Volume 8, Issue 3, March – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165

Digital And Social Media Marketing’s Impact on

Consumer Behaviour
Kirankumar. L. N
Department of Post Graduate Studies and Research in Commerce
Kuvempu University, JnanaSahyadri,
Shankaraghatta- 577451
Shivamogga District, Karnataka

Abstract:- The purpose of this article is to review the most
recent research on these topics in the consumer behavior
and psychology literature to promote further relevant
research. A total of 29 articles on these topics have
appeared in the consumer behavior literature in recent
years, suggesting that they are becoming increasingly
popular in the field of consumer research. The effect of
word of mouth [8], and his Yadav and Pavlous overview
of marketing in the computerized environment
RESEARCH THEMES AND FINDINGS Recent
consumer research on digital marketing and social media
shows five unique research themes. The most widely used
themes are online word-of-mouth , which is discussed in
nearly half of the articles, and advertising, which is
addressed in little over one-fourth of the articles.
EFFECTS OF DIGITAL ENVIRONMENTS The
influence of the digital environment and social networks
on consumer behaviour is a topic that has emerged in
recent years [21-23]. ONLINE WORD OF MOUTH AND
REVIEWS Given the apparent reliance of consumers on
information obtained from socially sourced online
sources, WOM is the most prevalent topic in research on
digital and social marketing.
I. INTRODUCTION
Billions of people now regularly use the internet, social
media, smartphone apps and other digital communication
technologies. For example, the percentage of American adults
who currently use the Internet is about 87%, and he is closer
to 100% in certain demographics such as high-income adults
and higher education[1]. Young people, the next generation
of mass consumers, have a relatively high value[2]. It also
increases your online time. For example, a UK adult now
spends an average of 20.5 hours a week online, more than
doubling over the past decade[3]. Some of it was pushed by
social media. Growth: Over 2 billion people use social media
worldwide[4] and on Facebook alone he has about 1 billion
active users per day[5].
It is clear that people are becoming more and more
accustomed to social and digital media. This serves a variety
of purposes, including helping consumers find information
about various products, find ways to buy and consume them,
and share their experiences with others. In response to the
shift, marketers are increasing their use of digital marketing
channels. In fact, by 2017, almost one-third of global
advertising spend is expected to come from digital media[6].
Therefore, in the future, consumer marketing will mostly take
place online, especially on social media and smartphones.
Consumer research therefore needs to analyze and understand
consumer behavior in a digital context. Over the past decade,
more and more research has focused on the issues of digital
consumer behavior that are causing this. That said, this area
of research is still very young and definitely needs further
research. Especially given the dynamic nature of the digital,
social media and mobile worlds in which consumers live and
interact with businesses and others. The purpose of this article
is to review the most recent research on these topics in the
consumer behavior and psychology literature to promote
further relevant research.
This review is based on articles he published in four
major consumer research journals between January 2013 and
September 2015. Journal of Consumer Research (JCR),
Journal of Consumer Psychology (JCP), Journal of Marketing
(JM), Journal of Marketing Research (JMR). This review
features articles related to digital marketing, social media, and
online word of mouth. A total of 29 articles on these topics
have appeared in the consumer behavior literature in recent
years, suggesting that they are becoming increasingly popular
in the field of consumer research. In addition to these articles,
there were three notable reviews: (i) Berger's review of word
of mouth and interpersonal communication research [7], and
(ii) his You et al. meta-analysis of online word of mouth. The
effect of word of mouth [8], and (iii) his Yadav and Pavlous
overview of marketing in the computerized environment
II. RESEARCH THEMES AND FINDINGS
Recent consumer research on digital marketing and
social media shows five unique research themes. The five
topics are: (i) consumer digital culture; (ii) advertising; (iii)
effects of digital environments; (iv) mobile; and (v) online
word of mouth and reviews. The most widely used themes are
online word-of-mouth (WOM), which is discussed in nearly
half of the articles, and advertising, which is addressed in
little over one-fourth of the articles. I'll now go over each
subject.
III. CONSUMER DIGITAL CULTURE
The digital settings in which consumers are positioned are
extensively considered in consumer digital culture study.
Understanding how consumer identities and self-concepts
expand into virtual spaces has been a crucial component of

IJISRT23MAR1502 www.ijisrt.com 1535

Volume 8, Issue 3, March – 2023
this research, as demonstrated by Belk's work [10, 11]. The
digital was added to Belk [10]'s earlier research on the
"extended self." contexts in which consumers currently locate
themselves, which is a critical component of theory
development since it takes into account ideas like the
possibility that consumers may have numerous selves as a
result of having various online "personas." Furthermore, Belk
offers a wide range of potential study topics. In several
studies on this issue, distinct phenomena were examined. The
"megaphone effect," which refers to the capacity for common
consumers to reach enormous audiences through
digital/social media, was examined by McQuarrie et al. [12]
with a focus on fashion blogging. They talked about how
bloggers acquire followers and social (or cultural) capital by
exhibiting "excellent taste," which is an essential
consequence. In a social media context, this essentially
implies that a blogger (or "influencer" in this case) provides
recommendations that let other users know she is an expert.
Although this is in a particular context, it has significance for
understanding consumers' content-generation habits on social
media in general, as indicating favourable personal traits is
probably a typical incentive for sharing certain items on
websites like Facebook. Together, these articles contribute
significantly to our understanding of how we conceptualise
consumers in the digital age. This is especially true because
they suggest a broader understanding of what it means to be
a consumer in the modern digital age.
IV. ADVERTISING
The marketing literature devotes a lot of attention to the topic
of digital advertising, which takes into account consumer
behaviour when examining how people react to different
facets of digital ads. The behavioural aspects of digital
advertising have been examined in a number of recent articles
from different angles. One interesting angle that was taken in
a few articles [13-15] focused on how to get past (supposed)
psychological reactivity caused by the personalization of
digital ad targeting. Schumann et al. [13] thought about how
normative reciprocity appeals could counteract unfavourable
responses to personalization (instead of utility appeals).
When a customer returns to a website, personalised
recommendations based on previous web browsing history
are made. This is known as ad retargeting, according to
research by Lambrecht and Tucker [14]. Retargeting does
cause some unfavourable reactions, but this is lessened as
consumers' preferences become more exact. Tucker [15]
discovered that when consumers perceive themselves to have
more control over the personal information used for
personalization, they are more likely to respond favourably to
personalised website ads. This finding directly relates to the
literature on psychological reactions and offers an alternative
theoretical framework for the field's dearth of consumer
digital privacy research.
Other articles [16–20] have looked at a range of digital ad
response factors. When Luo et al. [16] examined the factors
that influenced the popularity of group-buying ads (i.e., "daily
deals" akin to those from Groupon), they discovered that
social influence (i.e., social proof resulting from other deal
IJISRT23MAR1502 www.ijisrt.com
International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
purchases) was a significant factor. When consumers search
for less common keywords, they have to put more effort into
their searches, according to research by Jerath et al. [17] on
responses to search engine advertising. Puccinelli et al. [18]
looked at digital video ads (such as those that appear on Hulu
and YouTube), focusing on how the energy of the ads and the
emotion of the TV shows interacted to influence consumer
reactions. When viewers are experiencing "deactivating"
emotions, such as sadness, it is more difficult for them to view
engaging advertisements, according to their research on the
importance of affective matching between a show and an
advertisement. Dinner et al. [19] examined how digital
display and search advertisements influence both online and
offline shopping for a retailer and discovered that digital
advertisements are more successful than offline
advertisements in influencing online behaviour. Last but not
least, Goldstein et al. [20] investigated "annoying" (e.g.,
intrusive, low quality) website ads and demonstrated how
they result in financial costs for advertisers (i.e., waste) and
cognitive costs for consumers.
V. EFFECTS OF DIGITAL ENVIRONMENTS
The influence of the digital environment and social networks
on consumer behaviour is a topic that has emerged in recent
years [21-23]. Consequences can be classified as contextually
contingent (behavior in contexts unrelated to the digital
environment is affected) or integral (behavior in these
contexts is affected by the digital environment). It would be
interesting to observe how different aspects of social media
in the digital and social environment, such as being exposed
to the opinions or choices of other consumers (such as bidding
in an online auction), or even learning about the lives of their
friends through Social networks influence a person's entire
life. future measures. For example, regarding environmental
influences, in digital environments learning from strangers
has been considered by Lamberton et al. [21] and Norton et
al. [twenty-two]. They found that consumers in a competitive
environment infer inequality between people and show
hostility toward ambiguous others (strangers) [21], and found
that finding other people online leads to the same behavior as
your decisions decreases your trust in your decisions rather
than increasing your confidence. in them If other people's
reasons (such as online reviews) are different from yours.
Wilcox and Stephen [23] studied how Facebook use affects
self-control by observing the state of the environment from a
different perspective. They found that clients showed less
self-control when making decisions about healthy behaviors,
for example, after reaching out to closer friends on Facebook
(eg, choosing cookies over granola bars). healthier).
VI. MOBILE
As people use mobile devices more frequently, consumer
behaviour in mobile environments is also becoming more and
more significant. In terms of shopping, this is particularly
intriguing. Hui et al[24] .'s investigation into consumer
behaviour in relation to mobile coupons used in physical
stores found that when consumers are required to deviate
from their intended shopping routes in order to take
advantage of mobile offers, the amount of impulsive spending
can rise. The environment of an online shop. According to
1536
 Volume 8, Issue 3, March – 2023
Brasel and Gips [25], purchasing products using a mobile
device (such as a tablet) can lead to greater feelings of
psychological ownership and endowment because touching
the product rather than simply clicking with a mouse can do
so. This is a fascinating contribution because there is little
research on the physical interactions that consumers have
with mobile devices and how that affects how they make
decisions, despite the fact that it is crucial as this article
demonstrated. Work by Bart et al. [26] considered how
mobile display ads, which are tiny and carry very little (if any)
information, influence consumers' brand attitudes and
purchase intentions, but it had nothing to do with shopping.
They discovered that mobile display advertisements have no
impact on many product categories, but they do improve
attitudes and intentions for highly involved, utilitarian
products (e.g., financial services).
VII. ONLINE WORD OF MOUTH (WOM) AND
REVIEWS
Given the apparent reliance of consumers on information
obtained from socially sourced online sources, WOM is the
most prevalent topic in research on digital and social
marketing. Recent articles have covered a number of sub-
themes. First, a fascinating collection of articles looked at the
linguistic aspects of online WOM and/or reviews [27–33],
demonstrating in general how perceptions of reviews and
their influence can be influenced by subtle linguistic aspects.
For instance, Kronrod and Danziger [27] demonstrated that
the use of figurative (as opposed to literal) language in online
reviews had a favourable effect on consumers' attitudes
towards and choice of hedonic goods. When analysing the
explanatory language used in online reviews, Moore [28]
discovered that whether or not users described their actions
or reactions had an impact on how helpful they felt the review
was. When considering negative WOM, Hamilton et al. [29]
discovered that using euphemistic language (e.g., "I don't
want to be negative, but...") increases perceived reviewer
credibility and likeability. Mixed (positive and negative)
versus indifferent neutral language were the two types of
language that Tang et al. [30] examined. They demonstrate
how mixed neutral (as opposed to indifferent) WOM
amplifies the effects of WOM on purchasing. Ludwig et al.
[31] studied affective language in reviews and investigated
how a review with linguistic style that is consistent with the
typical linguistic style used for that product group influenced
sales, finding that positive affect increases conversions (but
at a diminishing rate), negative affect decreases conversions,
and congruent linguistic styles are advantageous. Consumers
are less likely to discount favourable reviewer opinions if the
reviewer's experience seems to have occurred recently,
according to Chen and Lurie's [32] analysis of temporal
contiguity language in online reviews (i.e., reviewers
indicating they recently had the experience) (i.e., presence of
temporal contiguity cues).
The differences between online and offline WOM have
recently been studied as another important topic. Lovett et al.
[33] discovered that while offline WOM is driven by
emotional brand characteristics, online WOM is driven by
social and functional brand characteristics. Consumers are
IJISRT23MAR1502 www.ijisrt.com
International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
less likely to spread WOM on social media due to a higher
perceived social risk, according to research by Eisingerich et
al. [34] comparing WOM transmission in social media (such
as Facebook) versus offline (in person).
Finally, additional online WOM-related issues were taken
into account in other recent articles. For instance, He and
Bond [35] examined whether online reviews can accurately
predict how much a consumer will enjoy a brand and
discovered that the forecast error/discrepancy depends on
how closely the preferences of the reviewer and the consumer
match. In online WOM settings, Cascio et al. [36] identified
neural correlates of social influence susceptibility, with
susceptibility to social influence being related to brain regions
involved with changing personal preferences and taking
others into consideration. He and Bond [37] concentrated on
collections of online reviews (vs. single reviews) and thought
about how customers interpret opinion dispersion and
whether it is attributed to the product or the reviewers' varied
tastes. According to Anderson and Simester [38], who
documented the prevalence of false online reviews left by
people who have not actually bought a product, the practise
is not just used by rival companies but also by regular
customers who have no financial incentive to slant online
reviews. Finally, Barasch and Berger [39] looked at social
transmission behaviour when consumers broadcast (to many,
for example, through mass-audience posts on Facebook or
Twitter) versus narrowcast (to few, for example, through
messages to a few friends), discovering that people share
information to make themselves look good when
broadcasting (i.e., self focus) but share information that will
be helpful to receivers when narrowcasting (i.e., other focus).
VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE
RESEARCH
The literature on social/virtual customer behavior is growing
rapidly, and much of it specializes in theoretically interesting
and practically applicable phenomena. In most cases,
researchers looked at how buyers used the data (e.g., online
WOM, reviews) available to them in a social/virtual media
environment. Future studies should retain this approach,
albeit to a greater extent. Consumer behavior outside of those
related to WOM/online reviews should be considered and the
different types of data found (and inferences made) in the
online environment should be viewed review. For example, it
is interesting to recall the complex interactions between
sender, receiver, language/content and contextual factors
related to the premise and impact of online WOM.
Future studies have to additionally cognizance at the
consequences of numerous virtual environments (including
social media and mobile) on quite a number client effects,
together with mental and economic constructs. This hasn`t
been protected in lots of articles, no matter the reality that it
is probable that a extensive variety of client effects are
stricken by the an increasing number of virtual environments
wherein they locate themselves. It`s additionally potential
that poor consequences can be found, just like Wilcox and
Stephen`s [23] locating connecting Facebook use to reduced
self control. In addition, given what Brasel and Gips [25]
1537
Volume 8, Issue 3, March – 2023
determined concerning emotions of endowment whilst the
usage of touch-primarily based totally interfaces for
shopping, it`s far important to discover in addition the
methods that purchasers bodily interact (i.e., interface) with
virtual environments. Because those consequences can be
diffused however upload as much as widespread
consequences through the years, it is going to be important to
take longer-time period responses under consideration whilst
analyzing the consequences of virtual environments on
purchasers. Therefore, longitudinal research capturing virtual
exhibitions, online social interactions and buyer behavior
over time should be combined with ad hoc experimental
research.
Finally, researchers want to keep in mind hot topics that
might be just starting to get attention, especially issues of
customer privacy in the context of social media and virtual
marketing. Tucker [15] gave this a little thought, but
additional studies had to fully understand how buyers
perceive their privacy, what they need to do to protect it, and
how they evaluate (or devalue) the offers virtual media has
(or DO). no) protect privacy.
In summary, there are many new interests in the literature on
psychology and customer behavior related to virtual and
social network marketing, and much progress has been made
in our knowledge of the topics. this. Research that aims to
broaden our understanding of key phenomena, investigate
new ones, and develop theories that lack long-standing
theoretical foundations can be particularly important for
advancing data. Especially since virtual environments are
fast-moving by nature.
