouth (WOM) communication can contain
positive or negative statements made by potential, actual, and former customers about a product or a
company via the Internet (Thurau et al, 2004). As online communities increase in size, number, and
character, marketers have come to recognize word of mouth’s growing importance (McKinsey
Quarterly, 2010). Indeed, word of mouth is the primary factor behind 20 to 50 percent of all
purchasing decisions. Its influence is greatest when consumers are buying a product for the first time
or when products are relatively expensive, factors that tend to make people conduct more research,

Proceedings of the AGBA 11th World Congress, New Delhi, India, November, 2014
Page 270 of 484
 Advances in Global Business Research
Vol. 11 No. 1 – ISSN 1549-9332

seek more opinions, and deliberate longer than they otherwise would (McKinsey Quarterly, 2010).
Consequently, while advertising effectiveness has been decreasing, and people more and more ask for
the advice of a colleague, friends or relatives before buying a product, it is important to understand
whether and how WOM effect impact on marketing productivity (Armelini, 2011). Since the internet
is globally used, marketers may consider the internet as well as viral marketing as sources of
customer-based brand equity. Due to the extensive use of internet in sharing information among
young adults, marketers should focus on viral marketing as one of the new sources of customer-based
brand equity (Yasin and Zahari, 2011). WOM has been shown to influence a variety of conditions:
awareness, expectations, perceptions, attitudes, and behaviour (Richins & Root-Shaffer, 1988; Hogan
et al., 2004). This paper focuses on influence of WOM on Brand Equity dimensions taking the
dimensions namely Brand awareness, Brand association, Perceived Quality and Brand Loyalty as
defined by Aaker. The study firstly defines the various terms like WOM, e-WOM, Brand Equity,
Brand Equity dimensions then it focuses on various constructs and measures used for WOM/e-WOM
in previous related studies. The Paper shows the relationship of e-WOM with Brand Equity with
reference to various latest studies done in some similar context and finally arrives at an integrative
model and some propositions to conclude the relationship.

Word of Mouth (WOM) & Electronic Word of Mouth (e-WOM)

Westbrook (1987) defines Word of Mouth as ‘‘all informal communications directed at other
consumers about the ownership, usage, or characteristics of particular goods and services or their
sellers.’’. Described as WOM communication (WOM), the process allows consumers to share
information and opinions that direct buyers towards and away from specific products, brands, and
services (Hawkins et al., 2004). Litvin et al (2008) define WOM as the communication between
consumers about a product, service, or a company in which the sources are considered independent of
commercial influence. Based on the definition of WOM by Westbrook (1987), electronic word-of-
mouth (e-WOM) can be defined as all informal communications directed at consumers through
Internet-based technology related to the usage or characteristics of particular goods and services, or
their sellers. This includes communication between producers and consumers as well as those
between consumers themselves (Goldsmith, 2006). Duana et al (2008) define online word of mouth (e
WOM) as an Internet platform to share the positive or negative reports between the existing users and
future customers. In contrast to traditional WOM, e-WOM is defined as ‘any positive or negative
statements made by potential, actual, or former customers about a product or company, which is made
available to a multitude of people and institutions via the Internet’ (Henning-Thurau et al, 2004). As
such, far different from physical WOM, e-WOM can create virtual relationships and communities,
with influence far beyond the readers and producers of WOM; it actually creates a new type of reality
by influencing readers during their online information searches (Litvin et al, 2008).

Brand Equity

Brand Equity is defined as the difference in consumer choice between the focal branded product and
an unbranded product given the same level of product features (Yoo and Donthu, 2001). Aaker (1991)
defines Brand Equity as a set of brand assets and liabilities linked to a brand, its name and symbol that
add to or subtract from the value provided by a product or service to a firm and/or to that firm’s
customers. Keller (1993) proposes a similar definition of brand equity as the differential effect of
brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand. Brand equity is viewed both
from customer and firm based perspectives. The consumer based perspective focuses on “consumer
mind-set” and is explained with such constructs as attitudes, awareness, associations, attachments and
loyalties (Keller and Lehmann, 2001). The firm based perspective, however, uses “Product market
outcomes” such as price premium, market share, relative price, and “financial market outcomes” such
as brand’s purchase price and discounted cash flow of license fees and royalties (Ailawadi, Lehmann,
and Neslin, 2003; Keller and Lehmann, 2001). Consumer based brand equity measures asses the
awareness, attitudes, associations, attachments and loyalties consumers have towards a brand (Keller
and Lehman, 2006). From this perspective, the two main frameworks that conceptualize brand equity
are those of Aaker (1991) and Keller (1993). According to Aaker (1991), brand equity is a

