Samenvatting
Language in Social Media Summary (2022)
Summary of all 16 discussed academic papers in the Language in Social Media classes (Weeks 1-5).
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 3 van de 20 pagina's
Voorbeeld 3 van de 20 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Verkoper
Volgen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Language in Social MediaWeek 1
Van Hooijdonk, C. & Liebrecht, C. (2021). Sorry but no sorry. The use and effects of airline webcare
responses to NeWOM messages of flight passengers.
Customers often voice their complaints to large audiences on social media, especially Twitter. Research
has shown that negative electronic word-of-mouth hurts the brand’s reputation, which means that
brands have to monitor and talk to complaining customers in an effort to save face, also known as
webcare. Apologies can be equivocal, indicating that they could backfire in case the brand issues an
apology as this may hint that they are the only ones responsible for the inconvenience.
This paper features two research questions:
• RQ1 → How do airline companies offer apologies to complaining customers on Twitter?
• RQ2 → How does offering an apology with and without a defensive and/or accommodative
strategy affect passengers’ perceptions of the airline’s reputation?
An apology indicates that an inconvenience has occurred and that it requires remedy, effectively making
customer complaints a request for remedy. These apologies are also accompanied with response
strategies, starting with accommodative and defensive. Accommodative responses indicate a high
degree of responsibility for failure while defensive ones are low. Accommodative responses accept the
inconvenience, and these responses vary from providing information (low-moderately accommodative)
to corrective actions (highly accommodative). Defensive responses deny responsibility and they resort
to justification and denial of the unfortunate event.
Brands do not issue apologies often (only 10%). However, accommodative responses (including
apologies) are still more common than defensive responses. This may be caused by the fact that
apologizing may imply responsibility.
This paper features five hypotheses:
• H1 → Airlines’ webcare responses to NeWOM tweets will rarely contain an apology
• H2 → Airlines’ webcare apologies will be combined with accommodative rather than defensive
strategies
• H3 → Airlines’ webcare apologies will often contain the word sorry instead of regret/apology
• H4 → Stakeholders’ perception of brand reputation will be more positive with the presence of
an apology in a webcare response to a lost luggage complaint than the absence of an apology
• H5 → Stakeholders’ perception of brand reputation will be more positive with the presence of a
defensive accommodative strategy in a webcare apology to a lost luggage complaint than the
absence of these response strategies
Webcare serves as customer care, reputation management and public relations, allowing brands to meet
or possibly exceed customers’ expectations and avoid negative third-party views. Webcare prevents
NeWOM messages from turning into crises and further reputation damage. Apologies alone are not
,enough because they do not take responsibility for solving issues, making it important to combine
apologies with the aforementioned response strategies.
Webcare response strategies are divided into seven categories that can be allocated to three main
strategies (passive, defensive, and accommodative). Passive strategies are redirections to other
communication channels, defensive strategies consist of denial and justification, while accommodative
strategies consist of corrective action, apologizing, sympathy, and informing.
The results indicate that webcare responses with justification (defensive) and corrective action
(accommodative) perform the best in all three scenarios (credibility, reliability, and credibility in
responses without an apology).
Apologies were by far the most common on Twitter, defying the hypothesis that brands rarely issue
apologies. This may have occurred because only conversations starting with complaints were picked.
Airlines combined apologies with multiple response strategies, aligning with previous research. In
contradiction to SCCT expectations, apologies and their presence did not enhance brand reputation.
However, combining defensive and accommodative strategies did enhance the reputation. Combining
justifications and corrective actions likely decreased perceived responsibility and enhanced perceived
credibility respectively. Ultimately, the context in which apologies are offered are also important for
effectiveness.
Park, H. & Lee, H. (2013). Show us you are real: The effect of human-versus-organizational presence on
online relationship building through social networking sites.
Social media has enhanced how people exchange information and interact with each other. It also allows
companies to interact with their audiences in a more personal way, which in turn provides better
opportunities for dialogue. Conversational human voice (CHV) is key to improving these ties, which is all
about making people perceive that they are talking to humans instead of robots in organizational
communication. It is related to social presence theory, which in a nutshell points out that greater social
presence is perceived as more sociable, sensitive, personal, and warm. Elements such as your own
profile pictures increase human presence and make communication look more interpersonal and
conversational.
Organization-public relationships cover the situation between an organization and its key audiences and
how either of their actions affect each other’s economic, social, cultural, and political well-being. There
are four key constructs to assess this, namely trust, control mutuality, satisfaction, and commitment. All
of these are built up through communications featuring high social presence.
Dialogic communication is any communication in which ideas and opinions are exchanged.
Organizations can boost dialogue by focusing on interpersonal communication provided by social media,
allowing them to convince people that they are no longer talking to faceless corporates. Once their social
media pages give an impression of true human contact, the audience is more open to voicing their
opinions and thoughts about the organization and their offered products/services.
Word-of-mouth (WOM) is any communication between consumers about the characteristics of
products/services provided by a certain company, especially product reviews. Positive word-of-mouth is
, essentially free marketing for the organizations receiving these positive reviews. Word-of-mouth
intentions and word-of-mouth behaviors are also aligned with good relationships.
Therefore, we can formulate the following four hypotheses:
• H1 → Participants’ perceptions of an organization’s CHV will be greater when its social
networking page has a human presence rather than an organizational presence
• H2 → Participants will perceive more favorable relationships with an organization when its social
networking page has a human presence rather than an organizational presence
• H3 → Participants will have stronger intentions to engage in dialogic communication when its
social networking page has a human presence rather than an organizational presence
• H4 → Participants will have stronger intentions to engage in positive WOM communication for
an organization when its social networking page has a human presence rather than an
organizational presence
H1 is supported as the results show that better CHV and good relationships are achieved in human
presence compared to organizational presence. The effects of organization type were also significant on
CHV, but this did not apply to two-way interaction between presence type and organization type. H2 was
also supported because human presence indeed boosted trust, commitment, control mutuality, and
satisfaction. H3 was unsupported as participants had equal intentions to engage in dialogic
communication regardless of presence type, whereas H4 was supported because participants were more
likely to share WOM when the organization had a human presence.
Page, R., Barton, D., Unger, J. W., & Zappavigna, M. (2014). Researching the language of social media:
A student guide.
Social media is any Internet-based medium that provides social interaction between participants,
ranging from social networks, content sharing, forums, blogs, and podcasts. Social media is different
from regular mass media because it is of a many-to-many broadcasting nature instead of one-to-many.
Social media is as old as 1978 (bulletin board systems) but it was not until the mid- to late-1990s that
social media relocated to public contexts instead of private or semi-private ones, turning into the
multimedia-based platforms we know today. Social media interactions lean towards information
exchange and interpersonal relationships instead of task-based transactions (buying tickets, online
banking).
Web 2.0 was coined to outline the shift from web users being consumers (reading news) to creators
(YouTubers) and the introduction of apps, succeeding Web 1.0, which consisted of basic text-only
websites. However, these terms are not widely accepted because there is no consensus on where to
pinpoint the border between each Web generation.
There are two key models to classify social media types and medium/situation factors, both being open-
ended because this makes classification more flexible and recognize variety between social media
platforms. Kaplan and Haenlein’s (2009) factors for classifying social media types are further categorized
into media characteristics and social characteristics. The media characteristics are social presence
(degree of mediation/immediacy) and media richness (amount of information) while the social
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper Beezin. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €6,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 67096 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen