Electronic Commerce Research

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 603–627 | Cite as

What content and context factors lead to selection of a video clip? The heuristic route perspective

  • Sang-Hyeak Yoon
  • Hee-Woong KimEmail author


The popularity of watching video clips on mobile devices is rapidly increasing. The providers of such video services have developed mobile capabilities and have worked to increase their video selections. This study investigates the effect of the factors of preview content (the thumbnail and the title) and context (the popularity cue and the serial position) on video selection in a mobile context by adopting dual process theory and the model of attention capture and transfer. We performed a logit transformation on the dependent variable, and then applied generalized least squares (GLS) regression to analyze 206,221 logs and 323 thumbnails and titles of a video service. Image and text- mining techniques were used to ascertain the level of valence and response to content. This study has four main findings: (1) low valence but high arousal of a thumbnail has a positive effect on video selection; (2) high valence and arousal by a title has a positive effect on video selection; (3) the upper serial position of a video clip and a high popularity cue have a positive effect on the video selection; and (4) the length and recency of a video have a positive effect on the video selection. The results of this study suggest practical implications to help the programming and marketing strategy of the video service as well.


Mobile context Video clip Sentiment analysis Heuristic route Order effect Bandwagon effect Machine learning Text mining 



The authors would like to acknowledge professor Jeonghye Choi for providing insightful advice during review period.


