Referrals · Empirical analysis of negative online WOM and brand outcomes

Brand Equity Dilution through Negative Online Word-of-Mouth Communication

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · 2011

Sung Y. Lee, et al.

Original paper ↗

Summary

Negative online WOM can dilute brand equity, highlighting asymmetric downside from unmanaged complaints.

For your marketing

Possible founder application

Respond quickly and transparently to public incidents; treat support and incident communication as brand investment.

Reported result

What the study found

Negative online WOM can dilute brand equity, highlighting asymmetric downside from unmanaged complaints.

Research question

What the authors investigated

How does the study’s stated design explain its reported outcome in this setting?

Design

Empirical analysis of negative online WOM and brand outcomes

Sample and setting

Online brand/community context; abstract-only

Scope and transfer

Limitations to keep in view

Abstract/page does not establish broad external validity.

Research sources

abstract_only

Study strength

3.5/5 Abstract-level evidence is useful for framing questions; verify full methods before transfer.

How this was assessed

The 1–5 evidence-check score is a practical reading aid, not a formal peer review or a probability that a conclusion is true. It combines design strength (2 points), sample reporting (1), comparison/control clarity (1), and how much of the paper could be checked (1). Access affects how confidently this directory can assess a study, not the study's underlying quality. Blinding is reported separately because it is not relevant to every design.

Design transparency · 2/2

Based on the reported study design in the retrieved source.

Sample and setting · 1/1

The sample context is stated; a numerical count is preserved only when reported.

Outcome clarity · 1/1

The finding is summarized from publisher or article metadata.

Access for checking · 0.5/1

Only abstract or bibliographic access was confirmed.

Double-blind? The retrieved publisher record does not establish whether participants or outcome assessors were blinded.