Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Examining Differences between the Motivations of Providing and Seeking Electronic Word-of-Mouth among Turkish and Foreign Student Groups

Year 2019, Volume: 7 Issue: 6, 175 - 185, 13.12.2019
https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.468662

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the
electronic word-of-mouth communication (eWOM) motivations of providing and
seeking, and whether these motivations differ among to the groups of students
from different nations. A survey was carried out for Turkish and foreign
student groups in Istanbul. In the study, eWOM seeking motivations consist of
"social interaction benefits", "risk reduction",
"social essential product information" and "product usage
information", and eWOM providing motivations consist of
"self-improvement", "social benefit", and "negative
emotions" dimensions. According to the findings of the study;
"socially relevant product information" from the eWOM providing
motive is important for foreign student groups wheras "risk
reduction", "product use information" from the eWOM motivations
of providing and "emergence of negative emotions" from the eWOM motivations
of seeking are found as discriminators for Turkish student groups.

References

  • Akehurst, G. (2009). User Generated Content: The Use of Blogs for Tourism Organisations and Tourism Consumers. Service Business, 3(1), 51-61.
  • Akkılıç, E., ve Özbek, E. (2012). İnternet Üzerinden Yapılan Alışverişlerde Ürüne Yönelik Yorumların Tüketici Satın Alma Kararı Üzerindeki Etkisi. Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10, 1-14.
  • Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411.
  • Arndt, J. (1967) Role of Product-Related Conversations in the Diffusion of a New Product. Journal of Marketing Research 4, 291–295.
  • Arrayo, M. M ve Pandey, T. (2010). Identification of Critical eWOM Dimensions for Music Albums, Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE ICMIT, 1230-1235.
  • Avcılar, M.Y. (2005). Kişisel Etik Kaynakları ve Ağızdan Ağıza İletişim Ağı, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 19(2), 333-347.
  • Aydın, B. O. (2014). Elektronik Ağızdan Ağıza İletisim: Tüketici Motivasyonlarinin Analizi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (32), 13-25.
  • Brown, M. T., ve Wicker, L. R. (2000). Discriminant Analysis. In Handbook of Applied Multivariate Statistics and Mathematical Modeling, 209-235.
  • Cheung, C. M., & Lee, M. K. (2008). Online Consumer Reviews: Does Negative Electronic Word-of-Mouth Hurt More? AMCIS 2008 Proceedings, 143.
  • Cheung, C. M., & Thadani, D. R. (2010). The Effectiveness of Electronic Word-of-Mouth Communication: A Literature Analysis. eTrust: Implications for the Individual, Enterprises and Society, In Bled eConference, Slovenia.
  • Chung, C.M.Y. and Darke, P.R. (2006). The Consumer as Advocate: Self-Relevance, Culture, and Wordof-Mouth, Marketing Letters, 17, 269-279.
  • Christodoulides, G., Michaelidou, N., & Argyriou, E. (2012). Cross-National Differences in e-WOM Influence. European Journal of Marketing, 46(11/12), 1689-1707.
  • Dellarocas, Chrysanthos (2003), The Digitization of Word of Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms, Management Science, 49 (10), 1407-1424.
  • Ditcher, Ernest (1966), How Word-of-Mouth Advertising Work, Harvard Business, 44 (6), 147- 166.
  • Demir, S. B. ve Koç, H. (2013). Coğrafya Dersi Tutum Ölçeği: Geliştirilmesi, Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Turkish Studies-International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic 8(8), 1765-1777.
  • Engel, James F. , Blackwell, Roger D. and Miniard, Paul W. (1993). Consumer Behavior (7th Edition).Texas: Dreyden Press.
  • Forman. C, A. Ghose, and B.Wiesenfeld (2008). Examining the Relationship Between Reviews and Sales: The Role of Reviewer Identity Disclosure in Electronic Markets, Information Systems Research, 19(3), 291-313.
  • Godes, David, Dina, Mayzlin, Yubo, Chen, Sanjiv, Das, Chrysanthos Dellarocas and Bruce, Pfeiffer (2005). The Firm's Management of Social İnteractions. Marketing Letters, 16, (3/4), 415-428.
  • Gruen. T. W., Osmonbekov, T. ve Czaplewski, A. J. (2006). eWOM: The Impact of Customer-to-Customer Online Know-How Exchange on Customer Value and Loyalty, Journal of Business Research, 59(7), 449 – 456.
  • Goldsmith, Ronald E. and David Horowitz (2006). Measuring Motivations for Online Opinion Seeking. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 6(2), 1-16.
  • Han, S. M. (2008). Motivations for Providing and Seeking eWOM: A Cross Cultural Comparison of US and Korean College Students. Michigan State University. Department of Advertising, Michigan. Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten and Walsh, Gianfranco (2003). Electronic Word-of-Mouth: Motives for and Consequences of Reading Customer Articulations on the Internet. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8(2), 51-74.
  • Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, Gwinner, Kevin P., Walsh, Gianfranco and Gremler, Dwayne D. (2004). Electronic Word-of-Mouth via Consumer-Opinion Platforms: What Motivates Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the Internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38-52.
  • Jeong, E.; Jang, S.( 2011). Restaurant Experiences Triggering Positive Electronic Word-of-Mouth (eWOM) Motivations. Int. J. Hosp. Management, 30, 356-366
  • King, R. A., Racherla, P., & Bush, V. D. (2014). What We Know and Don't Know About Online Word-of-Mouth: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(3), 167-183.
  • Korgaonkar, P. K. and Lori, D. Wolin (1999). A Multivariate Analysis of Web Usage. Journal of Advertising Research, 39(2), 53-68.
  • Koğar, H. (2010). Farklı Örneklem Büyüklüklerinde Uç Değerlerle Baş Etme Yöntemlerinin Puanların Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Kanıtları Üzerindeki Etkisi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Kurtuluş, K. (2010). Araştırma Yöntemleri. İstanbul: Türkmen Kitabevi.
  • Kwon, J. M., Bae, J-I, & Phelan, K. (2011). Online Consumer Herding Behaviors in the Hotel Industry Presented at 16th Graduate Students Research Conference, Houston, Texas.
  • Lam, D., Lee, A., & Mizerski, R. (2009). The Effects of Cultural Values in Word-of-Mouth Communication. Journal of international Marketing, 17(3), 55-70.
  • Lerrthaitrakul, W., & Panjakajornsak, V. (2014). The Impact Of Electronic Word-Of-Mouth Factors on Consumers' Buying Decision-Making Processes in the Low Cost Carriers: A Conceptual Framework. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 5(2), 142-167
  • Litvin, S. W., Goldsmith, R. E., & Pan, B. (2008). Electronic Word-of-Mouth in Hospitality and Tourism Management. Tourism Management, 29(3), 458-468.
  • Liu, R. R., & McClure, P. (2001). Recognizing Cross-Cultural Differences in Consumer Complaint Behavior and Intentions: An Empirical Examination. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(1), 54-75.
  • Oğuzlar, A. (2006). Hanehalkı Tipi ve Kır-Kent Ayırımının Diskriminant Analizi ile İncelenmesi. Akdeniz Üniversitesi Iktisadi Ve Idari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(11), 70-84.
  • Sarıışık, M., ve Özbay, G. (2012). Elektronik Ağızdan Ağıza İletişim ve Turizm Endüstrisindeki Uygulamalara İlişkin Bir Yazın İncelemesi. Yabancı Yönetim İktisat Ve İşletme Dergisi, 8(16), 1-22.
  • Savić, M., Brcanov, D., & Dakić, S. (2008). Discriminant Analysis-Applications and Software Support. Management Information Systems, 3(1), 29-33.
  • Sharma, S. (1996). Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Shen, W. (2011). Electronic Word-of-Mouth in China: A Motivational Analysis”, E -Business and E -Government (ICEE), 2011 International Conference, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5881777, 6-8 May, 1-6, (Erişim:12.01.2016).
  • Sundaram, D.S. (1998). Word-of-Mouth Communications: A Motivational Analysis, http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/display.asp?id=8208, (Erişim:25.02.2017).
  • Sridharan, S. (2016). What Makes One Spread The Word Online-A Study on Electronic Word of Mouth Motivations on Social Networking Sites, Master's thesis, University of Stavanger, Norway.
  • Sun, T., Youn, S., Wu, G., & Kuntaraporn, M. (2006). Online Word‐of‐Mouth (or Mouse): An Exploration of its Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 11(4), 1104-1127.
  • Thevenot, C. ve Watier, K. (2001). Georgetown University, Communications, Culture & Technology Program, http://www.watier.org/kathy/papers/ViralMarketing.doc. (Erişim:02.10.2016).
  • Thorson, K. S., & Rodgers, S. (2006). Relationships between Blogs as eWOM and Interactivity, Perceived Interactivity, and Parasocial Interaction. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 6(2), 39-50.
  • Tsao, W. C., Hsieh, M. T., Shih, L. W., & Lin, T. M. (2015). Compliance with eWOM: The influence of Hotel Reviews on Booking Intention from the Perspective of Consumer Conformity. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 46, 99-111.
  • Yalman, N., Ulusu, Y., Sağlık, D., & Durmuş, B. (2012). Blackberry ve Iphone'un Marka Kişilikleri Farklı Mıdır?, Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10, 83-99.
  • Yen, C. L. A., & Tang, C. H. H. (2015). Hotel Attribute Performance, eWOM Motivations, and Media Choice. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 46, 79-88.
  • Yıldız, E. (2016). Elektronik Ağızdan Ağıza İletişim: Tüketicilerin Elektronik Platformlarda Yorum Yazma Davranışını Etkileyen Faktörler. Gümüshane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Elektronik Dergisi, 7(15), 13-25.
  • Yıldız, S. ve Tehci A. (2014). Ağızdan Ağıza İletişimde Müşteri Tatmini ve Müşteri Sadakati ile Mağaza İmajı Boyutları: Ordu İlinde Bir Uygulama, Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 18(1), 441-460.

