The Impact of Social Media Relationships on e-WOM in Syria and Hungary

Anikó Tompos; Jawad Abu Khair

doi:10.54609/reaser.v25i1.335

Anikó Tompos Széchenyi István University
Jawad Abu Khair Széchenyi István University Győr, Hungary

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54609/reaser.v25i1.335

Keywords: cultural values, eWOM, social media, social relationship variables

Abstract

Cultural values play a crucial role in the formation of individuals’ behaviour. With the emergence of social networking sites, which have formed a parallel world to the real world, the behaviour of individuals and their motives to engage in electronic word of mouth (eWOM) on social media platforms has become extremely important for brands. Due to a relative lack in studies focusing on the cultural difference-based impact of social relationships on eWOM in social media, the present study seeks to address this gap as its broad objective is to investigate the effect of social relationship variables on eWOM in social media by comparing two different cultures, namely Syria and Hungary in order to explore whether social relationships exert a more significant impact on eWOM in a collectivistic society than in an individualistic one. An explanatory research design was adopted and the data was collected by means of a questionnaire survey. The final sample included 113 Syrian and 90 Hungarian respondents, all of them aged 35 or below. It was found that tie strength among young adults has a more positive impact on eWOM in Syria than in Hungary, while no homophily impact was found on eWOM in either. Regarding the other social relationship variables examined in the study (trust, normative and informational influences), the results showed that they do not have a more positive impact on eWOM in Syria than in Hungary. The research is believed to have contributed to previous investigations on the impact of social relationships on eWOM via social media by providing insights into the role of a cultural value dimension in determining the extent to which individuals are affected by their cultural background, whether collectivistic or individualistic, when they interact in social media platforms. At the same time, it is acknowledged that the study has limitations thus future examinations are necessary.

Author Biography

Anikó Tompos, Széchenyi István University

associate professor, Department of International Studies and Communication

References

[1] Bearden, W. O., Netemeyer, R. G., & Teel, J. E. (1989). Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(4), 473-481.
[2] Brown, J. J., & Reingen, P. H. (1987). Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(3), 350-362. https://doi.org/10.1086/209118
[3] Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[4] Castellano, S., & Vincent, D. (2017). Investigating the influence of E-word-of-mouth on E-reputation. International Studies of Management and Organization, 47(1), 42-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2017.1241088
[5] Chou S-C., & Kim, Y. (2011). Determinants of consumer engagement in electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) in social networking sites. International Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 47-75. https://doi.org/10.2501/IJA-30-1-047-075
[6] Coleman, S. (2004). The effect of social conformity on collective voting behavior. Political Analysis, 12(1), 76-96. DOI:10.1093/pan/mpg015
[7] Dancey, C., & Reidy, J. (2004). Statistics without Maths for Psychology: using SPSS for Windows. London: Prentice Hall.
[8] De Bruyn, A., & Lilien, G. L. (2008). A multi-stage model of word-of-mouth influence through viral marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(3), 151-163. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.03.004
[9] Deshpande, R. (1983). “Paradigms lost”: On theory and method in research in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 47(4), 101-110.
[10] Farias, P. (2017). Identifying the factors that influence eWOM in SNSs: The case of Chile. International Journal of Advertising, 36(6), 852-869. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2017.1364033
[11] Feick, L. F., Price, L. L., & Higie, R. A. (1986). People who use people: The other side of opinion leadership. NA Advances in Consumer Research, 13, 301-305. Retrieved from https://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/6508
[12] Flynn, L. R., Goldsmith, R. E., & Eastman, J. K. (1996). Opinion leaders and opinion seekers: Two new measurement scales. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 24(2), 137-147.
[13] Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. Retrieved from: https://snap.stanford.edu/class/cs224w-readings/granovetter73weakties.pdf
[14] Hanks, L., Line, N., & Yang, W. (2017). Status seeking and perceived similarity: A consideration of homophily in the social servicescape. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 60, 123-132.
[15] Hansen, S. S., & Lee, J. K. (2013). What drives consumers to pass along marketer-generated eWOM in social network games? Social and game factors in play. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 8(1), 53-68. DOI:10.4067/s0718-18762013000100005
[16] Heihonen, K. (2011). Consumer activity in social media: Managerial approaches to consumers' social media behavior. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 10(6), 356-364. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.376
[17] Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
[18] Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind (Rev. 3rd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
[19] House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., Gupta, V., & (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
[20] Kim, S., Kandampully, J., & Bilgihan, A. (2018). The influence of eWOM communications: An application of online social network framework. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 243-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.11.015
[21] Lee, J. A., & Kacen, J. J. (2008). Cultural influences on consumer satisfaction with impulse and planned purchase decisions. Journal of Business Research, 61(3), 265-272.
[22] Lin, H.-F. (2006). Understanding behavioral intention to participate in virtual communities. CyberPsychology & Behavior 9(5), 540-547. DOI: 10.1089/cpb.2006.9.540
[23] McCroskey, J., Richmond, V. P., & Daly, J. A. (1975). The development of a measure of perceived homophily in interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1(4), 323-332. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00281.x
[24] Mittal, V., Huppertz, J. W., & Khare, A. (2008). Customer complaining: the role of tie strength and information control. Journal of Retailing, 84(2), 195-204.
[25] Moorman, C., Deshpande, R., & Zaltman, G. (1993). Factors affecting trust in market research relationships. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 81-101. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299305700106
[26] Pigg, K. E., & Crank, L. D. (2004). Building community social capital: The potential and promise of information and communications technologies. The Journal of Community Informatics, 1(1), 58-73. https://doi.org/10.15353/joci.v1i1.2062
[27] Rogers, E. M., & Bhowmik, D. K. (1970). Homophily-heterophily: Relational concepts for communication research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34(4), 523-538. https://doi.org/10.1086/267838
[28] Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business Students (5th ed.). London: Pearson.
[29] Sharma, S. & Rehman, A. (2017). Impact of social relationships on electronic word of mouth in social networking sites: a study of Indian social network users. International Journal of Electronic Marketing and Retailing, 8(2), 93-115.
[30] 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00310.x
[31] Stewart, D. W., & Pavlou, P. A. (2002). From consumer response to active consumer: Measuring the effectiveness of interactive media. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(4), 376-396.
[32] Taras, V., & Steel, P. (2009). Beyond Hofstede: Challenging the ten commandments of cross-cultural research. In C. Nakata (Ed.), Beyond Hofstede: Culture Frameworks for Global Marketing and Management. Macmillan/Palgrave. DOI: 10.1057/9780230240834_3
[33] Thelwall, M. (2009). Homophily in MySpace. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(2), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20978
[34] Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (2020). Riding the Waves of Cultures: Understanding Diversity in Global Business.4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
[35] Wallace, E., Buil, I., & De Chernatony, L. (2012). Facebook ‘friendship’and brand advocacy. Journal of Brand Management, 20(2), 128-146. DOI:10.1057/bm.2012.45
[36] Wang, T., Yeh, R.-J., Chen, C., & Tsydypov, Z. (2016). What drives electronic word-of-mouth on social networking sites? Perspectives of social capital and self-determination. Telematics and Informatics, 33(4), 1034-1047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.03.005