Who is an evangelist? Food tourists’ positive and negative eWOM behavior

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine food tourists’ engagement in positive and negative electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) by considering the following questions: Do satisfied customers engage in advocacy, and do dissatisfied customers make the same effort to spread their negative experiences? Which restaurant experience attributes influence eWOM behavior? What demographic and psychographic characteristics contribute to advocacy? Design/methodology/approach Using data from an online survey of 456 consumers with restaurant experience in the tourism context, this study applied simultaneous Tobit estimation to examine the research hypotheses. Findings Engagement in negative eWOM because of poor experiences was stronger than engagement in positive eWOM because of positive experiences. Food taste was a critical attribute for both positive and negative eWOM. Authenticity was influential for positive eWOM only, and value was influential for negative eWOM only. Atmosphere, service and location were found to be insignificant, indicating that they are ‘indifferent’ factors for eWOM in the food tourism context. Female customers were more active in negative advocacy, while Generation Y customers were more active in positive advocacy. Food involvement was significantly related to both positive and negative eWOM. Research limitations/implications The results of this study provide useful marketing and service insights for restaurant managers in the digitally connected world, enabling them to formulate services based on factors critical for restaurant eWOM in the tourism context. Originality/value To fill a gap in the current literature in the era of digital marketing, this study takes a comprehensive yet industry-specific perspective on eWOM engagement by examining demographic factors and the food involvement of consumers as well as restaurant experience attributes. By investigating both positive and negative eWOM, this study presents meaningful practical and theoretical implications.

A hotel stay for a respite from work? Examining recovery experience, rumination and well-being among hotel and bed-and-breakfast guests

“…Second, it further examines how work-related rumination mediates the effects of a lodging recovery experience on well-being. Moreover, as lodging businesses rely on customer satisfaction to produce repurchases or positive word-of-mouth (Kim and Hwang, 2021), the third purpose is to unveil the interrelationships of guest satisfaction with lodging recovery experience, work-related rumination and well-being. Finally, given that bed-and-breakfasts (B&B) are a popular type of lodging worldwide (So et al, 2021), this research also compares the structural relationships of the constructs between the hotel and B&B guests.…”

Prestige and Dominance: How eWOM Differs Between Consumers High in Authentic and Hubristic Pride

“…eWOM also articulates and strengthens a consumer's personality when he or she shares advertisements that are consistent with his or her personality (Taylor et al, 2012 ). However, few studies have demonstrated what factors compel consumers to create different types of eWOM (Hu and Kim, 2018 ; Nam et al, 2020 ; Sohaib et al, 2020 ; Kim and Hwang, 2022 ). Hu and Kim ( 2018 ) have found that there are different motivations behind positive eWOM and negative eWOM.…”

“…Sohaib et al ( 2020 ) have found that promotion-focused customers are more likely to spread positive eWOM, while prevention-focused customers are more likely to spread negative eWOM. Kim and Hwang ( 2022 ) have found that authenticity is influential for positive eWOM only, and value is influential for negative eWOM only. However, no research has been conducted to explore the emotional factors that lead to different types of eWOM.…”

“…Given its importance, researchers have studied various aspects of eWOM, including factors that drive consumers' eWOM behaviors (Taylor et al, 2012 ; Hayes and King, 2014 ; Anggraeni and Diandra, 2017 ; Nikolinakou and King, 2018b ; Chu et al, 2019 ; Zhou et al, 2020 ), eWOM's impact on consumers (Godes and Mayzlin, 2004 ; Chevalier and Mayzlin, 2006 ; Moe and Trusov, 2011 ), and how businesses manage and respond to eWOM (Li, 2018 ; Gössling et al, 2019 ). However, research on drivers has focused on both general eWOM and positive eWOM, but few studies have explored the factors that lead to different types of eWOM (Hu and Kim, 2018 ; Nam et al, 2020 ; Sohaib et al, 2020 ; Kim and Hwang, 2022 ). Because different types of eWOM have different impacts on consumers (Lis and Fischer, 2020 ), clarifying the factors that influence specific types of eWOM will help better manage the business.…”

“…Because different types of eWOM have different impacts on consumers (Lis and Fischer, 2020 ), clarifying the factors that influence specific types of eWOM will help better manage the business. Previous studies have explored when consumers are more likely to engage in positive eWOM behavior and when they are more likely to engage in negative eWOM behavior, in terms of motivation (Hu and Kim, 2018 ; Nam et al, 2020 ), individual differences (Sohaib et al, 2020 ) and product attributes (Kim and Hwang, 2022 ). However, there has been no research on what type of eWOM consumers are more likely to post from an emotional perspective.…”