Language Abstraction in Word of Mouth

By Gaby Schellekens, Peeter W. J. Verlegh, Ale Smidts. 2010

170 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Marketing, Sociology and Political Science, Human-Computer Interaction

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f12dd642cf7c0e8cf50dda5bd8e972a821fcd1e2

How researchers see this paper

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

In Marketing

In Sociology and Political Science

In Human-Computer Interaction

Citations in the corpus

(I'm) Happy to Help (You): The Impact of Personal Pronoun Use in Customer–Firm Interactions (2018, background): “…been shown to affect consumers’ self-control and motivation (Patrick and Hagtvedt 2012; Senay, Albarracı́n, andNoguchi 2010),word ofmouth (Moore 2012; Schellekens, Verlegh, and Smidts 2010), and responses to persuasion attempts (Kronrod, Grinstein, andWathieu 2011; Sela,Wheeler, and Sarial-Abi…”
How Language Shapes Word of Mouth's Impact (2017, background): “…social interactions, researchers have begun to examine the consequences of language-related phenomena such as abstract versus concrete word use (Schellekens, Verlegh, and Smidts 2010), boasting (Packard, Gershoff, and Wooten 2016), explained actions (Moore 2015), figurative language (Kronrod…”
The Enhancing Versus Backfiring Effects of Positive Emotion in Consumer Reviews (2020, background): “…of content, researchers have increasingly aimed to understand both what drives consumers to express their opinions and share content as well as the kind of content that is most impactful (King, Racherla, and Bush 2014; Moore 2015; Packard and Berger 2017; Schellekens, Verlegh, and Smidts 2010).”
Selectively Emotional: How Smartphone Use Changes User-Generated Content (2019, unknown): “Prior work on online WOM has shown that its impact or persuasiveness depends on factors such as the characteristics of the reviewer (e.g., Godes and Mayzlin 2009) and the characteristics of the review itself, such as its linguistic characteristics (e.g., Schellekens, Verlegh, and Smidts 2010).”
Word of Mouth: What We Know and What We Have Yet to Learn (2013, unknown): “Similarly, Schellekens, Verlegh, and Smidts (2010) show that the use of abstract versus concrete language magnifies the effect of WOM’s valence on consumers’ purchase intentions and on their attitudes towards a product.”
“Wii Will Rock You!” The Use and Effect of Figurative Language in Consumer Reviews of Hedonic and Utilitarian Consumption (2013, background): “Surprisingly, one factor that has received practically no attention is the language that consumers use to describe consumption (for exceptions, see Moore 2012; Schellekens et al. 2010).”
Perceived Helpfulness of Online Consumer Reviews: The Role of Message Content and Style (2010, background): “In general, there is much potential in examining the use of language in WOM messages, both in terms of when consumers tend to make specific language choices and how those choices affect the impact of the message (for example, see Schellekens et al., 2010).”