口碑研究online

如何提高口碑行銷的有效性？〈II〉─ 信不信由誰？

可信度（credibility）是網路口碑採用（eWOM adoption）最重要的前因之ㄧ。在訊息說服過程之初，最重要的關鍵便是接收者對訊息本身的可信度判斷，而非訊息傳遞者或組織（Wathen & Burkell, 2002; Cheung et al., 2009）。

Cheung et al. (2009)在研究中引用雙歷程理論（dual-process theory）[i]，將影響網路口碑評論說服力的前因分為資訊性影響（informational influence）[ii]和規範性影響（normative influence）[iii]兩構面。資訊性影響是網路口碑訊息內容本身對消費者的可信度認知（perceived eWOM credibility）所產生的影響，規範性影響則是指其他評論讀者所造成的影響。根研究結果，在資訊性影響方面「論點強度（argument strength）、來源可信度（source credibility）和符合接收者過去信仰程度（confirmation of the receiver’s prior belief）」三個變數對可信度認知有非常顯著的正向影響（另外兩個關於評論方向性的變數不顯著）；規範性方面，推薦一致性（recommendation consistency）與推薦排名（recommendation rating）也都有顯著的正向影響。

參照這樣的實證結果，口碑行銷者或許會誤以為只要根據以上要點，找具有公信力的評論者（如知名部落客）寫立論清楚的推薦文，或者在知名論壇中（具有來源可信度）發動寫手大量撰寫推薦文便可藉由輕易地說服消費者。然而，事實真的是這樣嗎？

根據該實驗結果，當評論內容與消費者過去信任不一致時，消費者會傾向相信自己過去的經驗和認識。要取得消費者的信任，最重要的第一步就是不要違背他們對產品的信仰，對於表現不好的廠商而言，大方承認自己的錯誤和缺點反而是取得信任的最佳方式。

Cheung et al. (2009)進一步分析（post-hoc analyses）更發現，推薦一致性的強度受到消費者涉入程度影響，當消費者本身對討論的主題愈了解時，他愈不易受到推薦一致性該因素影響。並且當消費者本身對該討論主題有豐富的知識，來源可信度對他的訊息可信度認知影響也不高。

由以上這三點進階的研究結果，我們會發現無論是哪些因素影響消費者對網路口碑可信度的認知，最關鍵的決定因素還是在消費者身上。消費者的過去信仰、對該主題的知識豐富程度和涉入程度，是決定他們是否會被網路口碑可信度影響的關鍵因素。由此可見，利用網路口碑評論說服消費者的過程並不單純。建議行銷者在進行口碑行銷活動前，務必花時間弄清楚目標顧客群的底細（對目標產品的期望或抱怨、了解產品的程度、目標客群的背景），並且依照這些底細擬定詳細的取信戰略。

參考文獻

Cheung, Man Yee, Chuan Luo, Choon Ling Sia, & Huaping Chen (2009), “Credibility of Electronic Word-of-Mouth: Informational and Normative Determinants of On-line Consumer Recommendations”, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 13 (4), 9–38.

 Wathen, C.N., and J. Burkell (2002), “Believe it or not: Factors influencing credibility on the Web,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53 (2), 134–144.

[i] Dual-process theory

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_process_theory

In psychology, a dual process theory provides an account of how a phenomenon can occur in two different ways, or as a result of two different processes. Often, the two processes consist of an implicit (automatic), unconscious process and an explicit (controlled), conscious process. Verbalized explicit processes or attitudes and actions may change with persuasion or education; though implicit process or attitudes usually take a long amount of time to change with the forming of new habits. Dual process theories can be found in social, personality, cognitive, and clinical psychology.

 [ii] Informational influence

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_process_theory

Informational social influence occurs when one turns to the members of one's group to obtain accurate information. A person is most likely to use informational social influence in three situations: When a situation is ambiguous, people become uncertain about what to do. They are more likely to depend on others for the answer. During a crisis when immediate action is necessary, in spite of panic. Looking to other people can help ease fears, but unfortunately they are not always right. The more knowledgeable a person is, the more valuable they are as a resource. Thus people often turn to experts for help. But once again people must be careful, as experts can make mistakes too. Informational social influence often results in internalization or private acceptance, where a person genuinely believes that the information is right.

Informational social influence was first documented in Muzafer Sherif's autokinetic experiment.[4] He was interested in how many people change their opinions to bring them in line with the opinion of a group. Participants were placed in a dark room and asked to stare at a small dot of light 15 feet away. They were then asked to estimate the amount it moved. The trick was there was no movement, it was caused by a visual illusion known as the autokinetic effect. Every person perceived different amounts of movement. Over time, the same estimate was agreed on and others conformed to it. Sherif suggested that this was a simulation for how social norms develop in a society, providing a common frame of reference for people.

[iii] Normative influence

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_process_theory

Normative social influence occurs when one conforms to be liked or accepted by the members of the group. It usually results in public compliance, doing or saying something without believing in it. Solomon E. Asch was the first psychologist to study this phenomenon in the laboratory. He conducted a modification of Sherif’s study, assuming that when the situation was very clear, conformity would be drastically reduced. He exposed people in a group to a series of lines, and the participants were asked to match one line with a standard line. All participants except one were secretly told to give the wrong answer in 12 of the 18 trials. The results showed a surprisingly high degree of conformity. 76% of the participants conformed on at least one trial. On average people conformed one third of the time.[7]

Normative influence is a function of social impact theory which has three components.[8] The number of people in the group has a surprising effect. As the number increases, each person has less of an impact. A group's strength is how important the group is to a person. Groups we value generally have more social influence. Immediacy(直接性) is how close the group is in time and space when the influence is taking place. Psychologists have constructed a mathematical model using these three factors and are able to predict the amount of conformity that occurs with some degree of accuracy.[9]

An experiment using procedures similar to Asch's found that there was significantly less conformity in six-person groups of friends as compared to six-person groups of strangers.[11McKelvey, W. & Kerr, N. H. (1988). Differences in conformity among friends and strangers. Psychological Reports, 62, 759-762.] Because friends already know and accept each other, there may be less normative pressure to conform in some situations. Field studies on cigarette and alcohol abuse, however, generally demonstrate evidence of friends exerting normative social influence on each other.[12]