Understanding electronic word of behavior: conceptualization of the observable digital traces of consumers’ behaviors

Abstract

The widespread digitization of consumers’ daily lives entails a plethora of digital traces of consumers’ behaviors. These traces can be turned into meaningful communicative and observable content by the services that possess the trace data. While extant research has empirically showed this to have a significant impact on consumer choices we argue that the phenomenon is undertheorized. In this theoretical paper, we conceptualize this kind of observable behavior-based information as ‘Electronic Word of Behavior’ (eWOB) and define it as “published accounts of behavior, based on the unobservable digital traces of consumers’ behaviors”. We characterize eWOB as an instantiation of Digital Trace Data and situate it within the established concepts of Social Interactions and Electronic Word of Mouth (eWOM). By drawing on extant empirical research and constructs from Digital Trace Data, Social Interactions and eWOM, we propose a framework for eWOB that highlights its unique characteristics and design dimensions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    To simplify, we refer to these almost identical concepts as ‘Social Interactions’

  2. 2.

    Cheung & Thadani’s original term for this element was ‘Contextual Factor’, however it basically describes the channel/platform on which the eWOM was published, and thus we will refer to it as Channel which also aligns it with the SI framework

References

  1. Aral, S., & Walker, D. (2011). Creating social contagion through viral product design: A randomized trial of peer influence in networks. Management Science, 57(9), 1623–1639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aral, S., Dellarocas, C., & Godes, D. (2013). Introduction to the special issue —Social media and business transformation: A framework for research. Information Systems Research, 24(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1120.0470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Arndt, J. (1968). Selective processes in word of mouth. Journal of Advertising Research, 8(3), 19–22.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bapna, R., & Umyarov, A. (2015). Do your online friends make you pay? A randomized field experiment on peer influence in online social networks. Management Science, 61(8), 1902–1920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bartikowski, B., & Walsh, G. (2014). Attitude contagion in consumer opinion platforms: Posters and lurkers. Electronic Markets, 24(3), 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-013-0149-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bikhchandani, S., Hirshleifer, D., & Welch, I. (1998). Learning from the behavior of others: Conformity, fads and informational Cascades. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12(3), 151–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bond, R. M., Fariss, C. J., Jones, J. J., Kramer, A. D. I., Marlow, C., Settle, J. E., & Fowler, J. H. (2012). A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature, 489(7415), 295–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chang, H. H., & Wu, L. H. (2014). An examination of negative e-WOM adoption: Brand commitment as a moderator. Decision Support Systems, 59(1), 206–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2013.11.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen, Y., Wang, Q., & Xie, J. (2011). Online social interactions: A natural experiment on word of mouth versus observational learning. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(2), 238–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cheung, C. M. K., & Thadani, D. R. (2012). The impact of electronic word-of-mouth communication: A literature analysis and integrative model. Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 461–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.06.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cheung, C. M. K., Xiao, B. S., & Liu, I. L. B. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chiou, S.-Y., Chang, S.-Y., Mezzour, G., Perrig, A., & Sun, H.-M. (2009). A Trustable Reputation Scheme Based on Private Relationships. In 2009 International Conference on Advances in Social Network Analysis and Mining (pp. 19–24). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASONAM.2009.8.

  14. Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Harnessing the science of persuasion. Harvard Business Review, 79(9), 72–81.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Daugherty, T., & Hoffman, E. (2014). eWOM and the importance of capturing consumer attention within social media. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20(1–2), 82–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2013.797764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dou, Y., Niculescu, M. F., & Wu, D. J. (2013). Engineering optimal network effects via social media features and seeding in Markets for Digital Goods and Services. Information Systems Research, 24(1), 164–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Duan, W., Gu, B., & Whinston, A. B. (2009). Informational CASCADES and software adoption on the internet: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 23–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Freelon, D. (2014). On the interpretation of digital trace data in communication and social computing research. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 58(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2013.875018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fu, J.-R., Ju, P.-H., & Hsu, C.-W. (2015). Understanding why consumers engage in electronic word-of-mouth communication: Perspectives from theory of planned behavior and justice theory. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 14(6), 616–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2015.09.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Furner, C., Zinko, P., & Robert, A. (2016). The influence of information overload on the development of trust and purchase intention based on online product reviews in a mobile vs. web environment: An empirical investigation. Electronic Markets., 27, 211–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-016-0233-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Godes, D., Mayzlin, D., Chen, Y., Das, S., Mit, C. D., Pfeiffer, B., & Shi, M. (2005). The Firm’s Management of Social Interactions. Marketing Letters, 16(3/4), 415–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Goodrich, K., & de Mooij, M. (2013). How “social” are social media? A cross-cultural comparison of online and offline purchase decision influences. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2013.797773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gregor, S. (2006). The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K., Walsh, G., & Gremler, 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Howison, J., Wiggins, A., & Crowston, K. (2011). Validity issues in the use of social network analysis with digital trace data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(12), 767–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2014.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Libai, B., Bolton, R., Bugel, M. S., de Ruyter, K., Gotz, O., Risselada, H., & Stephen, A. T. (2010). Customer-to-customer interactions: Broadening the scope of word of mouth research. Journal of Service Research, 13(3), 267–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Liu, D., Brass, D. J., Lu, Y., & Chen, D. (2015). Friendships in online peer-to-peer lending: Pipes, prisms, and relational herding. MIS Quarterly, 39(3), 729–742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Milgram, S., Bickman, L., & Berkowitz, L. (1969). Note on the drawing power of crowds of different size. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13(2), 79–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Parker, G. G., Van Alstyne, M. W., & Choudary, S. P. (2016). Platform revolution : How networked markets are transforming the economy and how to make them work for you (First edition). New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

  32. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York: The Guildford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Salganik, M. J., & Watts, D. J. (2008). Leading the herd astray: An experimental study of self-fulfilling prophecies in an artificial cultural market. Social Psychology Quarterly, 71(4), 338–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Sasaki, T., Becker, D. V., Janssen, M. A., & Neel, R. (2011). Does greater product information actually inform consumer decisions? The relationship between product information quantity and diversity of consumer decisions. Journal of Economic Psychology, 32, 391–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2011.02.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Shibutani, T. (1955). Reference groups as perspectives. American Journal of Sociology, 60(6), 562–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Snyder, M. (1987). Public appearances, private realities: The psychology of self-monitoring. New York: WH Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.

  37. Stanislaw, B. (2015). Why Social Is the New Word-of-Mouth Marketing, and What That Means. Retrieved November 15, 2017, from http://www.marketingprofs.com/opinions/2015/26771/why-social-is-the-new-word-of-mouth-marketing-and-what-that-means

  38. Thies, F., Wessel, M., & Benlian, A. (2016). Effects of social interaction dynamics on platforms. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33(3), 843–873. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2016.1243967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Tucker, C., & Zhang, J. (2011). How does popularity information affect choices? A field experiment. Management Science, 57(5), 828–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Zhang, D., Zhou, L., Kehoe, J. L., & Kilic, I. Y. (2016). What online reviewer behaviors really matter? Effects of verbal and nonverbal behaviors on detection of fake online reviews. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33(2), 456–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2016.1205907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhao, J., Binns, R., Kleek, M. Van, & Shadbolt, N. (2016). Privacy languages: Are we there yet to enable user controls? In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web (pp. 799–806). https://doi.org/10.1145/2872518.2890590.

  42. Zhou, W., & Duan, W. (2016). Do professional reviews affect online user choices through user reviews? An empirical study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33(1), 202–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2016.1172460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katrine Kunst.

Additional information

Responsible Editors: Christian Matt and Christy M.K. Cheung

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kunst, K., Vatrapu, R. Understanding electronic word of behavior: conceptualization of the observable digital traces of consumers’ behaviors. Electron Markets 29, 323–336 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-018-0301-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Electronic word of mouth (eWOM)
  • Electronic word of behavior (eWOB)
  • Social influence
  • Observational learning
  • Social interactions
  • Digital trace data

JEL classification

  • M15: IT Management
  • M31: Marketing
  • L81 Retail and Wholesale Trade; e-Commerce
  • D11 Consumer Economics: Theory