2019 | 27 | 4 | 127-152
Article title

Negative WoM and its Transmission on OSN: The Determining Role of the Seeding Population

Title variants
Negatywne opinie oraz ich rozprzestrzenianie się w internetowych mediach społecznościowych: rola wyznacznikowa populacji początkowej
Languages of publication
This paper is a contribution to the knowledge of WoM transmis­sion on OSN. We specifically analyze the role of the seeding popula­tion diffusion of negative WoM. The method is based on an experi­ment on the Facebook fan base of an existing company. We manage to control the four elements of a successful WoM communication: the message, the social structure of the network, the characteristics of the individuals in the network, and the seeding population. We de­velop an original method to dissociate a seeding population from the general population and compare the diffusion of a set of negative messages distributed to both the original population and the artifi­cially targeted subset. Results show the impact of the seeding popu­lation’s characteristics on the diffusion of consumers’ negative mes­sages. We specifically show the impact of the carrier on the virality of the message.
Artykuł stanowi wkład w wiedzę dotyczącą transmisji WoM (Word of Mouth) w sieciach społecznościowych (OSN). Analizujemy w szcze­gólności rolę rozprzestrzeniania się antyreklamy w populacji użyt­kowników. Metoda badawcza opiera się na eksperymencie wykona­nym na społeczności fanów realnie istniejącej marki na Facebooku. Udało nam się poddać kontroli cztery elementy skutecznej komuni­kacji WoM: komunikat, strukturę społeczną sieci, charakterystykę jed­nostek w sieci, populację początkową (seeding population). Wypraco­waliśmy autorską metodę wyodrębniania takiej populacji z ogółu oraz porównywania rozprzestrzeniania się zestawu negatywnych komuni­katów dostarczonych zarówno populacji pierwotnej, jak i sztucznie wyznaczonemu jej podzbiorowi. Wyniki pokazują skutki oddziaływa­nia cech populacji początkowej na wiralne rozprzestrzenianie się ne­gatywnych opinii konsumentów. Ukazujemy w szczególności wpływ nośnika komunikatu na jego wiralność.
Physical description
  • Agorapulse, Facebook Page Barometer, 2015, http://barometer.agorapulse. com/ (access: 05.12.2015).
  • Arndt J., Role of product-related conversations in the diffusion of a new product, “Journal of Marketing Research IV,” 1967, pp. 291-295.
  • Bakshy E., Rosenn I., Marlow C., Adamic L., The role of social networks in information diffusion, Proceedings of the 21st …, 2012.
  • Bampo M., Ewing M.T., Mather D.R., Stewart D., Wallace M., The Effects of the Social Structure of Digital Networks on Viral Marketing Performance, “Information Systems Research,” 2008, 19, pp. 273-290. DOI: 10.1287/isre.1070.0152.
  • Barnes N.G., Lescault A.M., Wright S., Fortune 500 Are Bullish on Social Media, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, cmr/socialmediaresearch/2013fortune500, 2013.
  • Bassett E., O’Riordan K., Ethics of Internet research: Contesting the human subjects research model, “Ethics and Information Technology,” 2002, pp. 1-16.
  • Berger J., Milkman K., What makes online content viral? Available at SSRN 1528077 XLIX, 2009, pp. 192-205.
  • Bernstein M., Bakshy E., Burke M., Karrer B., Quantifying the invisible audience in social networks, “Proceedings of the SIGCHI,” 2013.
  • Booth N., Matic J., Mapping and leveraging influencers in social media to shape corporate brand perceptions, “Corporate Communications: An International Journal,” 2011.
  • Brown J., Reingen P., Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior, “Journal of Consumer research,” 1987, pp. 350-363.
  • Champoux V., Durgee J., McGlynn L., Corporate Facebook pages: when “fans” attack, “Journal of Business Strategy,” 2012, 33, pp. 22-30. DOI:10.1108/02756661211206717.
  • Constine J., Why Is Facebook Page Reach Decreasing? More Competition and Limited Attention, 2014, -feed-problem.
  • Cuvelier E., Aufaure M., EVARIST : un outil de monitoring du buzz et de l’e reputation sur Twitter 1 Introduction 2 Twitter et Micro-Blogging, 2011.
  • Dunn H., Allen C., Rumors, urban legends and internet hoaxes, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of …, 2005, pp. 85-91.
  • East R., Hammond K., Wright M., The relative incidence of positive and negative word of mouth: A multi-category study, “International Journal of Research in Marketing,” 2007, 24, pp. 175-184. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2006.12.004.
  • Fournier S., Avery J., The uninvited brand, “Business Horizons,” 2011, 54, pp. 193-207. DOI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.001.
  • Galeotti A., Goyal S., Influencing the influencers: a theory of strategic diffusion, “The RAND Journal of Economics,” 2009, 40, pp. 509-532. DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-2171.2009.00075.x.
  • Gillin P., Attack of the Customers: The Pampers Dry Max Crisis, 2012, 1-7.
  • Hann I.-H., Hui K.-L., Lee S.-Y.T., Png I.P.L., Consumer Privacy and Marketing Avoidance: A Static Model, “Management Science,” 2008, 54, pp. 1094-1103. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1070.0837.
  • Hansen D., Shneiderman B., Smith M., Analyzing social media networks with NodeXL: Insights from a connected world, Proceedings of the …, 2011.
  • Heath C., Heath D., Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard, New York 2010.
  • Heiderich D., Influence sur internet. Observatoire International des Crises, 2009.
  • Herbig P., Milewicz J., The relationship of reputation and credibility to brand success, “Journal of Consumer Marketing,” 1993, 10, pp. 18-24. DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000002601.
  • Hey J.D., Experimental economics and deception: A comment, “Journal of Economic Psychology,” 1998, 19, 397-401. DOI: 10.1016/S0167-4870(98)00013-0.
  • Hill S., Provost F., Volinsky C., Network-Based Marketing: Identifying Likely Adopters via Consumer Networks, “Statistical Science,” 2006, 21, pp. 256-276. DOI: 10.1214/088342306000000222.
  • Hinz O., Skiera B., Barrot C., Becker J., Seeding strategies for viral marketing: an empirical comparison, “Journal of Marketing,” 2011, 75, pp. 55-71.
  • Hudson J., Bruckman A., Using empirical data to reason about internet research ethics, ECSCW 2005.
  • Hudson J.M., Bruckman A.S., The Bystander Effect: A Lens for Understanding Patterns of Participation, “Journal of the Learning Sciences,” 2004, 13, pp. 165-195. DOI: 10.1207/s15327809jls1302_2.
  • Kamins M., Folkes V., Perner L., Consumer responses to rumors: Good news, bad news, “Journal of Consumer Psychology,” 1997, pp. 22-23. DOI: 10.1207/ s15327663jcp0602.
  • Krombholz K., Merkl D., Weippl E., Fake identities in social media: A case study on the sustainability of the Facebook business model, “Journal of Service Science Research,” 2012, 4, pp. 175-212. DOI: s12927-012-0008-z.
  • Laczniak R.N., DeCarlo T.E., Ramaswami S.N., Consumers’ Responses to Negative Word-of-Mouth Communication: An Attribution Theory Perspective, “Journal of Consumer Psychology,” 2001, 11, pp. 57-73. DOI: 10.1207/ S15327663JCP1101_5.
  • Lee N., Facebook used you like a lab rat and you probably don’t care, Engadget International Editions, 2014, facebook-experiment.
  • Li C., Bernoff J., Groundswell: Winning in a world transformed by social technologies, 2011.
  • Liu-Thompkins Y., Seeding viral content: The Role of Message and Network Factors, “Journal of Advertising Research,” 2012, 52, 465. DOI: 10.2501/ JAR-52-4-465-478.
  • Loomer J., No, Facebook Organic Page Reach Is Not Dead, 2015, http://www.
  • Miller S., The Bigger the Facebook Page, the Harder it is to Reach Fans, 2013, -the-harder-it-is-to-reach-fans.
  • Naylor G., Kleiser S., Negative versus positive word-of-mouth: An exception to the rule, “Journal of Consumer Satisfaction,” 2000.
  • Rashid, F.Y., IT Security & Network Security News: Facebook Scammers Create Fake Profiles to Facebook Scammers Create Fake Profiles to Spam Users, Click-Jacking ..., 2012.
  • Rheingold H., Smart mobs: The next social revolution, Social Forces. Basic Books, 2007.
  • Scarpi, D., Does size matter? An examination of small and large web-based brand communities, “Journal of Interactive Marketing,” 2010.
  • Silverman G., How to harness the awesome power of word of mouth, “Direct Marketing Review November,” 1997, 32-37.
  • Social Media Research Foundation, Social Network Importer for NodeXL, 2015,
  • Sprague R., Wells M.E., Regulating Online Buzz Marketing: Untangling a Web of Deceit, “American Business Law Journal,” 2010, 47, pp. 415-454. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1714.2010.01100.x.
  • Steel E., Nestlé takes a beating on social-media sites, “The Wall Street Journal,” 2010.
  • Ugander J., Karrer B., Backstrom L., Marlow C., The anatomy of the Facebook social graph, “arXiv,” 2011, pp. 1-17.
  • Vaille E., La prise en compte du risque d’opinion dans les stratégies d’influences sur Internet, 2010.
  • Valente T.W., Network interventions, “Science” (New York, N.Y.), 2012, 337, pp. 49-53. DOI:10.1126/science.1217330
  • Valente T.W., Myers R., The Messenger is the Medium: Communication and Diffusion Principles in the Process of Behavior Change, “Estudios Sobre las Culturas,” 2010, XVI, pp. 249-276.
  • Valos M.J., Bednall D.H.B., Callaghan B., The impact of Porter’s strategy types on the role of market research and customer relationship management, “Marketing Intelligence & Planning,” 2007, 25, pp. 147-156. DOI:10.1108/02634500710737933
  • Vázquez-Casielles R., Suárez-Álvarez L., del Río-Lanza A.B., The word of mouth dynamic: How positive (and Negative) WOM drives purchase probability: An analysis of interpersonal and non-interpersonal factors, “Journal of Advertising Research,” 2013, 53, pp. 43-60. DOI:10.2501/JAR-53-1-043-060.
  • Watts D., Dodds P., Influentials, networks, and public opinion formation, “Journal of Consumer Research,” 2007, 34, pp. 441-458.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.