Advertisement

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science

, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp 83–100 | Cite as

A dyadic study of interpersonal information search

  • Mary C. Gilly
  • John L. Graham
  • Mary Finley Wolfinbarger
  • Laura J. Yale
Article

Abstract

Although interpersonal word-of-mouth communication, by definition, takes place between two people, rarely has the phenomenon of word of mouth been studied using both members of the dyad. Building on the literature, this article offers a model of active interpersonal information search that is tested by using a method in which information seeker and source perceptions were obtained. Source characteristics were important determinants of interpersonal influence, but seeker characteristics also played an important role. Interestingly, it proved useful to distinguish between demographic and attitudinal homophily of seeker and source as the former was inversely and the latter directly related to interpersonal influence.

Keywords

Partial Little Square Opinion Leadership Consumer Research Source Expertise Focal Product 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Apasu, Yao, Shiguera Ichikawa, and John L. Graham., 1987. “Corporate Culture and Sales Force Management in Japan and America.”Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management 7 (November): 51–62.Google Scholar
  2. Arndt, Johan. 1967a. “Role of Product-Related Conversations in the Diffusion of a New Product.”Journal of Marketing Research 4 (August): 291–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. —. 1967b. “Word of Mouth Advertising and Informal Communication.” InRisk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer Behavior. Ed. D. F. Cox. Boston: Harvard University, Graduate School of Business Administration, 188–239.Google Scholar
  4. —. 1968. “Word-of-Mouth Advertising and Perceived Risk.” InPerspectives in Consumer Behavior. Ed. H. Kassarjian and T. Robertson. Glenwood, IL: Scott, Foresman, 330–336.Google Scholar
  5. Baumgarten, Steven. 1975. “The Innovative Communicator in the Diffusion Process.”Journal of Marketing Research 12 (February): 12–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bayus, Barry. 1985. “Word of Mouth: The Indirect Effects of Marketing Efforts.”Journal of Advertising Research 25 (June/July): 31–39.Google Scholar
  7. —, Vincent Carroll, and Ambar Rao. 1985. “Harnessing the Power of Word of Mouth.” InInnovation Diffusion Models of New Product Acceptance. Eds. V. Mahajan and Y. Wind. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 61–83.Google Scholar
  8. Bearden, William O., Richard G. Netemeyer, and Jesse E. Teel. 1989. “Measurement of Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence”Journal of Consumer Research 15 (March): 473–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beatty, Sharon and Scott Smith. 1987. “External Search Effort: An Investigation Across Several Product Categories.”Journal of Consumer Research 14 (June): 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bloch, Peter and Marsha Richins. 1983. “A Theoretical Model for the Study of Product Importance Perceptions.”Journal of Marketing 47 (Summer): 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. —, Daniel Sherrell, and Nancy Ridgway. 1986. “Consumer Search: An Extended Framework.”Journal of Consumer Research 13 (June): 119–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bone, Paula Fitzgerald. 1992. “Determinants of Word-of-Mouth Communications During Product Consumption.” InAdvances in Consumer Research. Eds. John Sherry and Brian Sternthal. Vol. 19. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 579–583.Google Scholar
  13. Brewer, John and Albert Hunter. 1989.Multimethod Research: A Synthesis of Styles. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Brown, Jacqueline and Peter Reingen. 1987. “Social Ties and Word-of-Mouth Referral Behavior.”Journal of Consumer Research 14 (December): 350–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brucks, Merrie. 1985. “The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior.”Journal of Consumer Research 12 (June): 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Campbell, Nigel C. G., John L. Graham, Alain Jolibert and Hans Gunther Meissner. 1988. “Marketing Negotiations in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States.”Journal of Marketing 52 (April): 49–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cantril, H. and G. W. Allport. 1935.The Psychology of Radio. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  18. Celsi, Richard L. and Jerry C. Olson. 1988. “The Role of Involvement in Attention and Comprehension Processes.”Journal of Consumer Research 15 (September): 210–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Childers, Terry L. 1986. “Assessment of Psychometric Properties of an Opinion Leadership Scale.”Journal of Marketing Research 23 (May): 184–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Coleman, James, Elihu Katz, and Herbert Menzel. 1966.Medical Innovation: A Diffusion Study. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
  21. Cunningham, Scott. 1964. “Perceived Risk as a Factor in Product-Oriented Word-of-Mouth Behavior: A First Step.” InReflections on Progress in Marketing. Ed. L. G. Smith. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 229–238.Google Scholar
  22. —. 1967. “Perceived Risk as a Factor in Informal Consumer Communications.” InRisk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer Behavior. Ed. D. F. Cox, Boston: Harvard University Press, 265–288.Google Scholar
  23. Doob, L. W. 1948.Public Opinion and Propaganda. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
  24. Dowling, Grahame R. and Richard Staelin. 1994. “A Model of Perceived Risk and Intended Risk-Handling Activity.”Journal of Consumer Research 21 (June): 119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Engel, J., R. Kegerreis, and R. Blackwell. 1969. “Word-of-Mouth Communication by the Innovator.”Journal of Marketing 33 (July): 15–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Evans, Franklin B. 1963. “Selling as a Dyadic Relationship—A New Approach.”American Behavioral Scientist 6 (May): 76–79.Google Scholar
  27. Feick, Lawrence and Linda L. Price. 1987. “The Market Maven: A Diffuser of Marketplace Information.”Journal of Marketing 51 (January): 83–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Feldman, Sidney and Merlin Spencer. 1965. “The Effect of Personal Influence in the Selection of Consumer Services.” InMarketing and Economic Development. Ed. Peter Bennett. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 440–452.Google Scholar
  29. Fisher, Robert J. and Linda L. Price. 1992. “An Investigation Into the Social Context of Early Adoption Behavior.”Journal of Consumer Research 19 (December): 477–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Fornell, Claes and Fred L. Bookstein. 1982. “Two Structural Equation Models: LISREL and PLS Applied to Consumer Exit-Voice Theory.”Journal of Marketing Research 19 (November): 440–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. — and William T. Robinson. 1983. “Industrial Organization and Consumer Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction.”Journal of Consumer Research 9 (March): 403–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Friestad, Marian and Peter Wright. 1994. “The Persuasion-Knowledge Model: How People Cope With Persuation Attempts.”Journal of Consumer Research 21 (June): 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Furse, David, Girish Punj, and David Stewart. 1984. “A Typology of Individual Search Strategies Among Purchasers of New Automobiles.”Journal of Consumer Research 10 (March): 417–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Herr, Paul M., Frank R. Kardes, and John Kim. 1991. “Effects of Word-of-Mouth and Product-Attribute Information on Persuasion: An Accessibility-Diagnosticity Perspective.”Journal of Consumer Research 17 (March): 454–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Iacobucci, Dawn and Nigel Hopkins. 1992. “Modeling Dyadic Interactions and Networks in Marketing.”Journal of Marketing Research 29 (February): 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jacoby, Jacob and Wayne Hoyer. 1981. “What if Opinion Leaders Didn’t Know More? A Question of Nomological Validity.”Advances in Consumer Research 8: 299–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jöreskog, Karl B. and Dag Sörbom. 1981.LISREL V: Analysis of Linear Structure Relationships by Maximum Likelihood and Least Squares Methods. Chicago: National Education Resources.Google Scholar
  38. Katona, George and Eva Mueller. 1954. “A Study of Purchasing Decisions.” InConsumer Behavior: The Dynamics of Consumer Reaction. Ed. L. H. Clark. New York: New York University Press, 30–87.Google Scholar
  39. Katz, E. and P.F. Lazarsfeld. 1955.Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
  40. Keaveney, Susan M. 1995. “Customer Switching Behavior in Service Industries: An Exploratory Study.”Journal of Marketing 59 (April): 71–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kiel, Geoffrey and Roger Layton. 1981. “Dimensions of Consumer Information Seeking Behavior.”Journal of Marketing Research 18 (May): 233–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. King, Charles. 1964. “Fashion Adoption: A Rebuttal to the ‘Trickle Down’ Theory.” InToward Scientific Marketing. Ed. Stephen Greyser. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 108–125.Google Scholar
  43. — and John Summers. 1970. “Overlap of Opinion Leadership Across Consumer Product Categories.”Journal of Marketing Research 7 (February): 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Knower, F. H. 1935. “Experimental Studies of Changes in Attitude. I. A Study of the Effect of Oral Argument on Changes of Attitude.”Journal of Social Psychology 6: 315–347.Google Scholar
