1. bookTom 26 (2022): Zeszyt 1 (January 2022)
Informacje o czasopiśmie
License
Format
Czasopismo
eISSN
2083-8506
Pierwsze wydanie
01 Jan 1997
Częstotliwość wydawania
1 raz w roku
Języki
Angielski
Otwarty dostęp

Webcare across public and private social networking sites: How stakeholders and the Netherlands Red Cross adapt their messages to channel affordances and constraints

Data publikacji: 21 Oct 2022
Tom & Zeszyt: Tom 26 (2022) - Zeszyt 1 (January 2022)
Zakres stron: 375 - 398
Informacje o czasopiśmie
License
Format
Czasopismo
eISSN
2083-8506
Pierwsze wydanie
01 Jan 1997
Częstotliwość wydawania
1 raz w roku
Języki
Angielski

Arora, A., Bansal, S., Kandpal, C., Aswani, R., & Dwivedi, Y. (2019). Measuring social media influencer index-insights from Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 49, 86–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.03.012 Search in Google Scholar

Béal, M., & Grégoire, Y. (2021). How do observers react to companies’ humorous responses to online public complaints? Journal of Service Research, 25(2), 242–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670521989448 Search in Google Scholar

Boot, A. B., Sang, E. T. K., Dijkstra, K., & Zwaan, R. A. (2019). How character limit affects language usage in tweets. Palgrave Communications, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0280-3 Search in Google Scholar

Briones, R. L., Kuch, B., Liu, B. F., & Jin, Y. (2011). Keeping up with the digital age: How the American Red Cross uses social media to build relationships. Public Relations Review, 37(1), 37–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.12.006 Search in Google Scholar

Church, K., & De Oliveira, R. (2013). What’s up with WhatsApp? Comparing mobile instant messaging behaviors with traditional SMS. In: MobileHCI ‘13: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Human-computer interaction with mobile devices and services (pp. 352–361). Association for Computing Machinery. Search in Google Scholar

Crijns, H., Cauberghe, V., Hudders, L., & Claeys, A. S. (2017). How to deal with online consumer comments during a crisis? The impact of personalized organizational responses on organizational reputation. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 619–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.046 Search in Google Scholar

Dijkmans, C., Kerkhof, P., Buyukcan-Tetik, A., & Beukeboom, C. J. (2015). Online conversation and corporate reputation: A two-wave longitudinal study on the effects of exposure to the social media activities of a highly interactive company. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(6), 632–648. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12132 Search in Google Scholar

Einwiller, S. A., & Steilen, S. (2015). Handling complaints on social network sites–An analysis of complaints and complaint responses on Facebook and Twitter pages of large US companies. Public Relations Review, 41(2), 195– 204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.11.012 Search in Google Scholar

Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1086/209380 Search in Google Scholar

Ghosh, T., & Mandal, S. (2020). Webcare quality: conceptualisation, scale development and validation. Journal of Marketing Management, 36(15–16), 1556–1590. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2020.1800797 Search in Google Scholar

Giles, H., Coupland, N., & Coupland, J. (1991). Accommodation theory: Communication, context, and consequence. In H. Giles, J. Coupland, & N. Coupland (Eds.), The contexts of accommodation: Developments in applied sociolinguistics (pp. 1–68). Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511663673 Search in Google Scholar

Grégoire, Y., Salle, A., & Tripp, T. M. (2015). Managing social media crises with your customers: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Business Horizons, 58(2), 173–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2014.11.001 Search in Google Scholar

Gretry, A., Horváth, C., Belei, N., & van Riel, A. C. (2017). “Don’t pretend to be my friend!” When an informal brand communication style backfires on social media. Journal of Business Research, 74, 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.01.012 Search in Google Scholar

Hachmang, D., & Keuning, A. (2020). Stand van Webcare 2020. https://www.upstream.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Stand-van-Webcare-juni-2020.pdf Search in Google Scholar

Hachmang, D. D., van Os, R., Akpinar, M., & van der Pool, E. (2019). Webcare via openbare en privé sociale media. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 41(2), 391–418.10.5117/TVT2019.2.003.HACH Search in Google Scholar

Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004). Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.10073 Search in Google Scholar

Huibers, J., & Verhoeven, J. (2014). Webcare als online reputatiemanagement. Het gebruik van webcarestrategieën en conversational human voice in Nederland, en de effecten hiervan op de corporate reputatie. Tijdschrift voor Communicatiewetenschap, 42(2), 165–189.10.5117/2014.042.002.165 Search in Google Scholar

Java, A., Song, X., Finin, T., & Tseng, B. (2007, August). Why we twitter: understanding microblogging usage and communities. In: WebKDD/SNAKDD ‘07: Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 workshop on Web mining and social network analysis (pp. 56–65). Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/1348549.1348556 Search in Google Scholar

Jakic, A., Wagner, M. O., & Meyer, A. (2017). The impact of language style accommodation during social media interactions on brand trust. Journal of Service Management, 28(3), 418–441. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-12-2016-0325 Search in Google Scholar

Jepma, L. (2017). Noodhulp Rode Kruis verdubbeld dankzij media monitoring. Obi4wan. https://www.obi4wan.com/nl/blog/inzet-rode-kruis-verdubbeld-door-omgevingsanalyse-via-social-media/ Search in Google Scholar

Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication bythe individual. In: J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research, Vol. 3 (pp. 19–34). Sage. Search in Google Scholar

Kelleher, T. (2009). Conversational voice, communicated commitment, and public relations outcomes in interactive online communication. Journal of Communication, 59(1), 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01410.x Search in Google Scholar

Krallman, A., Pelletier, M. J., & Adams, F. G. (2016). @ Size vs. #Impact: Social media engagement differences amongst Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. In: K. K. Kim (Ed.), Celebrating America’s pastimes: Baseball, hot dogs, apple pie and marketing? (pp. 557–561). Springer. Search in Google Scholar

Kwak, H., Lee, C., Park, H., & Moon, S. (2010). What is Twitter, a social network or a news media?. In WWW ‘10: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web (pp. 591–600). Association for Computing Machinery10.1145/1772690.1772751 Search in Google Scholar

Kwon, E. S., & Sung, Y. (2011). Follow me! Global marketers’ Twitter use. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 12(1), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2011.10722187 Search in Google Scholar

Liebrecht, C., Tsaousi, C., & van Hooijdonk, C. (2021). Linguistic elements of conversational human voice in online brand communication: Manipulations and perceptions. Journal of Business Research, 132, 124–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.03.050 Search in Google Scholar

Lovejoy, K., & Saxton, G. D. (2012). Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3), 337–353. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01576.x Search in Google Scholar

Manikonda, L., Meduri, V.V., & Kambhampati, S. (2016). Tweeting the mind and instagramming the heart: Exploring differentiated content sharing on social media. In: Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (Vol. 10, No. 1). Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. Search in Google Scholar

Muntinga, D.G., Moorman, M., & Smit, E.G. (2011). Introducing COBRAs. Exploring motivations for brand-related social media use. International Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 13–46. https://doi.org/10.2501/IJA-30-1-013-046 Search in Google Scholar

Page, R. (2014). Saying ‘sorry’: Corporate apologies posted on Twitter. Journal of Pragmatics, 62, 30–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.12.003 Search in Google Scholar

Papetti, C., Christofle, S., & Guerrier-Buisine, V. (2018). Digital tools: Their value and use for marketing purposes. In: M. Sotiriadis (Ed.), The Emerald handbook of entrepreneurship in tourism, travel and hospitality: Skills for successful ventures (pp. 277–295). Emerald Publishing. Search in Google Scholar

Phua, J., Jin, S. V., & Kim, J. J. (2017). Uses and gratifications of social networking sites for bridging and bonding social capital: A comparison of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 115–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.041 Search in Google Scholar

Quan-Haase, A., & Young, A. L. (2010). Uses and gratifications of social media: A comparison of Facebook and instant messaging. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(5), 350–361. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467610380009 Search in Google Scholar

Ruggiero, T. E. (2000) Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Communication and Society, 3(1), 3–36. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0301_02 Search in Google Scholar

Schamari, J., & Schaefers, T. (2015). Leaving the home turf: How brands can use webcare on consumer-generated platforms to increase positive consumer engagement. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 30, 20–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2014.12.001 Search in Google Scholar

Smith, A. N., Fischer, E., & Yongjian, C. (2012). How does brand-related user-generated content differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(2), 102–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2012.01.002 Search in Google Scholar

Society for New Communication Research. (2008). New media, new influencers and implications for public relations. http://www.palliativecare.issuelab.org/resources/928/928.pdf Search in Google Scholar

Van Hooijdonk, C., & Liebrecht, C. (2018). “Wat vervelend dat de fiets niet is opgeruimd! Heb je een zaaknummer voor mij? ^EK”. Conversational human voice in webcare van Nederlandse gemeenten. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 40(1), 45–81.10.5117/TVT2018.1.hooi Search in Google Scholar

Van Hooijdonk, C., & Liebrecht, C. (2021). Sorry but no sorry: The use and effects of apologies in airline webcare responses to NeWOM messages of flight passengers. Discourse, Context & Media, 40, 100442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2020.100442 Search in Google Scholar

Van Noort, G., & Willemsen, L. M. (2012). Online damage control: The effects of proactive versus reactive webcare interventions in consumer-generated and brand-generated platforms. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(3), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2011.07.001 Search in Google Scholar

Van Noort, G., Willemsen, L. M., Kerkhof, P., & Verhoeven, J. W. (2014). Webcare as anintegrative tool for stakeholder care, reputation management, and online marketing: A literature review. In: P. J. Kitchen, & E. Uzunoglu (Eds.), Integrated communications in the post-modern era (pp. 77–99). Palgrave Macmillan. Search in Google Scholar

Van Os, R., Hachmang, D., Akpinar, M., Keuning, A., & Derksen, M. (2018). Stand van Webcare 2018. https://www.upstream.nl/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/20180918-Onderzoek-Stand-van-Webcare-2018.pdf Search in Google Scholar

Van Os, R., Hachmang, D., & van der Pool, E. (2016). Webcare-strategieën door OV-aanbieders. Tijdschrift voor Communicatiewetenschap, 44(3), 231–252. Search in Google Scholar

Verheijen, L. (2019). Is textese a threat to traditional literacy? Dutch youths’ language use in written computer-mediated communication and relations with their school writing [Doctoral dissertation]. Radboud University Nijmegen). Search in Google Scholar

Voorveld, H. A. M., van Noort, G., Muntinga, D. G., & Bronner, F. (2018). Engagement with WhatsApp marketing: A study on WhatsApp brand communication and the role of trust in self-disclosure social media and social media advertising: The differentiating role of platform type. Journal of Advertising, 47(1), 38–54.10.1080/00913367.2017.1405754 Search in Google Scholar

Walther, J. B. (2011). Theories of computer-mediated communication and interpersonal relations. In: M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), The Sage handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 443–479). Sage. Search in Google Scholar

Waterloo, S. F., Baumgartner, S. E., Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2018). Norms of online expressions of emotion: Comparing Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and WhatsApp. New Media & Society, 20(5), 1813–1831. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817707349 Search in Google Scholar

Waters, R. D. (2009). The use of social media by nonprofit organizations: An examination from the diffusion of innovations perspective. In T. Dumova, & R. Fiordo (Eds.), Handbook of research on social interaction technologies and collaboration software: Concepts and trends (pp. 473–485). IGI Publishing. Search in Google Scholar

Weitzl, W., & Hutzinger, C. (2017). The effects of marketer- and advocate-initiated online service recovery responses on silent bystanders. Journal of Business Research, 80, 164–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.04.020 Search in Google Scholar

Zarouali, B., Brosius, A., Helberger, N., & De Vreese, C. H. (2021). WhatsApp marketing: A study on WhatsApp brand communication and the role of trust in self-disclosure. International Journal of Communication, 15, 252–276. Search in Google Scholar

Zhu, Y.-Q., & Chen, H.-G. (2015). Social media and human need satisfaction: Implications for social media marketing. Business Horizons, 58(3), 335–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2015.01.006 Search in Google Scholar

Polecane artykuły z Trend MD

Zaplanuj zdalną konferencję ze Sciendo