INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT

JAMMU

Course of Independent Study

On
"Harnessing Social Media for Healthcare sector: Engaging and Creating Advocates"

Faculty Mentor- Dr. Rambabu Lauvri Student Name: Ivanshi Rathod

MBA ID- HAHM22016

1
 Indian Institute of Management Jammu

All India Institute of Medical Sciences Jammu

Indian Institute of Technology Jammu

Master of Business Administration

(Hospital Administration and Healthcare Management)

Certificate of Approval for CIS Report

The CIS Report titled “Harnessing social media for Healthcare sector: Engaging and Creating Advocates” submitted
by “Ivanshi Rathod.” is hereby approved as a certified study in Management carried out and presented in a manner
satisfactory to warrant its acceptance as a prerequisite for the award of Master of Business Administration (Hospital
Administration and Healthcare Management) Programme for which it has been submitted. It is understood that by
this approval the undersigned does not necessarily endorse or approve any statement made, opinion expressed, or
conclusion drawn there in but approve the CIS Report only for the purpose it is submitted.

Signatures of Faculty Guide

2
Abstract

In the dynamic healthcare landscape, social media integration has become a transformative influence. The

21st-century digital revolution has fundamentally altered information access and dissemination, positioning

social media platforms as indispensable tools for the healthcare sector. This study examines the profound

impact of social media on healthcare, showcasing how healthcare entities, professionals, and patients

employ these platforms to enhance patient care, stimulate community engagement, and cultivate a network

of healthcare advocates.

Accessible information empowers individuals to actively engage in their healthcare decisions. Social media

offers a platform for patients to exchange experiences, seek advice, and connect with others facing similar

health challenges. Healthcare professionals and organizations leverage these platforms to disseminate

critical health information, participate in real-time discussions, and promote preventive care.

This exploration delves into the multifaceted dimensions of social media's influence on healthcare, including

popular platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn. Additionally, it addresses ethical

considerations, challenges, and opportunities in this digital transformation.

As we explore the symbiotic relationship between social media and healthcare, we uncover the potential for

a healthcare ecosystem where informed, engaged, and empowered individuals collaboratively shape the

future of healthcare. This study serves as a practical guide for healthcare stakeholders seeking to harness the

power of social media to enhance healthcare outcomes and foster a more interconnected healthcare

community.

3
Table of Contents

S.no Title Page No.

1 Chapter 1 5

2 Chapter 2 7

3 Chapter 3 12

4 Chapter 4 16

5 Chapter 5 38

6 Bibliography 41

7 Questionnaire 42

4
CHAPTER-1

Introduction

In the ever-evolving landscape of healthcare, the integration of social media has emerged as a powerful and

transformative force. The 21st century has witnessed a digital revolution that has reshaped the way

individuals’ access, interact with, and share information. Social media platforms, once seen as mere tools for

socializing and networking, have now become indispensable tools in the healthcare sector. This

transformation is not limited to the dissemination of information; it extends to the creation of a vibrant and

engaged healthcare community.

The topic at hand, "Harnessing Social Media for Healthcare Sector: Engaging and Creating Advocates,"

delves into the profound impact of social media on the healthcare industry. It explores how healthcare

organizations, professionals, and patients are leveraging the dynamic capabilities of social media platforms

to improve patient care, foster community engagement, and create a network of healthcare advocates.

In an era where information is readily accessible at our fingertips, individuals are more empowered than

ever to actively participate in their healthcare decisions. Social media has played a pivotal role in this shift,

providing a space for patients to share experiences, seek advice, and connect with others facing similar

health challenges. Furthermore, healthcare professionals and organizations are using these platforms to

disseminate critical health information, engage in real-time discussions, and promote preventive care.

This exploration will encompass the multifaceted dimensions of social media's influence on healthcare. We

will discuss how platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn are being employed to not only

educate and inform but also to inspire advocacy among patients and healthcare stakeholders. Additionally,

we will delve into the ethical considerations, challenges, and opportunities that come with this digital

transformation.

5
As we embark on this journey to unravel the symbiotic relationship between social media and the healthcare

sector, we will witness the remarkable potential for creating a healthcare ecosystem where informed,

engaged, and empowered individuals can collaborate in shaping the future of healthcare. This exploration

will serve as a guide for healthcare professionals, organizations, and individuals looking to harness the

power of social media in their pursuit of improved healthcare outcomes and a more connected healthcare

community, to make this happen we have to analyse the people perspective and in order to do that we

address the following research areas:

RA1: Trustworthy news in social media (TSM)

RA2: Credibility of social media news (CRSM)

RA3: Credibility of Source (CRS)

RA4: Customer Engagement

RA5: Advocacy

In order to gather comprehensive insights, we have developed a Google Form that encompasses all the

specified areas. This form has been carefully structured to solicit opinions from respondents in the form of

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs). Following the collection of responses, we will conduct a rigorous

analysis, applying the SOR (Stimulus-Organism-Response) model to systematically dissect the gathered

data. This approach will enable us to gain a deeper understanding of how marketing stimuli influence

individuals' internal psychological processes (organism) and subsequently shape their responses.

6
CHAPTER-2

Literature Review-

Empirical Insights:

Patient Empowerment through Information Sharing:

Numerous empirical studies highlight how patients are leveraging social media platforms to share their

health experiences, seek advice, and gain a deeper understanding of their medical conditions. These

interactions empower patients to actively participate in healthcare decisions.

Patient Advocacy and Support Groups:

Online patient communities and advocacy groups on social media provide invaluable support for individuals

with chronic illnesses. They offer a sense of belonging and access to shared experiences, positively

impacting mental health and overall well-being.

Enhanced Communication and Engagement:

Research indicates that healthcare organizations have utilized social media to improve communication with

patients and the public. Real-time updates, interactive Q&A sessions, and health campaigns on platforms

like Twitter and Facebook have led to increased engagement and information dissemination (Neiger et al.,

2012).

7
Theoretical Framework

The Framework

The SOR Framework

Stimulus (S):

Age in years

Gender

Education

8
Family Income level

Family Size

Which of the following social media platforms do you usually use? (Yes/No)

What is your frequency of usage of social media?

Do you follow health-related news shared on social media? (Yes/No)

Organism (O):

To analyse these variables within the Organism component of the SOR model, consider the following

psychological factors:

Credibility, Trustworthy, Source & news credibility, Self-efficacy

Trustworthy news in social media (TSM)

a) I feel this social media news provide relevant health service information.

b) I feel this social media news are reliable for health service information.

c) I feel this social media news are informative for health service information.

Credibility of social media news (CRSM)

a) I feel this social media news are Authentic for health service.

b) I feel this social media news are Accurate for health service.

c) I feel this social media news are Believable.

Credibility of Source (CRS)

a) I find this social media news are credible and knowledgeable for health service.

b) I find this social media news trustworthy for health service.

9
c) I find this social media news are honest for health service.

Response (R):

In the context of the SOR model, these factors relate to the responses or actions taken by respondents:

Customer Engagement

a) I may continue patronizing this social media for health service information in the future.

b) I am engrossed while interacting with the social media for health service information.

c) I feel contented while interacting with the social media for health service information.

Advocacy

a) I recommend this social media platform to my friends and family for health service information.

b) When I hear people speaking badly about this social media for acquiring health service information, I try

to defend it.

c) I would like my family and friends to use this social media for health service information.In the context of

the SOR model, these factors relate to the responses or actions taken by respondents:

Customer Engagement

a) I may continue patronizing this social media for health service information in the future.

b) I am engrossed while interacting with the social media for health service information.

c) I feel contented while interacting with the social media for health service information.

Advocacy

a) I recommend this social media platform to my friends and family for health service information.

b) When I hear people speaking badly about this social media for acquiring health service information, I try

to defend it.

c) I would like my family and friends to use this social media for health service information.
10
Research Gaps & Objectives

Research Gap

Existing research in the field of social media integration in healthcare has indeed made significant strides,

yet notable gaps persist. These gaps encompass a scarcity of investigations into the interaction between

social media and patients, a lack of comprehensive studies exploring the impact of particular social media

platforms on healthcare, and a call for more thorough analysis of patients transitioning into advocates for

healthcare causes.

Research Objectives

1. Assessing Trustworthiness in Social Media News

2. Evaluating Credibility of Social Media News

3. Analysing Source Credibility

4. Measuring Customer Engagement

5. Exploring Advocacy for Health Service Information

11
CHAPTER-3

Methodology

SOR model

The SOR (Stimulus-Organism-Response) model was applied to analyze the interplay of various factors in

the context of social media and health service information. The Stimulus component comprised

demographic variables, social media usage patterns, and following health-related news. Within the Organism

component, psychological factors like credibility, trustworthiness and customer engagement were evaluated

through participants' perceptions. The Response component encompassed, advocacy behaviours, such as

recommending social media platforms for health information. The SOR model facilitated a comprehensive

understanding of how individuals engage with and respond to health-related information on social media

platforms.

Data Collection and Statistical Analysis

Data Collection:

To conduct our research, we employed a structured questionnaire distributed via Google Forms. Participants

were selected through purposive sampling and invited to complete the questionnaire, which focused on

assessing various aspects of social media's role in disseminating health service information, trustworthiness,

12
credibility, customer engagement, and advocacy. Responses were collected over a specified period, ensuring

a diverse sample of participants.

Statistical Analysis:

Following the data collection phase, we utilized the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS)

software to perform a comprehensive statistical analysis. This analysis involved the following techniques:

Correlation Analysis: We employed correlation analysis to explore relationships between different variables.

Specifically, we assessed correlations between trustworthiness, credibility, customer engagement, and

advocacy to gain insights into potential associations.

Regression Analysis: Regression analysis was conducted to examine the predictive power of selected

independent variables on dependent variables. This allowed us to identify key factors influencing

trustworthiness, credibility, engagement, and advocacy.

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA): ANOVA was employed to assess variations among different groups or

categories within the dataset. In our study, ANOVA helped determine whether there were significant

differences in participants' responses based on demographic or other categorical factors.

By employing these statistical techniques, we aimed to uncover meaningful patterns, relationships, and

factors affecting the perceptions and behaviours related to health service information on social media

platforms. The results of this analysis form a critical component of our research findings and provide

valuable insights for the report.

Data & Data Sources

Data Sources:

The primary source of data for this study was the responses obtained from survey participants. Participants

were selected through purposive sampling to ensure a diverse range of perspectives. The survey was

distributed to individuals who have experience using social media for health service information or related
13
purposes. This included a mix of healthcare consumers, patients and individuals with an interest in health-

related topics.

Data Collection Process:

Questionnaire Development: The questionnaire was carefully designed to capture relevant information and

align with the research objectives.

Distribution: The survey link was disseminated through various online channels, including social media

platforms and email invitations.

Data Collection Period: Responses were collected over a specified time frame to ensure a sufficient sample

size for robust analysis.

Data Cleansing: Collected data was reviewed and cleaned to identify and address any incomplete or

erroneous responses.

Data Types:

The data collected includes quantitative information:

Quantitative Data: This encompasses numerical data gathered from Likert-scale responses and multiple-

choice questions. It allows for statistical analysis, including correlation, regression, and ANOVA.

Demographic Data, Screening Questions, and Factor Questions in the Questionnaire

Demographic Data:

In the questionnaire, demographic data were collected to gain insights into the characteristics of the study

participants. These data typically included information such as age, gender, educational background, Family

size, and Name. Collecting demographic data helps in understanding how different groups of respondents

may perceive and interact with social media in the context of health service information.

Screening Questions:

14
Screening questions were included to ensure that respondents met the criteria for participation in the study.

These questions were used to identify individuals who have experience or an interest in using social media

for health service information. For instance, respondents may have been asked if they “Which of the

following social media platforms do you usually use?” or if they follow healthcare organizations on social

media.

Factor Questions:

Factor questions in the questionnaire were designed to assess specific aspects related to the research

objectives. These questions typically comprised Likert-scale items or multiple-choice questions that allowed

respondents to express their opinions, attitudes, or behaviours concerning social media and health service

information. For example, respondents may have been asked to rate their level of trust in health-related

information shared on social media platforms, with response options ranging from "Strongly Disagree" to

"Strongly Agree."

The inclusion of demographic data, screening questions, and factor questions in the questionnaire enhances

the depth and relevance of the data collected, facilitating a comprehensive understanding of how individuals

engage with social media in the context of health service information.

15
CHAPTER-4

Results & Analysis

Data collected from the survey that was done

Demographic & Screening questions

Age in Years

Interpretation:

The data from the respondents who have completed the Google form can be summarized in terms of age

distribution as follows:

Participants below 20 years of age make up 8.2% of the total.

16
The majority of respondents, 83.0%, fall within the age range of 21 to 30 years.

4.1% of respondents are aged between 31 and 40 years.

A smaller proportion, 1.4%, are in the 41-50 years age group.

Lastly, individuals above 50 years of age account for 2.7% of the total respondents.

These percentages provide a clear representation of the age demographics of the survey participants.

Gender

Interpretation:

The data collected from the Google form indicates that 47.9% of the respondents self-identify as female,

whereas 52.1% identify as male

Education

Interpretation:
17
The data gathered from respondents who have completed the Google form allows for a summary of their

educational background in terms of age distribution, as follows:

Individuals categorized as "Below graduate" constitute 9.6% of the total respondents.

"Graduate" respondents make up a majority portion, accounting for 35.6% of the total.

A significant proportion of respondents, totaling 52.1%, fall under the "Postgraduate" category.

A smaller segment, representing 2.7% of the respondents, have attained education levels categorized as

"Above postgraduate."

These percentages provide valuable insights into the educational diversity of the survey participants.

Family Size

Interpretation:

The data derived from respondents who have completed the Google form allows for a concise summary of

household size distribution as follows:

Households consisting of "2 members" account for 2.7% of the total.

A notable portion, comprising 12.3%, corresponds to households with "3 members."

A substantial majority, totalling 50.7%, represents households comprised of "4 members."

18
Lastly, households with "above 4 members" make up 34.2% of the respondents.

These percentages provide valuable insights into the distribution of household sizes among the survey

participants.

Which of the following social media platforms do you usually use?

Interpretation:

The data gathered from respondents who have completed the Google form allows us to summarize their

social media usage as follows:

YouTube is utilized by a significant majority, with 72.6% of respondents reporting its use.

Facebook is used by 31.5% of the respondents.

Instagram enjoys a high adoption rate, with 84.9% of respondents indicating its usage.

LinkedIn is used by 58.9% of the respondents.

Twitter, while less widely used, still garners a presence with 15.1% of respondents engaging with the

platform.

These percentages provide valuable insights into the prevalence of various social media platforms among the

survey participants.
19
What is your frequency of usage of social media?

Interpretation:

The data collected from respondents who have completed the Google form reveals a concise summary of

their usage frequency as follows:

An overwhelming majority, amounting to 95.9%, reported daily usage.

A smaller segment, accounting for 2.7%, indicated weekly usage.

A minority, comprising 1.7%, reported monthly usage.

20
These percentages offer a clear depiction of the frequency at which respondents engage with the subject in

question.

Do you follow health-related news shared on social media?

Interpretation:

The data gleaned from respondents who have completed the Google form provides a summary of their

engagement with health-related news shared on social media as follows:

A significant majority, representing 58.9%, actively follow health-related news shared on social media.

In contrast, 41.4% of respondents do not follow health-related news shared on social media.

These percentages offer insight into the varying degrees of interest and engagement with health-related

information through social media platforms among the survey participants.

21
I feel this social media news provide relevant health service information

Interpretation:

The data collected from respondents who completed the Google form can be summarized based on their

Likert scale responses as follows:

A small minority, specifically 6.8%, rated the subject with a score of 1 on the Likert scale.

A quarter of the respondents, totalling 24.7%, gave a score of 2.

A substantial portion, accounting for 49.3%, assigned a score of 3.

A notable 13.7% of respondents provided a score of 4.

Lastly, 5.5% of respondents assigned the highest score of 5 on the Likert scale.

These percentages convey the distribution of responses and the diversity of opinions among the survey

participants regarding the subject at hand.

22
I feel this social media news are reliable for health service information.

Interpretation:

The data gathered from respondents who shared their perceptions of the reliability of social media news

for health service information can be summarized using the Likert scale as follows:

A small minority, specifically 9.6%, expressed a low level of trust by assigning a score of 1 on the Likert

scale.

Nearly a third of the respondents, totalling 28.8%, had limited confidence and assigned a score of 2.

A significant portion, accounting for 42.5%, found social media news moderately reliable with a score of

3.

A notable 13.7% of respondents expressed a relatively high level of trust by assigning a score of 4.

Lastly, 5.5% of respondents expressed the highest level of confidence, giving a score of 5.

These percentages reflect the varying degrees of trust that respondents place in social media as a source

of health service information.

23
I feel this social media news are informative for health service information.

Interpretation:

The data gathered from respondents who expressed their perceptions of the informativeness of social

media news for health service information, using a Likert scale, can be summarized as follows:

A minority, specifically 11%, indicated a low level of informativeness by assigning a score of 1 on the

Likert scale.

A slightly larger portion, totaling 19.2%, had limited confidence in the informativeness and assigned a

score of 2.

A significant majority, accounting for 35.6%, found social media news moderately informative with a

score of 3.

A notable 26% of respondents perceived a relatively high level of informativeness and assigned a score

of 4.

Lastly, 8.2% of respondents expressed the highest level of confidence in the informativeness of social

media news, giving a score of 5.

I feel this social media news are Authentic for health service

24
Interpretation

The data collected from respondents who expressed their perceptions of the authenticity of social media

news for health services can be summarized using a Likert scale as follows:

Approximately 23.3% of respondents expressed a low level of confidence in the authenticity by

assigning a score of 1 on the Likert scale, significant portion, totalling 28.2%, had limited confidence in

the authenticity and assigned a score of 2.

A substantial majority, accounting for 30.1%, found social media news moderately authentic with a score

of 3. A notable 12.3% of respondents perceived a relatively high level of authenticity and assigned a

score of 4. Lastly, 5.5% of respondents expressed the highest level of confidence in the authenticity of

social media news by giving a score of 5.

25
I feel this social media news are Believable

Interpretation

The data collected from respondents who expressed their perceptions of the believability of social media

news can be summarized using a Likert scale as follows:

A small minority, specifically 9.6%, expressed a low level of belief by assigning a score of 1 on the

Likert scale.

Approximately 30.1% of respondents had limited belief in the information and assigned a score of 2.

A substantial majority, accounting for 37%, found social media news moderately believable with a score

of 3.

A notable 16.4% of respondents perceived a relatively high level of believability and assigned a score of

4.

Lastly, 6.8% of respondents expressed the highest level of belief in the information by giving a score of

5.

26
I recommend this social media platform to my friends and family for health service

information

Interpretation

The data collected from respondents who expressed their likelihood of recommending a particular social

media platform for health service information to friends and family, using a Likert scale, can be

summarized as follows:

Approximately 19.2% of respondents indicated a low likelihood of recommending the platform,

assigning a score of 1 on the Likert scale.

Around 26% of respondents had limited confidence in recommending the platform and assigned a score

of 2.

An equal portion, totaling 19.2%, expressed a moderate likelihood of recommending the platform with a

score of 3.

A notable 15.1% of respondents indicated a relatively high likelihood of recommendation by assigning a

score of 4.

27
Lastly, 2.7% of respondents expressed the highest likelihood of recommending the platform to friends

and family by giving a score of 5.

These percentages offer insights into the varying degrees of willingness among respondents to

recommend the social media platform as a source of health service information.

Statistical analysis

Factors Questions

ANOVA

H01: There is no significant influence of social media factors such as trustworthiness, credibility of source, credibility

of news on customer engagement

ANOVA

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 14.492 7 2.070 1.820 .008

TW Within Groups 75.070 66 1.137

Total 89.562 73

Between Groups 10.085 7 1.441 2.057 .015

CS Within Groups 46.233 66 .701

Total 56.318 73

Between Groups 24.130 7 3.447 5.020 .000

CN Within Groups 45.319 66 .687

Total 69.449 73

Interpretation for Trustworthiness (TW):

28
The p-value of 0.008 is less than 0.05, indicating statistical significance. Therefore, there is a significant

influence of trustworthiness on customer engagement. In other words, trustworthiness in social media

factors has an impact on how customers engage with content or information.

Interpretation for Credibility of Source (CS):

The p-value of 0.015 is less than 0.05, indicating statistical significance. Thus, credibility of the information

source on social media does have a significant influence on customer engagement.

Interpretation for Credibility of News (CN):

The p-value of 0.000 is highly significant, indicating that credibility of news on social media has a

significant influence on customer engagement.

H02: There is no significant influence of customer engagement on their advocates

ANOVA

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 22.122 7 3.160 2.854 .012

Within Groups 73.087 66 1.107

Total 95.209 73

Interpretation:

The p-value of 0.012 is less than 0.05, indicating statistical significance. Therefore, there is a significant

influence of customer engagement on advocates. In other words, customer engagement does have a

significant impact on whether individuals become advocates or not.

29
In summary, the results suggest that customer engagement plays a statistically significant role in influencing

individuals to become advocates. This implies that individuals who are more engaged with certain content or

information are more likely to advocate for it.

Correlation

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TW, CS, CN, CE and CA

Correlations

TW CS CN CE CA

Pearson Correlation 1 .222** .199** .170** .372**

TW Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .001

N 74 74 74 74 74

Pearson Correlation .222** 1 .357** .202** .443**

CS Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .002 .000 .000

N 74 74 74 74 74

Pearson Correlation .199** .357** 1 .269 .336**

CN Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .002 .000 .003

N 74 74 74 74 74

Pearson Correlation .170** .202 .269 1 .341**

CE Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .003

N 74 74 74 74 74

Pearson Correlation .372** .443** .336** .341** 1

CA Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .000 .003 .003

N 74 74 74 74 74

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The provided correlation table shows the relationships between different variables: TW (Trustworthiness),

CS (Credibility of Source), CN (Credibility of News), CE (Customer Engagement), and CA (Advocacy).

Here's the interpretation of the correlations:

30
Trustworthiness (TW):

TW is positively correlated with CS (r = 0.222**), CN (r = 0.199**), CE (r = 0.170**), and CA (r =

0.372**).

All these correlations are statistically significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), as indicated by the p-values

(Sig.).

Credibility of Source (CS):

CS is positively correlated with TW (r = 0.222**) and CN (r = 0.357**).

Both correlations are statistically significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Credibility of News (CN):

CN is positively correlated with TW (r = 0.199**), CS (r = 0.357**), CE (r = 0.269), and CA (r = 0.336**).

The correlations with TW, CS, and CA are statistically significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), while the

correlation with CE is not significant at the 0.01 level.

Customer Engagement (CE):

CE is positively correlated with TW (r = 0.170**), CS (r = 0.202), CN (r = 0.269), and CA (r = 0.341**).

The correlations with TW, CN, and CA are statistically significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), while the

correlation with CS is not significant at the 0.01 level.

Advocacy (CA):

CA is positively correlated with TW (r = 0.372**), CS (r = 0.443**), CN (r = 0.336**), and CE (r =

0.341**).

All these correlations are statistically significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Overall, there are significant positive correlations between the variables TW, CS, CN, CE, and CA.

31
Trustworthiness (TW) appears to be positively related to all other variables, indicating that as

trustworthiness increases, credibility, customer engagement, and advocacy also tend to increase.

Credibility of Source (CS) is positively correlated with trustworthiness and credibility of news, suggesting

that a credible source is associated with more trustworthy information and news.

Credibility of News (CN) shows positive relationships with trustworthiness, credibility of source, and

advocacy but a weaker relationship with customer engagement.

Customer Engagement (CE) has positive associations with trustworthiness, credibility of news, and

advocacy.

Advocacy (CA) is positively correlated with all other variables, indicating that individuals who perceive

higher trustworthiness, credibility, and engagement are more likely to become advocates for the information.

In summary, these correlations provide valuable insights into the relationships among the studied variables,

highlighting the importance of trustworthiness and credibility in influencing customer engagement and

advocacy in the context of social media.

Multiple regression

H01: There is no significant influence of social media factors such as trustworthiness, credibility of source,

credibility of news on customer engagement

32
Interpretation:

The results suggest that the model, including trustworthiness (TW), credibility of source (CS), and

credibility of news (CN), has some explanatory power in predicting customer engagement. The R Square

value of 0.290 indicates that approximately 29% of the variance in customer engagement is accounted for by

these social media factors.

ANOVA

The provided ANOVA table presents the results of a regression analysis for the relationship between

customer engagement (CE) and the predictors (Independent variable), which include trustworthiness (TW),

credibility of source (CS), and credibility of news (CN). The analysis is used to test the overall significance

of the regression model.

Interpretation:

The ANOVA table indicates that the regression model is statistically significant. The p-value associated with

the F-statistic (0.002) is less than 0.05, indicating that the overall regression model, which includes

trustworthiness (TW), credibility of source (CS), and credibility of news (CN), has a significant impact on

predicting customer engagement (CE).

33
In other words, there is evidence to suggest that at least one of the predictors in the model significantly

influences customer engagement. This finding contradicts the null hypothesis H01, which stated that there is

no significant influence of these social media factors on customer engagement.

The provided coefficients table presents the unstandardized and standardized coefficients for the predictors

in the regression model, which aims to predict customer engagement (CE) based on trustworthiness (TW),

credibility of source (CS), and credibility of news (CN).

Interpretation:

The constant (intercept) of 2.003 represents the estimated level of CE when all predictors are set to zero.

Among the predictors, trustworthiness (TW) and credibility of source (CS) have p-values greater than 0.05,

indicating that they are not statistically significant predictors of CE at the 0.05 significance level.

34
Credibility of news (CN) has a p-value of 0.001, indicating that it is a statistically significant predictor of

CE.

In terms of standardized coefficients (Beta), CN has the highest standardized impact on CE.

In summary, based on this analysis, credibility of news (CN) appears to be a statistically significant predictor

of customer engagement (CE), while trustworthiness (TW) and credibility of source (CS) do not have a

significant influence on CE in this model.

H02: There is no significant influence of customer engagement on their advocates

Interpretation:

The results suggest that the model, which includes customer engagement (CE) as the predictor, has some

explanatory power in predicting advocates. The R Square value of 0.184 indicates that approximately 18.4%

of the variance in advocates is accounted for by customer engagement (CE).

35
The provided ANOVA table presents the results of a regression analysis for the relationship between

advocates (CA) and the predictor, which is customer engagement (CE). The analysis is used to test the

overall significance of the regression model.

Interpretation of ANOVA:

The ANOVA table indicates that the regression model is statistically significant. The p-value associated with

the F-statistic (0.012) is less than 0.05, indicating that the overall regression model, which includes customer

engagement (CE) as the predictor, has a significant impact on predicting advocates (CA).

In other words, there is evidence to suggest that customer engagement (CE) significantly influences

advocates (CA). This finding contradicts the null hypothesis H02, which stated that there is no significant

influence of customer engagement on advocates.

36
Interpretation of Coefficient table:

The provided coefficients table presents the unstandardized and standardized coefficients for the predictor,

customer engagement (CE), in the regression model predicting advocates (CA).

The constant (intercept) of 2.497 represents the estimated level of advocates (CA) when customer

engagement (CE) is zero.

The coefficient for customer engagement (CE) has a positive value of 0.294, indicating that an increase in

customer engagement is associated with an increase in advocates.

The standardized coefficient (Beta) for CE is 0.290, which provides a standardized measure of the impact of

customer engagement on advocates.

The t-value associated with the coefficient for CE is 2.575, and its p-value is 0.012. This indicates that

customer engagement (CE) is a statistically significant predictor of advocates (CA) at the 0.05 significance

level.

In summary, customer engagement (CE) has a statistically significant and positive influence on advocates

(CA), as indicated by the coefficient's significance and direction.

Summarization:

The statistical analyses revealed significant relationships in the studied factors. Trustworthiness, credibility

of source, and credibility of news significantly influence customer engagement, contradicting the null

hypothesis. Additionally, customer engagement significantly impacts advocates, opposing the null

hypothesis. Correlations showed positive associations among these factors. Trustworthiness exhibited strong

correlations with credibility, customer engagement, and advocacy. Credibility of source positively correlated

with trustworthiness and credibility of news. These findings emphasize the importance of trust and

credibility in shaping engagement and advocacy on social media.

37
CHAPTER-5

Conclusion & Recommendation

Conclusion:

The statistical analysis conducted in this study has provided valuable insights into the relationships between

various factors related to social media, customer engagement, and advocacy. Key findings include the

significant influence of trustworthiness, credibility of the source, and credibility of news on customer

engagement. These results suggest that individuals are more likely to engage with and be advocates for

content that they perceive as trustworthy and credible. Additionally, customer engagement has been shown

to have a significant impact on the likelihood of individuals becoming advocates, indicating that engaged

users are more likely to promote content.

The correlation analysis highlighted positive associations among the studied factors, reinforcing the

importance of trust and credibility in shaping engagement and advocacy on social media platforms.

Trustworthiness emerged as a strong influencer, with significant correlations with credibility, customer

engagement, and advocacy. Credibility of the source also played a significant role, positively correlating

with trustworthiness and credibility of news.

Recommendations:

Based on the findings, here are some recommendations for social media platforms, content creators, and

organizations seeking to leverage social media for disseminating health service information:

1. Prioritize Trust and Credibility: Social media platforms and content creators should focus on building trust

and credibility. This includes verifying sources, fact-checking information, and ensuring transparency in

content creation.

2. Engage and Interact: Encourage user engagement through interactive content and discussions. Responding

to user comments and questions can enhance customer engagement and foster advocacy.

38
3. Promote Credible Sources: Emphasize the credibility of the source when sharing health-related

information. Clearly state the qualifications and expertise of content creators or sources.

4. Monitor and Evaluate: Continuously monitor and evaluate the impact of content on customer engagement

and advocacy. Adjust content strategies based on user feedback and data analysis.

5. Educate Users: Promote media literacy and critical thinking among social media users to help them

distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy information.

6. Collaborate with Experts: Collaborate with health professionals and experts to create and validate health

service information. Their involvement can enhance the credibility of content.

7. Leverage Engaged Users: Identify and engage with users who are highly engaged with health-related

content and encourage them to become advocates. Their endorsement can be influential in spreading reliable

information.

8. Promote Ethical Practices: Encourage ethical practices among content creators and organizations, such as

avoiding sensationalism and fear-mongering tactics.

9. Address Misinformation: Actively address and correct misinformation when it arises. Promptly providing

accurate information can help maintain trust among users.

10. Conduct Ongoing Research: Continually study user behaviour, preferences, and trust factors to adapt

strategies and stay relevant in the ever-changing social media landscape.

In conclusion, trust, credibility, engagement, and advocacy are intertwined elements in the dissemination of

health service information on social media. By prioritizing these factors and implementing the recommended

strategies, organizations and content creators can enhance their impact on social media platforms and

contribute to the dissemination of reliable and valuable health information to the public.

39
Scope for Further Work/Study:

Longitudinal Research: Future studies should consider adopting a longitudinal approach to examine how the

identified factors, such as trustworthiness and credibility, evolve over time within the realm of social media.

This would provide insights into the dynamics of these variables and their long-term effects on user

engagement and advocacy.

Diverse Samples: Expanding the participant pool to include a more diverse demographic is essential. A

broader range of age groups, socioeconomic backgrounds, and cultural contexts would enhance the study's

external validity and allow for a more comprehensive understanding of how these factors operate across

different populations.

Qualitative Analysis: To gain a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the phenomena under

investigation, future research could incorporate qualitative methods. Qualitative data can capture the

subjective experiences, motivations, and perceptions of individuals, providing valuable context to

complement quantitative findings.

Influence of Content: Understanding how specific types of content affect trustworthiness, engagement, and

advocacy is crucial. Research could delve into the role of content characteristics, such as format, source, and

tone, in shaping user perceptions and behaviours on social media

40
Bibliography

Havocs of social media fake news! Analysing the effect of credibility, trustworthiness, and self-efficacy on

consumer’s buying intentions Umair Akram, Rambabu Lavuri, Aisha Rehman Ansari, Ratri Parida &

Muhammad Junaid.

Moorhead, S. A., et al. (2013). "A New Dimension of Health Care: Systematic Review of the Uses, Benefits,

and Limitations of Social Media for Health Communication." Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(4),

e85.

Neiger, B. L., et al. (2012). "Use of Social Media in Health Promotion: Purposes, Key Performance

Indicators, and Evaluation Metrics." Health Promotion Practice, 13(2), 159-164.

Frost, J. H., et al. (2019). "Online Health Communities for Patients with Chronic Diseases: A Rapid

Review." Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(3), e10827.

Patients’ and health professionals’ use of social media in health care: Motives, barriers and expectations

Marjolijn L. Antheunis a, *, Kiek Tates a , Theodoor E. Nieboer b

Social Media: Ubiquitous Community and Patient Engagement CHRISTINA BEACH THIELST, FACHE

41
Questionnaire
1. Age in years-
2. Gender
3. Education
4. Family Income level
5. Family Size
6. Which of the following social media platforms do you usually use? Yes/no
7. What is your frequency of usage of social media?
8. Do you follow health-related news shared on social media? Yes/No

Credibility, Trustworthy, Source & news credibility, Self-efficacy

Trustworthy news in social media (TSM)
a) I feel this social media news provide relevant health service information.
b) I feel this social media news are reliable for health service information.
c) I feel this social media news are informative for health service information.
Credibility of social media news (CRSM)
a) I feel this social media news are Authentic for health service
b) I feel this social media news are Accurate for health service
c) I feel this social media news are Believable
Credibility of Source (CRS)
a) I find this social media news are credible and knowledge for health service
b) I find this social media news trustworthy for health service
c) I find this social media news are honest for health service
Customer Engagement
a) I may continue patronizing this social media for health service information in the future?
b) I am engrossed while interacting with the social media for health service information?
c) I feel contented while interacting with the social media for health service information?
Advocacy
a) I recommend this social media platform to my friends and family for health service information
b) When I hear people speaking badly about this social media for acquiring health service information, I try
to
defend it
c) I would like my family and friends to use this social media for health service information

42