  45. —. 1936. “Experimental Studies of Changes in Attitude. II. A Study of the Effect of Printed Argument in Changes of Attitude.”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 30: 522–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lazarsfeld, Paul and Robert Merton. 1954. “Friendship as a Social Process: A Substantive and Methodological Analysis.” InFreedom and Control in Modern Society. Eds. Monroe Berger, Theodore Abel, and Charles H. Page. New York: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
  47. LeGrand, Bruce and Jon Udell. 1964. “Consumer Behavior in the Market Place.”Journal of Retailing 40 (Fall): 32–48.Google Scholar
  48. Lutz, R. and P. Reilly. 1973. “An Exploration of the Effects of Perceived Social and Performance Risk on Consumer Information Acquisition.” InProceedings, Fourth Annual Conference, The Association for Consumer Research, 393–405.Google Scholar
  49. McGrath, Joseph E. 1982. “Dilematics: The Study of Research Choices and Dilemmas.” InJudgement Calls in Research. Eds. Joseph E. McGrath, Joanne Martin, and Richard A. Kulka. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 69–102.Google Scholar
  50. Mitchell, Andrew A. and Peter A. Dacin. 1996. “The Assessment of Alternative Measures of Consumer Expertise.”Journal of Consumer Research 23 (December): 219–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Murray, Keith B. 1991. “A Test of Services Marketing Theory: Consumer Information Acquisition Activities.”Journal of Marketing 55 (January): 10–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Perry, M. and B. Hamm. 1969. “Canonical Analysis of Relations Between Socioeconomic Risk and Personal Influences in Purchase Decisions.”Journal of Marketing Research 6 (August): 351–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Phillips, Lynn W. 1981. “Assessing Measurement Error in Key Informant Reports: A Methodological Note on Organizational Analysis in Marketing.”Journal of Marketing Research 28 (November): 395–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Price, Linda and Lawrence Feick. 1984. “The Role of Interpersonal Sources in External Search: An Informational Perspective.”Advances in Consumer Research 10: 250–255.Google Scholar
  55. Punj, Girish and Richard Staelin. 1983. “A Model of Consumer Information Search Behavior for New Automobiles.”Journal of Consumer Research 9 (March): 366–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Richins, Marsha and Terri Root-Shaffer. 1988. “The Role of Involvement and Opinion Leadership in Consumer Word-of-Mouth: An Implicit Model Made Explicit.”Advances in Consumer Research 15: 32–36.Google Scholar
  57. Robertson, Thomas. 1971.Innovative Behavior and Communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  58. —, J. Zielinski, and S. Ward. 1984.Consumer Behavior. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.Google Scholar
  59. Rogers, Everett M. 1995.Diffusion of Innovations. 4th ed. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  60. — and D. Bhowmik. 1971. “Homophily-Heterophily: Relational Concepts for Communication Research.”Public Opinion Quarterly 34: 523–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Roselius, T. 1971. “Consumer Rankings of Risk Reduction Methods.”Journal of Marketing 35 (January): 56–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rudd, Joel and Frank J. Kohout. 1983. “Individual and Group Information Acquisition in Brand Choice Situations.”Journal of Consumer Research 10 (December): 303–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sheth, Jagdish. 1971. “Word-of-Mouth in Low-Risk Innovations.”Journal of Advertising Research 11: 15–18.Google Scholar
  64. Srinivasan, Narasimhan and Brian T. Ratchford. 1991. “An Empirical Test of a Model of External Search for Automobiles.”Journal of Consumer Research 18, 2 (September): 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Thorelli, Hans B. 1971. “Concentration of Information Power Among Consumers.”Journal of Marketing Research 8 (November): 427–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Webb, Eugene J., Donald T. Campbell, Richard D. Schwartz, and Lee Sechrest. 1981.Unobtrusive Measures: Nonreactive Research in the Social Sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  67. Wilke, W. H. 1934. “An Experimental Comparison of the Speech, the Radio and the Printed Page as Propaganda Devices.”Archives of Psychology, no. 169.Google Scholar
  68. Wolfinbarger, Mary Finley and Mary C. Gilly. 1993. “The Encoding and Decoding of Gift Symbolism.” Working paper. University of California at Irvine.Google Scholar
  69. Yale, Laura J. and Mary C. Gilly. 1995. “Dyadic Perceptions in Personal Source Information Search.”Journal of Business Research 32 (March): 225–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary C. Gilly
    • 1
  • John L. Graham
    • 1
  • Mary Finley Wolfinbarger
    • 2
  • Laura J. Yale
    • 3
  1. 1.University of CaliforniaIrvine
  2. 2.California State UniversityLong Beach
  3. 3.Fort Lewis CollegeDurangoUSA

Personalised recommendations