IX. CONCLUSION
Billions of people now regularly use the internet, social
media, smartphone apps and other digital communication
technologies. By 2017, nearly one-third of global advertising
spend is expected to come from digital media. Over the past
decade, more and more research has focused on the issues of
digital consumer behaviour that are causing this. A recent
consumer survey on digital marketing and social media
highlighted five unique research themes. The five themes are:
Digital consumer culture. advertising; the impact of the
digital environment; mobile phones, mobile phones; and
online word of mouth and reviews. Much attention is given to
the topic of digital advertising in the marketing literature.
Consumer behaviour is taken into consideration when
examining how people respond to various aspects of digital
advertising. The behavioural aspects of digital advertising
have been explored from different angles in many recent
articles. The impact of the digital environment and social
networks on consumer behaviour is a topic that has emerged
in recent years. Wilcox and Stephen looked at the state of the
environment from another perspective to see how Facebook
use affects self-regulation. Consumer behaviour in the mobile
environment is also becoming more important as the use of
mobile devices increases. Given that consumers clearly rely
on information from online social sources, WOM is the most
prevalent topic in digital and social marketing research.
IJISRT23MAR1502 www.ijisrt.com
International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
REFERENCES
[1]. Pew Research Centre (2015), Internet Use Over Time:
American Adults, http://www.pewinternet.org/data-
trend/internet-use/internet-use-over-time/ (accessed
09/15/15).
[2]. Pew Research Centre (2015), Internet Use Over Time:
American Teens (12-17),
http://www.pewinternet.org/data-trend/teens/internet-
use/ (accessed 09/15/15).
[3]. Ofcom (2015), Adults’ Media Use and Attitudes Report,
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-
research/other/research-publications/adults/media- lit-
10years/ (accessed 09/15/15).
[4]. We Are Social (2014), Global Social Media Users Pass
2 Billion, http://wearesocial.net/blog/2014/08/global-
social-media-users-pass-2-billion/ (accessed 09/15/15).
[5]. Facebook (2015), Facebook Company Info: Stats,
http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/ (accessed
09/15/15).
[6]. eMarketer (2015), Advertisers Will Spend Nearly $600
Billion Worldwide in 2015,
http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Advertisers-Will-
Spend-Nearly-600-Billion-Worldwide 2015/1011691
(accessed 09/15/15).
[7]. Berger, Jonah (2014), “Word of Mouth and
Interpersonal Communication: A Review and
Directions for Future Research,” Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 24 (4), 586-607.
[8]. You, Ya, Vadakkepatt, Gautham G., and Joshi, Amit M.
(2015), “A Meta-Analysis of Electronic Word-of-
Mouth Elasticity,” Journal of Marketing, 79 (2), 19-39.
[9]. Yadav, Manjit, and Pavlou, Paul A. (2014), “Marketing
in Computer-Mediated Environments: Research
Synthesis and New Directions,” Journal of Marketing,
78 (1), 20-40.
[10]. Belk, Russell W., “Extended Self in a Digital World,”
Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 477-500.
[11]. Belk, Russell W., “The Extended Self in a Digital
World,” this issue.
[12]. McQuarrie, Edward F., Miller, Jessica, and Phillips,
Barbara J. (2013), “The Megaphone Effect: Taste and
Audience in Fashion Blogging,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 40 (1), 136-158.
[13]. Schumann, Jan H., von Wangenheim, Florian, and
Groene, Nicole (2014), “Targeted Online Advertising:
Using Reciprocity Appeals to Increase Acceptance
Among Users of Free Web Services,” Journal of
Marketing, 78 (1), 59-75.
[14]. ** Lambrecht, Anja and Tucker, Catherine (2013),
“When Does Retargeting Work? Information
Specificity in Online Advertising,” Journal of
Marketing Research, 50 (5), 561-576. Retargeting
means that consumers are targeted with personalized ads
designed based on prior browsing history when they
return to a website. The authors report a field experiment
on a travel website and find that, generally, retargeted
ads do worse than control ads that are generic/not
personalized. This negative response is not found if,
based on browsing histories, consumers’ preferences
1538
Volume 8, Issue 3, March – 2023
have evolved in the sense that they have gotten more
precise.