Proceedings of the AGBA 11th World Congress, New Delhi, India, November, 2014
Page 271 of 484
 Advances in Global Business Research
Vol. 11 No. 1 – ISSN 1549-9332

multidimensional concept whose first four core brand equity dimensions are brand awareness,
perceived quality, brand associations and brand loyalty. Keller’s (1993) conceptualization focuses on
brand knowledge and involves two components: brand awareness and brand image. In this study,
research will focus on the Consumer based brand equity with the dimensions of brand awareness,
brand association, perceived quality, and brand loyalty as defined by Aaker (1991). In the consumer
based brand equity frameworks (Aaker, 1996; Keller, 1993), perceived quality is considered a primary
dimension). The main reason that perceived quality is a primary dimension in brand equity models is
that it has a strategic effect on brand equity, by reducing the perceived risk (Aaker, 1991; Keller,
1993). Brand Awareness relates to the likelihood that a brand name will come to mind and the ease
which it does so (Keller, 1993). It is based on both recognition and recall (Aaker, 1991; Keller, 1993).
Brand associations are defined as anything linked in memory to a brand (Aaker, 1991) such as product
attributes (Yoo et al., 2000), brand name and relative price (Aaker, 1996). The American Marketing
Association defines Brand Loyalty as “the situation in which a Consumer generally buys the same
manufacturer-originated product or service repeatedly over time rather than buying from multiple
suppliers within the category” or “the degree to which a Consumer consistently purchases the same
brand within a product class”. Brand Loyalty can be conceptualized as the final dimension of
consumer brand resonance symbolizing the customer’s ultimate relationship and level of identification
with a Brand (Keller, 2008).

Literature Identification & Theoretical Foundation

Searching the available articles to be used for the review is done by a two stage process i.e. article
identification and article analysis. In order to identify the relevant studies, our study involved
collecting academic and peer reviewed journal articles that propagate influence of e-WOM on Brand
Equity in some way. Firstly, we conducted a systematic electronic search using various Databases like
Emerald, Science Direct, Taylor and Francis, and EBSCO etc. Then, we reviewed Marketing Journals
like International Journal of Business and Management, Journal of Marketing Communications and
MIS Journals like Decision Support Systems, and Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics
and Informational Technology etc. Among the 12 identified WOM/e-WOM papers, a significant
number of studies have shown the influence of e-WOM on Brand Equity dimensions. Apart from this,
many studies have talked about the dimensions, measures or constructs of e-WOM emphasizing
mainly on credibility and usefulness of WOM. Table 1 shows the various dimensions of e-WOM used
in different studies and their influences as concluded by some good researches.

Author Constructs used Findings

Armelini (2011) e-WOM: PWOM & NWOM & PWOM positively influences Brand
Brand Equity : Brand Awareness, Equity dimensions.
Brand Association, Brand NWOM has negative impact on
Loyalty, Perceived Quality Perceived Quality & Brand Loyalty.

Daugherty (2013) PWOM, NWOM & Neutral Consumers pay more attention to
WOM NWOM as opposed to positive or
neutral content.
Yaseen and Zahiri Viral marketing, Brand Viral marketing positively influences
(2010) Awareness, Brand Association, Brand Awareness, Brand Association,
Brand Loyalty and Perceived Brand Loyalty, and Perceived Quality.
Quality

Murtiasih, Sucherly and WOM, Brand Awareness, Brand
Siringoringo (2013) Association, Brand Loyalty and
Perceived Quality
Severi, Ling and e-WOM, Brand Awareness,
Positive information through WOM
increases Brand Awareness, Brand
Association, Brand Loyalty, and
Perceived Quality.
e-WOM influences brand association,

Proceedings of the AGBA 11th World Congress, New Delhi, India, November, 2014
Page 272 of 484
 Advances in Global Business Research
Vol. 11 No. 1 – ISSN 1549-9332

Author Constructs used Findings

Nasermoadeli (2014) Brand Association, Brand Loyalty brand loyalty, brand image and
and Perceived Quality perceived quality.

Rezvani, Hoseini and Volume, Valence, Brand
Samadzadeh (2012) Awareness, Brand Association,
Brand Loyalty and Perceived
Quality
Cheung (2014) Trustworthiness, Timeliness &
Comprehensiveness, Quality and
Relevance
Volume plays a substantial positive
role on creating consumer based brand
equity. Valence has positive impact on
brand association and negative impact
on brand awareness.
Trustworthiness, Timeliness &
Comprehensiveness and Quality
positively influences Information
usefulness which further influences
purchase intention

Table 1: Review of studies

Review of Study Findings

Typology of e-WOM:

Electronic Word of Mouth (e-WOM) has been categorised on different basis in different research
studies. Some have defined its typology on the basis of its forms created by consumers’ and
marketers’ intervention, some have defined on the basis on positivity or negativity of communication,
some on the basis of nature of orientation and some on the basis of channels through which the
message is communicated.

Armelini (2011), Daugherty (2013), Luo (2009) & Hogan et al (2004) have defined e-WOM into two
types namely Positive Word of Mouth (PWOM) and Negative Word of Mouth (NWOM). PWOM
consists of favourable reviews that typically urge consumers to try a product or service. In contrast,
negative word-of-mouth (NWOM) is unfavourable in nature, and typically urges recipients not to use
a product or service (Daugherty, 2013). When there is positive WOM, productivity of marketing is
enhanced because word of mouth often complements and extends the effects of advertising (Hogan et
al., 2004). Positive WOM extends the effects of advertising among actual and future customers, and
increases the likelihood that a prospect wants to try the product, without any additional allocation of
resources (Armelini, 2011). Wang and Rodgers (2010) identify two major types of context for e-
WOM. The first type is information oriented, and consists of websites such as consumer review
forums and product feedback pages. Reviews in such contexts are focused on product performance. A
second type of context is emotion-oriented and includes non-product focused online communities and
social networks. In this type, consumer reviews are emphasized on broader product experiences and
are more subjective in nature. McKinsey Quarterly (April, 2010) has defined three forms of WOM
that Marketers should understand namely Experiential, Consequential and Intentional. Experiential
WOM results from consumer’s direct experience with a product or service, largely when that
experience deviates from what’s expected. Consequential word of mouth, which occurs when
consumers directly exposed to traditional marketing campaigns pass on messages about them or
brands they publicize. A less common form of word of mouth is Intentional, for example, when
marketers use celebrity endorsements to trigger positive buzz for product launches. Litvin et al (2008)
and Cheung & Thadani (2012) have identified different e-WOM channels/platforms where the
communication takes place or through which the message is communicated. Litvin et al (2008) define
the typology on the basis of communication scope and level of interactivity as shown in Figure 1.
They are Blogs and Virtual Communities, News Groups, Websites & Product Reviews, Emails,
Instant Messaging and Chat rooms. Cheung & Thadani (2012) have identified channels as Online
discussion forums, Online consumer review sites, Blogs, Social networking sites and Online
brand/shopping sites.

Proceedings of the AGBA 11th World Congress, New Delhi, India, November, 2014
Page 273 of 484
 Advances in Global Business Research
Vol. 11 No. 1 – ISSN 1549-9332

