2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.09.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Examining the relationship between language divergence and word-of-mouth intentions

Abstract: 2Examining the relationship between language divergence and word-of-mouth intentions AbstractMore than half of the countries in the world are multilingual, and more than half the world's consumers speak more than one language. Thus, bilingual consumers often receive services provided in a second or nonnative language. This article examines these consumers' word-ofmouth intentions after a service provision in a second language. Two studies show that consumers served in a second language are less likely to sprea… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
0
16
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These three types of responses appear to enhance a frustrated customer's trust in the bank. Many scholars acknowledged a customer–company bonding upon a communication that leads to customer self‐identification with the company, often mediated by the language utilized (Helal et al, ; Martin & Lueg, ; Tang, Chen, & Gillenson, ; Vaerenbergh & Holmqvist, ). A customer's negative response turning into aggression can be prevented if banks offer an apology and explanation within 24 business hours for rigorous customers (i.e., moderate online nWOM) and within a business day and/or compensation for confrontational customers (i.e., severe online nWOM).…”
Section: Discussion: the Complainant–recipient Model Of Online Nwommentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…These three types of responses appear to enhance a frustrated customer's trust in the bank. Many scholars acknowledged a customer–company bonding upon a communication that leads to customer self‐identification with the company, often mediated by the language utilized (Helal et al, ; Martin & Lueg, ; Tang, Chen, & Gillenson, ; Vaerenbergh & Holmqvist, ). A customer's negative response turning into aggression can be prevented if banks offer an apology and explanation within 24 business hours for rigorous customers (i.e., moderate online nWOM) and within a business day and/or compensation for confrontational customers (i.e., severe online nWOM).…”
Section: Discussion: the Complainant–recipient Model Of Online Nwommentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This indicates that providers' practices of company–customer trust development, in the form of WOM communication, is instrumental in discouraging customers from participating in online nWOM practices. For Vaerenbergh and Holmqvist (, p. 1601), customers' intent to engage in nWOM is determined by language divergence, that is, the “provider('s) diverge(nce) from the consumer's language.” According to Vaerenbergh and Holmqvist (), failure to use customers' native language confronts customers' presumptions of the similarity attraction paradigm (i.e., similarity between provider and customer), implying a basis for nWOM. Pee () posited that detailed product information and low price affect decisions to partake in nWOM, whereas Helal et al () revealed that online providers' failure to provide content that is relevant to customers' presumption of self‐identity has implications for how customers spread online nWOM.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Here, the calibrated sigma method is especially useful when comparing Likert-type data in different languages, including samples that share the same nationality but use a different language, a common situation in marketing research (Holmqvist & Van Vaerenbergh, 2013;Van Vaerenbergh & Holmqvist, 2014;Weijters, et al, in press). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Social media content was based on items gathered from Kim and Ko () and Bhattacherjee and Sanford (). Three items from Van Vaerenbergh and Holmqvist () were used to measure WOM , whilst interaction was measured using three items provided by Kim and Ko (). Message credibility was measured incorporating items from Bhattacherjee and Sanford () and Chang et al ().…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%