MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912522296 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2019.1.011

The effect of electronic word of mouth communication on purchase intention and brand image: An applicant smartphone brands in North Cyprus

2019· article· en· W2912522296 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muneer Alrwashdeh, Okechukwu Lawrence Emeagwali, Hasan Yousef Aljuhmani

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdvertisingWord of mouthBrand imageBusinessWord (group theory)MarketingPsychologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to examine the effects of electronic word of mouth communication (eWOM) among consumers on purchase intention and brand image, specifically, Generation Y and Z groups in relation to smartphone brands. The study utilizes an empirical research model using data collected from 402 valid respondents among consumers who use smartphone brands in North Cyprus. The study uses structural equation modeling (SEM) to explore and conduct the analysis. The results confirm the significant effects of eWOM on purchase intention through brand image and the moderating role of product type among eWOM, purchase intentions and brand image. The study also recommends that firms and marketers must concentrate on online communication channels to affect consumers' intention toward purchasing brands and brand image. Moreover, the current study model suggests that future study can be extended in different context, countries (i.e. developed, emerging, developing), industries (i.e. banks, e-commerce, tourism) and different social media platforms sites (i.e. Facebook, Twitter).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations95
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207