An integrative framework of e-WOM and Brand Equity

There have been many studies showing the relationship between WOM or e-WOM and Brand Equity.
Some of them have shown the direct impact of WOM/e-WOM on Brand Equity dimensions, some
have taken dimensions or measures of WOM and have shown their impact on Brand Equity
dimensions and some have identified the sources, mediating variables and finally the influence of
WOM on Brand Equity dimensions. In our study, we have consulted the Papers for the period of 2008
to 2014 which have identified the dimensions of WOM/e-WOM and the relationship between
WOM/e-WOM and Brand Equity in some way may be in different context like industry, country of
origin, population etc but their objectives and findings are very similar. Cheung (2014) in her study
has identified the key dimensions of e-WOM for information adoption. The dimensions are namely
Trustworthiness, Timeliness & Comprehensiveness and Quality. Cheung et al (2012) identified in
their study that Information usefulness and e-WOM credibility with antecedents as e-WOM Quality,
Valence, Sidedness and Source Credibility (Expertise & Trustworthiness) result in e-WOM adoption
where e-WOM Quality is positively associated with information usefulness, e-WOM valence and
sidedness are positively associated with e-WOM credibility. The e-WOM further positively influences
purchase intention. Yasin and Zahari (2010) have concluded in their study that Viral marketing which
is a synonym of e-WOM has positive and significant influence on Brand Equity dimensions namely
Perceived Quality, Brand Awareness/Association and Brand Loyalty. Similarly, study of Murtiasih et
al (2013) indicates found that positive information through WOM increases brand awareness, brand
association, perceived quality and brand loyalty. They have further investigated that WOM influence
brand equity significantly and indirectly through brand awareness, brand associations, perceived
quality and brand loyalty. Severi, Ling & Nasermoadeli (2014) have found in their study that e-WOM
significantly influences the Brand Equity dimensions. They have concluded that e-WOM influences
brand association, brand loyalty, brand image and perceived quality indirectly through mediators

Proceedings of the AGBA 11th World Congress, New Delhi, India, November, 2014
Page 274 of 484
 Advances in Global Business Research
Vol. 11 No. 1 – ISSN 1549-9332

brand awareness, brand association, brand loyalty and brand image. Armelini (2011) in his study has
incorporated the effect of WOM in the Brand value chain as explained by Keller & Lehmann (2003).
The researcher has taken the Positive Word of Mouth (PWOM) and Negative Word of Mouth
(NWOM) as independent variables showing their influence on Consumer mindset (Dependent
variable) defined by four dimensions of Brand Equity i.e. brand awareness, brand association,
perceived quality and brand loyalty. Armelini (2011) further concludes that PWOM increments Brand
Equity increasing the level of brand awareness, improving perceived quality and associations and
fostering loyalty whereas NWOM decreases Brand Equity by diminishing the level of perceived
quality and brand loyalty. Litvin et al (2008) identified that consumption experience and mass media
being the sources of WOM creates WOM through mediating variables like customer-employee
relationships, consumer involvements and surprises which finally influences customer loyalty,
product evaluation, consumer empowerment and product acceptance which are somehow similar to
the brand equity dimensions of Aaker (1991). Rezvani, Hoseini & Samadzadeh (2012) have
considered three dimensions of WOM namely Volume, Valence and Source type and have shown
their influence on Brand Equity dimensions i.e. brand awareness, brand association, brand loyalty and
perceived quality. They have concluded that Volume (e-WOM) has significant positive role on
Consumer based brand equity and its dimensions whereas Valence (e-WOM) has positive effect on
brand association and simultaneously negative impact on brand awareness.

Cheung (2014), Cheung at al (2012), Litvin et al (2008) and Rezvani et al (2012) have defined various
dimensions or measures of e-WOM which are majorly responsible for e-WOM adoption. Based on
their studies which have already been explained above, we derive the following propositions;
P1: e-WOM Quality is positively associated with Information usefulness.
P2: Timeliness and Comprehensiveness of e-WOM is positively associated with Information
usefulness.
P3: Trustworthiness is positively associated with e-WOM credibility.
P4: Valence of e-WOM is positively associated with e-WOM credibility.
The above explained dimensions further influences the positivity or negativity of e-WOM after e-
WOM adoption as described by Murtiasih et al (2013) and Armelini (2011) in their studies. Once the
e-WOM takes the form of PWOM or NWOM then it influences the brand equity dimensions namely
brand awareness, brand association, brand loyalty and perceived quality which in turn give significant
impact on the brand equity as a whole (Severi at al, 2014; Rezvani et al, 2012; Armelini, 2011;
Murtiasih et al, 2013; Litvin et al, 2008; Yasin et al, 2010). Hence, we have the following
propositions;
P5: PWOM positively influences Brand Awareness.
P6: PWOM is positively associated with Brand Association.
P7: PWOM is positively associated with Brand Loyalty.
P8: PWOM is positively associated with Perceived Quality.
P9: NWOM has negative influence on Brand Loyalty.
P10: NWOM has negative influence on Perceived Quality.
Based on our propositions, we have developed an integrative conceptual model showing the
dimensions creating e-WOM adoption, the form (Positive or negative) in which the e-WOM is
adopted and finally their influence on brand equity dimensions. Figure 2 depicts our integrative
conceptual model.