[15]. ** Tucker, Catherine E. (2014), “Social Networks,
Personalized Advertising, and Privacy Controls,”
Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (5), 546-562. The
author studies how consumers’ perceptions of control
over personal information used for social media ad
targeting (i.e., personalized ads) influence likelihood to
click on ads, using data from a field experiment.
Personalized ads did not perform well. However, when
the website gave users more control over their personal
information, personalized ads performed better. This
finding is consistent with the idea that reactance-type
responses can be mitigated by giving consumers a sense
of (perceived) control or freedom of choice.
[16]. Luo, Xueming, Andrews, Michelle, Song, Yiping, and
Aspara, Jaakko (2014), “Group-Buying Deal
Popularity,” Journal of Marketing, 78 (2), 20-33.
[17]. Jerath, Kinshuk, Ma, Liye, and Park, Young-Hoon
(2014), “Consumer Click Behavior at a Search Engine:
The Role of Keyword Popularity,” Journal of Marketing
Research, 51 (4), 480-486.
[18]. ** Puccinelli, Nancy M. Wilcox, Keith, and Grewal,
Dhruv (2015), “Consumers' Response to Commercials:
When the Energy Level in the Commercial Conflicts
with the Media Context,” Journal of Marketing, 79 (2),
1-18. The authors report six studies looking at the
interplay between focal media content (e.g., a TV show
or a movie) and digital video ads that come after viewing
that content. They show that after watching content that
evokes a deactivating emotion, consumers view
energetic ads less and have lower recall compared to
when they do not experience a deactivating emotion.
[19]. Dinner, Isaac M., Van Heerde, Harald J., and Neslin,
Scott A. (2014), “Driving Online and Offline Sales: The
Cross-Channel Effects of Traditional, Online Display,
and Paid Search Advertising,” Journal of Marketing
Research, 51 (5), 527-545.
[20]. Goldstein, Daniel G. Suri, Siddharth, McAfee, R.
Preston, Ekstrand-Abueg, Matthew, and Diaz, Fernando
(2014), “The Economic and Cognitive Costs of
Annoying Display Advertisements,” Journal of
Marketing Research, 51 (6), 742-752.
[21]. Lamberton, Cait Poynor, Naylor, Rebecca Walker, and
Haws, Kelly L. (2013), “Same destination, different
paths: When and how does observing others' choices
and reasoning alter confidence in our own choices?”
Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23 (1), 74-89.
[22]. Norton, David A., Lamberton, Cait Poynor, and Naylor,
Rebecca Walker (2013), “The Devil You (Don't) Know:
Interpersonal Ambiguity and Inference Making in
Competitive Contexts,” Journal of Consumer Research,
40 (2), 239-254.
[23]. Wilcox, Keith, and Stephen, Andrew T. (2013), “Are
Close Friends the Enemy? Online Social Networks,
Self-Esteem, and Self-Control,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 40 (1), 90-103. The authors show that using
Facebook, even for just five minutes, can potentially
lower subsequent self-control in unrelated tasks (e.g.,
persistence with a mentally challenging task, healthy
food choices). This effect occurs when consumers’
IJISRT23MAR1502 www.ijisrt.com
International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Facebook “friends” are mostly strong ties (more close
friends than acquaintances), and, perversely, occurs
because time on Facebook being exposed to the lives of
one’s reasonably close friends boosts self-esteem
(which in turn lowers self-control).
[24]. Hui, Sam K., Inman, J. Jeffrey, Huang, Yanliu, and
Suher, Jacob (2013), “The Effect of In- Store Travel
Distance on Unplanned Spending: Applications to
Mobile Promotion Strategies,” Journal of Marketing, 77
(2), 1-16.
[25]. ** Brasel, S. Adam, and Gips, James (2014), “Tablets,
touchscreens, and touchpads: How varying touch
interfaces trigger psychological ownership and
endowment,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24 (2),
226-233.
[26]. * Bart, Yakov, Stephen, Andrew T., and Sarvary,
Miklos (2014), “Which Products Are Best Suited to
Mobile Advertising? A Field Study of Mobile Display
Advertising Effects on Consumer Attitudes and
Intentions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (3), 270-
285. A study of 54 mobile display ad campaigns, each
with test (saw ad) and control (did not see ad) groups,
finds that mobile display ads only positively affect
brand favorability and purchase intention for products
that are both utilitarian and high involvement (e.g.,
financial services). The authors explain that this could
be because these types of products trigger more
deliberate “central route” processing (following the
elaboration likelihood model) that leads to greater
persuasive effectiveness.
[27]. Kronrod, Ann, and Danziger, Shai (2013), “Wii Will
Rock You! The Use and Effect of Figurative Language
in Consumer Reviews of Hedonic and Utilitarian
Consumption,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (4),
726-739.
[28]. ** Moore, Sarah G. (2015), “Attitude Predictability and
Helpfulness in Online Reviews: The Role of Explained
Actions and Reactions,” Journal of Consumer Research,
42 (1), 30-44.
[29]. Hamilton, Ryan, Vohs, Kathleen D., and McGill, Ann
L. (2014), “We'll Be Honest, This Won't Be the Best
Article You'll Ever Read: The Use of Dispreferred
Markers in Word-of- Mouth Communication,” Journal
of Consumer Research, 41 (1), 197-212.
[30]. Tang, Tanya, Fang, Eric, and Wang, Feng (2014), “Is
Neutral Really Neutral? The Effects of Neutral User-
Generated Content on Product Sales,” Journal of
Marketing, 78 (4), 41-58.
[31]. Ludwig, Stephan, de Ruyter, Ko, Friedman, Mike,
Brueggen, Elisabeth C., Wetzels, Martin, and Pfann,
Gerard (2013), “More Than Words: The Influence of
Affective Content and Linguistic Style Matches in
Online Reviews on Conversion Rates,” Journal of
Marketing, 77 (1), 87-103.
[32]. * Chen, Zoey, and Lurie, Nicholas H. (2013),
“Temporal Contiguity and Negativity Bias in the Impact
of Online Word of Mouth,” Journal of Marketing
Research, 50 (4), 463-476.
[33]. ** Lovett, Mitchell J., Peres, Renana, and Shachar, Ron
(2013), “On brands and Word of Mouth,” Journal of
Marketing Research, 50 (4), 427-444.
1539
Volume 8, Issue 3, March – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[34]. Eisingerich, Andreas B., Chun, HaeEun, Liu, Yeyi, Jia,
He, and Bell, Simon J. (2015), “Why recommend a
brand face-to-face but not on Facebook? How word-of-
mouth on online social sites differs from traditional
word-of-mouth,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25
(1), 120-128.
[35]. He, Stephen X. and Bond, Samuel D. (2013), “Word-of-
mouth and the forecasting of consumption enjoyment,”
Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23 (4), 464-482.
[36]. Cascio, Christopher N., O'Donnell, Matthew Brook,
Bayer, Joseph, Tinney, Francis J., Jr., and Falk, Emily
B. (2015), “Neural Correlates of Susceptibility to Group
Opinions in Online Word-of-Mouth
Recommendations,” Journal of Marketing Research, 52
(4), 559-575.
[37]. He, Stephen X. and Bond, Samuel D. (2015), “Why Is
the Crowd Divided? Attribution for Dispersion in
Online Word of Mouth,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 41 (6), 1509-1527.
[38]. Anderson, Eric T. and Simester, Duncan I. (2014),
“Reviews Without a Purchase: Low Ratings, Loyal
Customers, and Deception,” Journal of Marketing
Research, 51 (3), 249-269.
[39]. Barasch, Alixandra and Berger, Jonah (2014),
“Broadcasting and Narrowcasting: How Audience Size
Affects What People Share,” Journal of Marketing
Research, 51 (3), 286-299.

IJISRT23MAR1502 www.ijisrt.com 1540