Elektronik Ağızdan Ağıza İletişim Arama ve Sağlama Güdülerinin Türk ve Yabancı Öğrenci Gruplarına Göre Farklılıklarının İncelenmesi

Year 2019, Volume: 7 Issue: 6, 175 - 185, 13.12.2019
https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.468662

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı tüketicilerin elektronik
ağızdan ağıza iletişim (eAAİ) arama ve sağlama güdülerinin ortaya konulması ve
bu güdülerin farklı uyruklara mensup öğrenci gruplarına göre değişip
değişmediğinin belirlenmesidir. İstanbul’da yaşayan Türk ve yabancı öğrenci
gruplarına yönelik olarak bir araştırma yapılmıştır. Çalışmada, eAAİ arama
güdülerinin;
"sosyal
etkileşim faydaları
", "risk azaltma", "sosyal yönelimli ürün bilgisi" ve "ürün kullanım bilgileri", eAAİ sağlama güdülerinin ise "kendini geliştirme", "sosyal fayda", ve "olumsuz duyguların ortaya çıkışı" alt boyutlarından oluştuğu saptanmıştır. Çalışmanın
bulgularına göre; yabancı öğrenci grupları için arama güdülerinden "
sosyal yönelimli ürün bilgisi"
faktörünün önemli olduğu, Türk öğrenci grupları için ise arama güdülerinden
"r
isk azaltma", "ürün kullanım bilgileri"
ve sağlama güdülerinden "
olumsuz
duyguların ortaya çıkışı
" faktörlerin ayırt edici olduğu yapılan
diskriminant analiz sonucunda elde edilmiştir.

References

  • Akehurst, G. (2009). User Generated Content: The Use of Blogs for Tourism Organisations and Tourism Consumers. Service Business, 3(1), 51-61.
  • Akkılıç, E., ve Özbek, E. (2012). İnternet Üzerinden Yapılan Alışverişlerde Ürüne Yönelik Yorumların Tüketici Satın Alma Kararı Üzerindeki Etkisi. Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10, 1-14.
  • Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411.
  • Arndt, J. (1967) Role of Product-Related Conversations in the Diffusion of a New Product. Journal of Marketing Research 4, 291–295.
  • Arrayo, M. M ve Pandey, T. (2010). Identification of Critical eWOM Dimensions for Music Albums, Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE ICMIT, 1230-1235.
  • Avcılar, M.Y. (2005). Kişisel Etik Kaynakları ve Ağızdan Ağıza İletişim Ağı, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 19(2), 333-347.
  • Aydın, B. O. (2014). Elektronik Ağızdan Ağıza İletisim: Tüketici Motivasyonlarinin Analizi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (32), 13-25.
  • Brown, M. T., ve Wicker, L. R. (2000). Discriminant Analysis. In Handbook of Applied Multivariate Statistics and Mathematical Modeling, 209-235.
  • Cheung, C. M., & Lee, M. K. (2008). Online Consumer Reviews: Does Negative Electronic Word-of-Mouth Hurt More? AMCIS 2008 Proceedings, 143.
  • Cheung, C. M., & Thadani, D. R. (2010). The Effectiveness of Electronic Word-of-Mouth Communication: A Literature Analysis. eTrust: Implications for the Individual, Enterprises and Society, In Bled eConference, Slovenia.
  • Chung, C.M.Y. and Darke, P.R. (2006). The Consumer as Advocate: Self-Relevance, Culture, and Wordof-Mouth, Marketing Letters, 17, 269-279.
  • Christodoulides, G., Michaelidou, N., & Argyriou, E. (2012). Cross-National Differences in e-WOM Influence. European Journal of Marketing, 46(11/12), 1689-1707.
  • Dellarocas, Chrysanthos (2003), The Digitization of Word of Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms, Management Science, 49 (10), 1407-1424.
  • Ditcher, Ernest (1966), How Word-of-Mouth Advertising Work, Harvard Business, 44 (6), 147- 166.
  • Demir, S. B. ve Koç, H. (2013). Coğrafya Dersi Tutum Ölçeği: Geliştirilmesi, Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Turkish Studies-International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic 8(8), 1765-1777.
  • Engel, James F. , Blackwell, Roger D. and Miniard, Paul W. (1993). Consumer Behavior (7th Edition).Texas: Dreyden Press.
  • Forman. C, A. Ghose, and B.Wiesenfeld (2008). Examining the Relationship Between Reviews and Sales: The Role of Reviewer Identity Disclosure in Electronic Markets, Information Systems Research, 19(3), 291-313.
  • Godes, David, Dina, Mayzlin, Yubo, Chen, Sanjiv, Das, Chrysanthos Dellarocas and Bruce, Pfeiffer (2005). The Firm's Management of Social İnteractions. Marketing Letters, 16, (3/4), 415-428.
  • Gruen. T. W., Osmonbekov, T. ve Czaplewski, A. J. (2006). eWOM: The Impact of Customer-to-Customer Online Know-How Exchange on Customer Value and Loyalty, Journal of Business Research, 59(7), 449 – 456.
  • Goldsmith, Ronald E. and David Horowitz (2006). Measuring Motivations for Online Opinion Seeking. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 6(2), 1-16.
  • Han, S. M. (2008). Motivations for Providing and Seeking eWOM: A Cross Cultural Comparison of US and Korean College Students. Michigan State University. Department of Advertising, Michigan. Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten and Walsh, Gianfranco (2003). Electronic Word-of-Mouth: Motives for and Consequences of Reading Customer Articulations on the Internet. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8(2), 51-74.
  • Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, Gwinner, Kevin P., Walsh, Gianfranco and Gremler, Dwayne D. (2004). Electronic Word-of-Mouth via Consumer-Opinion Platforms: What Motivates Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the Internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38-52.
  • Jeong, E.; Jang, S.( 2011). Restaurant Experiences Triggering Positive Electronic Word-of-Mouth (eWOM) Motivations. Int. J. Hosp. Management, 30, 356-366
  • King, R. A., Racherla, P., & Bush, V. D. (2014). What We Know and Don't Know About Online Word-of-Mouth: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(3), 167-183.
  • Korgaonkar, P. K. and Lori, D. Wolin (1999). A Multivariate Analysis of Web Usage. Journal of Advertising Research, 39(2), 53-68.
  • Koğar, H. (2010). Farklı Örneklem Büyüklüklerinde Uç Değerlerle Baş Etme Yöntemlerinin Puanların Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Kanıtları Üzerindeki Etkisi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Kurtuluş, K. (2010). Araştırma Yöntemleri. İstanbul: Türkmen Kitabevi.
  • Kwon, J. M., Bae, J-I, & Phelan, K. (2011). Online Consumer Herding Behaviors in the Hotel Industry Presented at 16th Graduate Students Research Conference, Houston, Texas.
  • Lam, D., Lee, A., & Mizerski, R. (2009). The Effects of Cultural Values in Word-of-Mouth Communication. Journal of international Marketing, 17(3), 55-70.
  • Lerrthaitrakul, W., & Panjakajornsak, V. (2014). The Impact Of Electronic Word-Of-Mouth Factors on Consumers' Buying Decision-Making Processes in the Low Cost Carriers: A Conceptual Framework. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 5(2), 142-167
  • Litvin, S. W., Goldsmith, R. E., & Pan, B. (2008). Electronic Word-of-Mouth in Hospitality and Tourism Management. Tourism Management, 29(3), 458-468.
  • Liu, R. R., & McClure, P. (2001). Recognizing Cross-Cultural Differences in Consumer Complaint Behavior and Intentions: An Empirical Examination. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(1), 54-75.
  • Oğuzlar, A. (2006). Hanehalkı Tipi ve Kır-Kent Ayırımının Diskriminant Analizi ile İncelenmesi. Akdeniz Üniversitesi Iktisadi Ve Idari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(11), 70-84.
  • Sarıışık, M., ve Özbay, G. (2012). Elektronik Ağızdan Ağıza İletişim ve Turizm Endüstrisindeki Uygulamalara İlişkin Bir Yazın İncelemesi. Yabancı Yönetim İktisat Ve İşletme Dergisi, 8(16), 1-22.
  • Savić, M., Brcanov, D., & Dakić, S. (2008). Discriminant Analysis-Applications and Software Support. Management Information Systems, 3(1), 29-33.
  • Sharma, S. (1996). Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Shen, W. (2011). Electronic Word-of-Mouth in China: A Motivational Analysis”, E -Business and E -Government (ICEE), 2011 International Conference, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5881777, 6-8 May, 1-6, (Erişim:12.01.2016).
  • Sundaram, D.S. (1998). Word-of-Mouth Communications: A Motivational Analysis, http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/display.asp?id=8208, (Erişim:25.02.2017).
  • Sridharan, S. (2016). What Makes One Spread The Word Online-A Study on Electronic Word of Mouth Motivations on Social Networking Sites, Master's thesis, University of Stavanger, Norway.
  • Sun, T., Youn, S., Wu, G., & Kuntaraporn, M. (2006). Online Word‐of‐Mouth (or Mouse): An Exploration of its Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 11(4), 1104-1127.
  • Thevenot, C. ve Watier, K. (2001). Georgetown University, Communications, Culture & Technology Program, http://www.watier.org/kathy/papers/ViralMarketing.doc. (Erişim:02.10.2016).
  • Thorson, K. S., & Rodgers, S. (2006). Relationships between Blogs as eWOM and Interactivity, Perceived Interactivity, and Parasocial Interaction. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 6(2), 39-50.
  • Tsao, W. C., Hsieh, M. T., Shih, L. W., & Lin, T. M. (2015). Compliance with eWOM: The influence of Hotel Reviews on Booking Intention from the Perspective of Consumer Conformity. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 46, 99-111.
  • Yalman, N., Ulusu, Y., Sağlık, D., & Durmuş, B. (2012). Blackberry ve Iphone'un Marka Kişilikleri Farklı Mıdır?, Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10, 83-99.
  • Yen, C. L. A., & Tang, C. H. H. (2015). Hotel Attribute Performance, eWOM Motivations, and Media Choice. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 46, 79-88.
  • Yıldız, E. (2016). Elektronik Ağızdan Ağıza İletişim: Tüketicilerin Elektronik Platformlarda Yorum Yazma Davranışını Etkileyen Faktörler. Gümüshane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Elektronik Dergisi, 7(15), 13-25.
  • Yıldız, S. ve Tehci A. (2014). Ağızdan Ağıza İletişimde Müşteri Tatmini ve Müşteri Sadakati ile Mağaza İmajı Boyutları: Ordu İlinde Bir Uygulama, Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 18(1), 441-460.
There are 47 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Zehra Bozbay 0000-0002-2728-8003

Adem Uysal 0000-0001-7381-3852

Esra’a Zaid 0000-0001-6800-249X

Publication Date December 13, 2019
Acceptance Date January 23, 2019
Published in Issue Year 2019 Volume: 7 Issue: 6

Cite

APA Bozbay, Z., Uysal, A., & Zaid, E. (2019). Elektronik Ağızdan Ağıza İletişim Arama ve Sağlama Güdülerinin Türk ve Yabancı Öğrenci Gruplarına Göre Farklılıklarının İncelenmesi. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7(6), 175-185. https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.468662

Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi Creative Commons Atıf-GayriTicari 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı (CC BY NC) ile lisanslanmıştır.