Proceedings of the AGBA 11th World Congress, New Delhi, India, November, 2014
Page 275 of 484
 Advances in Global Business Research
Vol. 11 No. 1 – ISSN 1549-9332

Figure 2: Conceptual Model of Electronic Word of Mouth and Brand Equity

Conclusion & Discussion

Nowadays, firms are facing many challenges in terms of media and advertising. The introduction of
social media has made this field much broader. In such scenario the companies have to manage
consumers and their brands from all corners. Most importantly, they have to take care of e-WOM
going on in various platforms. Our study concluded that e-WOM is an important aspect for Brand
Equity creation. The positivity or negativity of e-WOM decides the fate of brand equity. We found
that there are mainly two dimensions of e-WOM namely Information usefulness and e-WOM
credibility which influence e-WOM adoption. Information usefulness has Quality, Timeliness &
Comprehensiveness as its antecedents while the antecedents of e-WOM credibility are
Trustworthiness, Valence and Sidedness. Further, Positive Word of Mouth has a positive significant
influence on brand equity dimensions namely brand awareness, brand association, brand loyalty and
perceived quality whereas Negative Word of Mouth has significant negative impact on brand loyalty
and perceived quality. Therefore, the firms should care about the PWOM and NWOM both. They
should try to avoid the creation of NWOM as it further affects the brand equity and can damage it as a
whole. The Managers should focus on the task how they can initiate PWOM about their
products/brands. They should focus on Consequential and Intentional e-WOM as these are the kinds
of WOM they can create or initiate (McKinsey Quarterly, 2010).

Limitations

Our study is a theoretical analysis. The results and conceptual model are based on the studies already
done in the same field. Due to time constraint, we could consult the papers of limited period only.
Impact of e-WOM on Brand Equity is still an emerging area. We could not find much empirical
studies in this topic especially in the Indian context.

References

Aaker, D.A (1991). Managing Brand Equity. New York: The Free Press.

Aaker, D.A. (1996). Building Strong Brands. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Ailawadi, K. L., Lehmann, D. R., & Neslin, S. A. (2003). Revenue premium as an outcome of brand
equity. Journal of Marketing, 67(4), pp. 1–17.

Armelini, G. (2011). The Effect of Word of Mouth in Customer Equity and Brand Equity. Chinese
Business Review, 10(3), pp.205-216.

Proceedings of the AGBA 11th World Congress, New Delhi, India, November, 2014
Page 276 of 484
 Advances in Global Business Research
Vol. 11 No. 1 – ISSN 1549-9332

Arndt, J. (1967). Role of product-related conversations in the diffusion of a new product, Journal of
Marketing Research, 4, pp.291–295.

Bughin, J., Doogan, J., Vetvik, O J. (2010). A new way to measure word-of-marketing, Marketing &
Sales Practise. McKinsey Quarterly (April, 2010). McKinsey & Company.

Cheung, R. (2014). The Influence of Electronic Word-of-Mouth on Information Adoption in Online

Customer Communities. Global Economic Review: Perspectives on East Asian Economies and
Industries, 43(1), pp.42-57.

Cheung, C M.K., Thadani, D R. (2012). The impact of electronic word-of-mouth communication: A

literature analysis and integrative model. Decision Support Systems, 54, pp.461-470.

Daugherty, T., Hoffman, E. (2013). eWOM and the importance of capturing consumer attention
within social media. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20(1-2), pp.82-102.

Duana, W., Gu, B., & Whinston, A. (2008). Do online review matter? An empirical investigation of
panel data. Journal of Decision Support System, 45(4).

Goldsmith, R. E. (2006). Electronic word-of-mouth. In K.-P. Mehdi (Ed.), Encyclopedia of e-

commerce, e-government and mobile commerce, pp.408–412. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.

Hawkins, D. I., Best, R., & Coney, K. A. (2004). Consumer behavior: Building marketing strategy
(9th ed). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Henning-Thurau, Thorsten, Kevin P. G., Gianfranco W., and Dwayne D. G. (2004). Electronic Word-
of-Mouth Via Consumer-Opinion Platforms: What Motivates Consumers to Articulate Themselves on
the Internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18 (1), pp.38–52.

Hogan, J. E., Lemon, K. N., & Libai, B. (2004). Quantifying the ripple: Word-of-mouth and
advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising Research, 44(3), pp.271-280.

Keller, K.L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer based brand equity. Journal
of Marketing, 57(1), pp.1-22.

Keller, K. L. (2008), Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring and Managing Brand Equity.
Prentice Hall: New Jersey.

Keller, K. L., & Lehmann, D. R. (2001). The brand value chain: Linking strategic and financial
performance. Working paper, Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New
Hampshire.

Keller, K.L., Lehmann, D.R. (2006). Brands and branding: research findings and future priorities.
Marketing Science 2006, 25(6), pp. 740–59.

Keller, K. L., & Lehmann, D. R. (2003). How do brands create value? Marketing Management, 12(3),
26-31.

Litvin, S W., Goldsmith, R E., Pan, B. (2008). Electronic word-of-mouth in hospitality and tourism
management. Tourism Management, 29, pp.458-468.

Luo, X. (2009). Quantifying the Long-Term Impact of Negative Word of Mouth on Cash Flows and
Stock Prices. Marketing Science, 28 (1), pp.148–165.

Proceedings of the AGBA 11th World Congress, New Delhi, India, November, 2014
Page 277 of 484
 Advances in Global Business Research
Vol. 11 No. 1 – ISSN 1549-9332

Murtiasih, S., Sucherly., Siringoringo, H. (2013). How Word of Mouth Influence Brand Equity for
Automotive Products in Indonesia. 1ST World Congress of Administrative & Political Sciences.
(ADPOL-2012). Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, 81, pp.40-44.

Rezvani, M., Hoseini, H K., Samadzadeh, M M. (2012). Investigating the Role of Word of Mouth on
Consumer Based Brand Equity Creation in Iran’s Cell-Phone Market. Journal of Knowledge
Management, Economics and Information Technology, Issue 8.

Richins, M. L., & Root-Shaffer, T. (1988). The role of involvement and opinion leadership in
consumer word-of-mouth: An implicit model made explicit. Advances in Consumer Research, 15(1),
pp.32-36.

Schiffman, G. L. & Kanuk, L.L. (2010). Consumer Behavior 10th Edition. Prentice Hall.

Severi, E., Ling, K C., Nasermoadeli, A. (2014). The Impacts of Electronic Word of Mouth on Brand
Equity in the Context of Social Media. International Journal of Business and Management, 9(8).

Wang, Y., & Shelly, R. (2010). Electronic Word of Mouth and Consumer Generated Content: From
Concept to Application. In Handbook of Research on Digital Media and Advertising: User Generated
Content Consumption, edited by Matthew S. E., et al., pp.212–231. New York: Information Science
Reference.

Westbrook, R. A. (1987). Product/consumption-based affective responses and postpurchase processes.

Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), pp.258–270.

Yasin, N M., Zahari, A R. (2011). Does Family and Viral Marketing have any effect on Brand Equity.
Contemporary Marketing Review, 1(9), pp.19-31.

Yoo, B., & Donthu, N. (2001). Developing and validating a multidimensional consumer-based brand
equity scale. Journal of Business Research, 52(1), pp. 1–14.

Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lee, S. (2000). An examination of selected marketing mix elements and brand
equity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), pp.195–211.

Proceedings of the AGBA 11th World Congress, New Delhi, India, November, 2014
Page 278 of 484