Paid media and measurement · Empirical questionnaire-survey analysis of a conceptual model based on cognitive-cost theory; the publisher page says the questionnaire had demographic items and 30 construct items.
E-WOM from e-commerce websites and social media: Which will consumers adopt?
Qiang Yan, Shuang Wu, Lingli Wang, Pengfei Wu, Hejie Chen, Guohong Wei (2016). E-WOM from e-commerce websites and social media: Which will consumers adopt?. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2016.03.004.
Plain-English take
EC-eWOM usefulness and credibility positively influenced EC-eWOM adoption but negatively influenced SM-eWOM adoption. EC-eWOM adoption negatively affected SM-eWOM adoption and mediated usefulness/credibility effects; cognitive level and involvement moderated effects. For your marketing: Use it to shape a locally controlled channel or message test; account for audience, timing and attribution limits before reallocating budget.
How much weight to give this
2.5/5 Evidence needs cautious interpretation
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.
Empirical questionnaire-survey analysis of a conceptual model based on cognitive-cost theory; the publisher page says the questionnaire had demographic items and 30 construct items.
Consumers exposed to eWOM from e-commerce websites (EC-eWOM) and social media (SM-eWOM) in a social-commerce/online-shopping context; the fetched publisher page does not state the respondent count.
Based on the publisher-described design and comparison; see the article for complete analysis.
Publisher record was fetched directly; full text was not assumed open.
Double-blind? Blinding was not established from the retrieved publisher record.
Research question
What the authors investigated
When consumers encounter eWOM from e-commerce websites and social media simultaneously, how do they choose/adopt the two sources, and how do usefulness, credibility, cognition, and involvement shape that process?
Design
Empirical questionnaire-survey analysis of a conceptual model based on cognitive-cost theory; the publisher page says the questionnaire had demographic items and 30 construct items.
Sample and setting
Consumers exposed to eWOM from e-commerce websites (EC-eWOM) and social media (SM-eWOM) in a social-commerce/online-shopping context; the fetched publisher page does not state the respondent count.
Reported result
What the study found
EC-eWOM usefulness and credibility positively influenced EC-eWOM adoption but negatively influenced SM-eWOM adoption. EC-eWOM adoption negatively affected SM-eWOM adoption and mediated usefulness/credibility effects; cognitive level and involvement moderated effects.
This is a paraphrase of the source. Check the original paper for definitions, estimates, statistical uncertainty and analysis details.
Scope and transfer
Limitations to keep in view
The publisher page says conclusions and research limitations are outlined in Section 5, but does not display the specific limitations in the fetched article preview; therefore specific limitations are not stated here.
Possible founder application
Use it to shape a locally controlled channel or message test; account for audience, timing and attribution limits before reallocating budget.
Evidence access
Publisher abstract/metadata retrieved; consult the linked paper for full methods and tables.
The ScienceDirect page labels the work a research article, identifies the six authors and DOI, describes questionnaire data, and reports the central result that usefulness and credibility increase EC-eWOM adoption while reducing SM-eWOM adoption, with EC-eWOM adoption mediating those relationships. Direct publisher-page retrieval was recorded on 2026-10-09; profile summarizes the accessible record and does not claim independent review of inaccessible full text.
If only an abstract or metadata was available, the profile is limited to claims supported there. A paper's paywall does not change its evidentiary status, but it limits what we can substantiate from accessible text.