the social exchange of viral ads
DESCRIPTION
The Social Exchange of Viral Ads Sharing Motivations, Brand Relationships, and SNS Trust in Viral Advertising Processes. Dr. Jameson Hayes Assistant Professor, Zimmerman Advertising Program March 28 , 2014. Impetus. Shift Towards Viral Advertising. Literature. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
The Social Exchange of Viral Ads
Sharing Motivations, Brand Relationships, and SNS Trust in Viral Advertising Processes
Dr. Jameson HayesAssistant Professor, Zimmerman Advertising Program
March 28, 2014
Impetus
188.5 M Ams. watched online
videos in Aug ‘13 (comScore)
22.7B online video ad views in August
2013(comScore)
Online video spending to double
by 2016(eMarketer)
Marketers with an Eye Toward Viral
Scope(Adap.TV)
Shift Towards Viral Advertising
Viral Advertising Research• Benefits of Viral Advertising (Southgate et al. 2010)• Creative Determinants (Eckler & Bolls 2011)• Web 2.0 Tools (Moran & Gossieaux 2010)
Knowledge Gaps• Sharing Motivations’ Impact on Viral Processes• Online video ad sharing• Viral Activity within SNSs• Brand Relationship Impact
Literature
Conceptual Background
Social Exchange Theory
Customer-brand Relationships
Information Exchange
• Molm (1997)• Lawler &Yoon (1996)
• Fournier (1998)• Hess & Story (2005)
• Nahapiet & Ghoshal (1998)
• Constant, Kiesler, & Sproul (1998)
Two Proposed Sharing Processes
Co-referral passing along the brand content endorsed by someone else to one’s social network (i.e.”Like” or retweet)
Referral act of referring the brand content to one’s social network (i.e. post/tweet)
Brand Relationship
Strength
OpinionGiving
Propensity
OpinionGiving
Propensity
SNSTrust
Likelihood ofReferral
Sharing Motivations
(ALT, TR, EB, & REL)
The Referral Decision Process
RQ1: Which?
H1 H2 RQ2
Opinion-Giving
Propensity
Brand Relationship
Strength
OpinionGiving
Propensity
SNSTrust
Likelihood ofCo-referral
Sharing Motivations
(ALT, TR, EB, & REL)
The Co-referral Decision Process
Opinion-Seeking
Propensity
H3 H4 RQ4RQ5
RQ3: Which?
Methodology
Purpose: Examine proposed processes
Design: 2 X 2 X 2 online experiment
Analyses: multiple regression
Sample: 409 U.S. Facebook users age 18-34 (42% M, 58% F)
Stimuli
Viral Video Ad Stimuli Facebook Referral Stimuli
Results – Referral Process
Process Hyp/RQ DescriptionRisk Level
Computers Candy
ReferralProcess
RQ1 Which SMs? LoR All SMs All SMs
H1 SMs X BRS LoR SupportedPartially Supported
(EB, REP, REL)
H2 SMs X TR LoR Not Supported Supported
RQ2 SMs X OGP LoR? No REL only
Results – Co-referral Process
Process Hyp/RQ DescriptionRisk Level
Computers Candy
Co-referralProcess
RQ4 Which SMs? LoCR ALT, EB, & REP All SMs
H3 SMs X BRS LoCRPartially Supported
(REP Only)Not Supported
H4 SMs X TR LoCRPartially Supported
(EB only)Not supported
RQ5 SMs X OGP LoCR No No
RQ6 SMs X OSP LoCR No No
General Discussion
The Ad Referral Process
• Reciprocal Altruism • Brand Relationship Enhances Sharing Motivation Impact• Brand Crucial When Risk is High• SNS Trust Crucial When Risk is Low
The Ad Co-referral Process
• Co-referral Largely Driven by Self-Interest• Brand Relationships Enhance Reputation w/ High Risk Ads• SNS Trust Ensures Expected Benefits w/ High Risk Ads• Low Risk Ads Shared for Relational Maintenance