  1. 1.
    IAB Research. (2015). One in four U.S. adults watches original digital video, According to IAB Research. IAB. Retrieved July 23, 2017 from
  2. 2.
    Statista. (2018). U.S. YouTube video ad advertising revenues 2018| Statistic. Statista. Retrieved August 28, 2018 from
  3. 3.
    Crompton, J. L., & Ankomah, P. K. (1993). Choice set propositions in destination decisions. Annals of Tourism Research, 20(3), 461–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davidson, J., Liebald, B., Liu, J., Nandy, P., Van Vleet, T., Gargi, U., et al. (2010). The YouTube video recommendation system. In Proceedings of the fourth ACM conference on recommender systems (pp. 293–296). ACM.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ghose, A., Goldfarb, A., & Han, S. P. (2012). How is the mobile Internet different? Search costs and local activities. Information Systems Research, 24(3), 613–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weaver, K. A., Yang, H., Zhai, S., & Pierce, J. (2011). Understanding information preview in mobile email processing. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on human computer interaction with mobile devices and services (pp. 303–312). ACM.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Vries, L., Gensler, S., & Leeflang, P. S. (2012). Popularity of brand posts on brand fan pages: An investigation of the effects of social media marketing. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(2), 83–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shin, D., He, S., Lee, G. M., Whinston, A. B., Cetintas, S., & Lee, K. -C. (2016). Content Complexity, Similarity, and Consistency in Social Media: A Deep Learning Approach. SSRN Electronic Journal.
  9. 9.
    Groves, P. M., & Thompson, R. F. (1970). Habituation: A dual-process theory. Psychological Review, 77(5), 419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fu, W. W., & Sim, C. C. (2011). Aggregate bandwagon effect on online videos’ viewership: Value uncertainty, popularity cues, and heuristics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(12), 2382–2395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hilligoss, B., & Rieh, S. Y. (2008). Developing a unifying framework of credibility assessment: Construct, heuristics, and interaction in context. Information Processing and Management, 44(4), 1467–1484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fu, W. W. (2012). Selecting online videos from graphics, text, and view counts: The moderation of popularity bandwagons. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(1), 46–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cheung, C. M., Xiao, B. S., & Liu, I. L. (2014). Do actions speak louder than voices? The signaling role of social information cues in influencing consumer purchase decisions. Decision Support Systems, 65, 50–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Susarla, A., Oh, J.-H., & Tan, Y. (2012). Social networks and the diffusion of user-generated content: Evidence from YouTube. Information Systems Research, 23(1), 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hsieh, J.-K., Hsieh, Y.-C., & Tang, Y.-C. (2012). Exploring the disseminating behaviors of eWOM marketing: Persuasion in online video. Electronic Commerce Research, 12(2), 201–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pieters, R., & Wedel, M. (2004). Attention capture and transfer in advertising: Brand, pictorial, and text-size effects. Journal of Marketing, 68(2), 36–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhou, S., & Guo, B. (2017). The order effect on online review helpfulness: A social influence perspective. Decision Support Systems, 93, 77–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dewan, S., Ho, Y.-J., & Ramaprasad, J. (2017). Popularity or proximity: Characterizing the nature of social influence in an online music community. Information Systems Research, 28(1), 117–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yantis, S. (2000). Goal-directed and stimulus-driven determinants of attentional control. Attention and Performance, 18, 73–103.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yantis, S., & Jonides, J. (1990). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Voluntary versus automatic allocation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16(1), 121.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ang, S. H., & Low, S. Y. (2000). Exploring the dimensions of Ad creativity. Psychology and Marketing, 17(10), 835–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Berger, J., & Milkman, K. (2010). Social transmission, emotion, and the virality of online content. Wharton Research Paper, 106, 1–52.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lane, R. D., Chua, P. M., & Dolan, R. J. (1999). Common effects of emotional valence, arousal and attention on neural activation during visual processing of pictures. Neuropsychologia, 37(9), 989–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schupp, H. T., Flaisch, T., Stockburger, J., & Junghöfer, M. (2006). Emotion and attention: Event-related brain potential studies. Progress in Brain Research, 156, 31–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wiens, S., Molapour, T., Overfeld, J., & Sand, A. (2012). High negative valence does not protect emotional event-related potentials from spatial inattention and perceptual load. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 12(1), 151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kensinger, E. A., & Schacter, D. L. (2006). Processing emotional pictures and words: effects of valence and arousal. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 6(2), 110–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bayer, M., Sommer, W., & Schacht, A. (2010). Reading emotional words within sentences: The impact of arousal and valence on event-related potentials. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 78(3), 299–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), 1161–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Barua, A., Ravindran, S., & Whinston, A. B. (1997). Efficient Selection of Suppliers over the Internet. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(4), 117–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zhang, W., Liu, C., Wang, Z., Li, G., Huang, Q., & Gao, W. (2014). Web video thumbnail recommendation with content-aware analysis and query-sensitive matching. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 73(1), 547–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Liebe, U., Hundeshagen, C., Beyer, H., & von Cramon-Taubadel, S. (2016). Context effects and the temporal stability of stated preferences. Social Science Research, 60, 135–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Haugtvedt, C. P., & Wegener, D. T. (1994). Message order effects in persuasion: An attitude strength perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 205–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hogarth, R. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1992). Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology, 24(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Leibenstein, H. (1950). Bandwagon, snob, and Veblen effects in the theory of consumers’ demand. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 64, 183–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Banerjee, A. V. (1992). A simple model of herd behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107, 797–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dewan, S., & Ramaprasad, J. (2012). Research note: Music blogging, online sampling, and the long tail. Information Systems Research, 23(3-part-2), 1056–1067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Walther, J. B., & Jang, J. (2012). Communication processes in participatory websites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(1), 2–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Rout, J. K., Choo, K.-K. R., Dash, A. K., Bakshi, S., Jena, S. K., & Williams, K. L. (2018). A model for sentiment and emotion analysis of unstructured social media text. Electronic Commerce Research, 18(1), 181–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jenkins, B. (2011). Consumer sharing of viral video advertisements: A look into message and creative strategy typologies and emotional content. A Capstone Project.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Das, E., Galekh, M., & Vonkeman, C. (2015). Is sexy better than funny? Disentangling the persuasive effects of pleasure and arousal across sex and humour appeals. International Journal of Advertising, 34(3), 406–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1999). Affective norms for English words (ANEW): Instruction manual and affective ratings. Technical report C-1, the center for research in psychophysiology, Florida: University of Florida.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Miller, H. J. (1993). Consumer search and retail analysis. Journal of Retailing, 69(2), 160–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 47, 263–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Xu, Y. C., & Kim, H.-W. (2008). Order effect and vendor inspection in online comparison shopping. Journal of Retailing, 84(4), 477–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Zhou, R., Khemmarat, S., Gao, L., Wan, J., & Zhang, J. (2016). How YouTube videos are discovered and its impact on video views. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 75(10), 6035–6058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Liu, H., Jou, B., Chen, T., Topkara, M., Pappas, N., Redi, M., & Chang, S. -F. (2016). Complura: Exploring and leveraging a large-scale multilingual visual sentiment ontology. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM on international conference on multimedia retrieval (pp. 417–420). ACM.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Borth, D., Ji, R., Chen, T., Breuel, T., & Chang, S. -F. (2013). Large-scale visual sentiment ontology and detectors using adjective noun pairs. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM international conference on Multimedia (pp. 223–232). ACM.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kurdi, B., Lozano, S., & Banaji, M. R. (2017). Introducing the open affective standardized image set (OASIS). Behavior Research Methods, 49(2), 457–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Cao, D., Ji, R., Lin, D., & Li, S. (2016). Visual sentiment topic model based microblog image sentiment analysis. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 75(15), 8955–8968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    An, A., & Kim, H.-W. (2015). Building a Korean Sentiment Lexicon Using Collective Intelligence. Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems, 21(2), 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kim, S., Kwon, S., & Kim, J. (2015). Building sentiment dictionary and polarity classification of blog review by using elastic net. Communications of the Korean Institute of Information Scientists and Engineers, 2015(12), 639–641.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kim, S., & Kim, N. (2014). A Study on the effect of using sentiment lexicon in opinion classification. Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems, 20(1), 133–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Pfeffer, J., & Davis-Blake, A. (1986). Administrative succession and organizational performance: How administrator experience mediates the succession effect. Academy of Management Journal, 29(1), 72–83.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Xu, X., & Lee, L. (2015). A spatial autoregressive model with a nonlinear transformation of the dependent variable. Journal of Econometrics, 186(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rahman, M., Rodríguez-Serrano, M. Á., & Lambkin, M. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and marketing performance: The moderating role of advertising intensity. Journal of Advertising Research, 57(4), 368–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Nevo, A. (2000). Mergers with differentiated products: The case of the ready-to-eat cereal industry. The RAND Journal of Economics, 31, 395–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Santos, M. A. D., Lobos, C., Muñoz, N., Romero, D., & Sanhueza, R. (2017). The influence of image valence on the attention paid to charity advertising. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 0(0), 1–18.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Zhang, Z., Li, X., & Chen, Y. (2012). Deciphering word-of-mouth in social media: Text-based metrics of consumer reviews. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS), 3(1), 5.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Liang, T.-P., Li, X., Yang, C.-T., & Wang, M. (2015). What in consumer reviews affects the sales of mobile apps: A multifacet sentiment analysis approach. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 20(2), 236–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of InformationYonsei UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations