Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
DO CONSUMERS BELIEVE EACH OTHER ONLINE?: A study of how consumers assess credibility of brand-related UGC
Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
2019 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (professional degree), 20 credits / 30 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

With the gradual rise of Web-2.0 based platforms, Internet users were given the possibility to interact with each other in virtual communities. Originating from this development was the concept of user-generated content (UGC), which implies that people were able to enrich each other’s user-experiences by sharing creative efforts and communicating openly (O’Reilly, 2007).

 

As Web 2.0 features continued to grow, marketers became aware of the opportunities this new development online created and how they could use it to their advantage (De Chernatony & Christodoulides, 2004). The development online however also faces companies with challenges, as consumers now are able to create and share opinions and thoughts about brands, which to an extent is uncontrollable by companies (Christodoulides et al., 2012). Just as marketer-controlled communication can create new brand associations in the minds of consumers, for better or worse - so can also externally-generated communication, such as brand-related UGC, do.

 

Knowing that consumers generally trust what other consumers say about products more than marketing communication (Cheong & Morrison, 2008; Song & Yoo, 2016), and that there does not exist much research on how consumers perceive brand-related UGC, this is a considerably important topic to study. A classic way of studying communication effectiveness is through credibility, which is argued to be a major determinant of whether consumers accept and adopt what is communicated (e.g. Hovland et al., 1953). Thus, the purpose of this thesis is to gain an understanding of how consumers assess credibility of brand-related UGC and furthermore, what their consequent responses are.

 

A qualitative approach was taken as the purpose is to gain insight rather than proving a point. The interviews were semi-structured and formed around three Instagram posts relating to a specific brand, which were deliberately chosen based on the content of the theoretical framework developed. Through using these example cases, interviewees’ first reactions could be captured and their reasoning around credibility could be followed and discussed.

 

The results from this study indicate that there exists a certain level of irritation as well as a scepticism towards brand-related UGC. This seem to stem from a suspicion that most content that promotes products and brands is part of sponsored collaborations, into which consumers put noticeably much distrust. Beyond questioning sponsorship, it was also found that the source played a particularly important role when assessing credibility. When a source is familiar, it is easier to determine credibility of brand-related UGC, and credibility furthermore increases with perceived expertise, attractiveness and trustworthiness. The channel through which a message is communicated also matters, as it is more difficult to be ingenuine through a video than an image or a text, which implicated that consumers may find videos more credible than other media formats. The message itself was also deemed to influence the credibility assessment, as the message was questioned both based upon common sense but also on knowledge and previous experience.

 

As for practical implications, this study indicates that encouraging or generating positive brand-related UGC through paid collaborations, is a balancing act, into which much consideration needs to be put. With the evident irritation that consumers feel when it comes to brand-related UGC, marketers should be careful to push too much positive brand communication onto the consumer, or it will turn negative. To come across as genuine, the “who”, ”what” and ”how” of communication should be carefully considered.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. , p. 97
Keywords [en]
UGC, brand-related UGC, user-generated content, consumer-generated content, consumer power, consumer response, e-WOM, brand perception, co-creation, brand communication, UGC marketing, brand management, communication process, credibility
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-162456OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-162456DiVA, id: diva2:1344422
Educational program
Study Programme in Business Administration and Economics
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2019-08-21 Created: 2019-08-20 Last updated: 2019-08-21Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(4431 kB)14 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 4431 kBChecksum SHA-512
5b3cd48110197b103f3f67776358c157ae5dd57f7b2805b16a99a1b5449ee111b7977114b630824c9f0682792d5ce7c18094b0f4f9d57e115f8508baf9a3cd57
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ketola, Rebecca
By organisation
Business Administration
Business Administration

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 14 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 68 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf