The Impact of Comedic Violence on Viral Advertising Effectiveness

By Mark Brown, Roop Kumar Bhadury, Nigel K. L. Pope. 2010

131 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Marketing, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/68b9a209f4ed227643e864d8e15811c34c2407cb

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Marketing

1. Kellie Newstead
2. Karen Nelson-Field
3. Erica Riebe

In Social Psychology

1. Kellie Newstead
2. Karen Nelson-Field
3. Erica Riebe

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Kellie Newstead
2. Karen Nelson-Field
3. Erica Riebe

Citations in the corpus

• Word of Mouth: What We Know and What We Have Yet to Learn (2013, unknown): “…channels which has led to renewed interest in commercially incentivized WOM, where the origin of a message is a commercial entity and where some consumers may receive an incentive for spreading a message (Leskovec, Adamic, and Huberman 2007; De Bruyn and Lilien 2008; Brown, Bhadury, and Pope 2010).”
• The Emotions that Drive Viral Video (2013, methodology): “However unlike Porter and Golan (2006), Brown et al. (2010) suggested that the strength of an audience’s emotional reaction to the campaign would also affect whether that content would be shared.”
• Attitude Toward the Viral Ad: Expanding Traditional Advertising Models to Interactive Advertising (2013, background): “…such as e-WOM (e.g., Duan, Gu, andWhinston 2008; Hennig-Thurau et al. 2004; Lee and Song 2010), social media (e.g., Agiichtein et al. 2008; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010), and viral marketing (e.g. Brown, Bhadury, and Pope 2010; De Bruyn and Lilien 2008; Ho and Dempsey 2010; Phelps et al. 2004).”