CYBERPSYCHOLOGY, BEHAVIOR, AND SOCIAL NETWORKING Volume 18, Number 10, 2015 ª Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2015.0190
How Peer Communication and Engagement Motivations Influence Social Media Shopping Behavior: Evidence from China and the United States Sidharth Muralidharan, PhD,1 and Linjuan Rita Men, PhD 2
Abstract
Based on consumer socialization theory, this study proposes and tests a conceptual model of social media shopping behavior, which links the antecedents of user motivations of engagement and peer communication about products to shopping behavior through social media. A cross-cultural survey was conducted with social media users in two culturally distinct markets with the largest Internet population: China (n = 304) and the United States (n = 328). Findings showed that social interaction, information, and remuneration were positive antecedents of peer communication for users from both countries. Peer communication positively impacted social media shopping behavior, and cultural differences were observed, with social interaction being important to Chinese users’ shopping behavior, while remuneration was more important to American users. Implications are discussed.
Introduction
S
ocial media, a manifestation of Web 2.0, has significantly influenced the realm of communication and can be defined as ‘‘a mechanism for the audience to connect, communicate, and interact with each other and their mutual friends through instant messaging or social networking sites.’’1(p248) On a global scale, there are social media platforms accessed worldwide such as Facebook. On the other hand, there are platforms that are distinct to one country and its unique culture that have grown exponentially,2 such as Wechat in China, Mixi in Japan, and Vkontakte in Russia. Nevertheless, the impact of social media on the success of marketing communications in emerging markets such as China has yet to be fully explored. Little is known on how its approach may be similar to or different from developed countries such as the United States. The proposed study aims to focus on how social media usage and peer communication of products affects social media shopping behavior among consumers in two distinct markets: China and the United States. Based on the Internet World Statistics,3 China has 642 million Internet users, the world’s largest, followed by the United States with 310 million users. According to a McKinsey report, compared with Japan (30%), the United States (67%), and South Korea (70%), China has the world’s most active social media population, with 91% claiming to have visited a social media site in the last 6 months.4 Cultural differences by country can influence the selection of 1 2
information sources, such as peers. Past research has shown that Chinese users had smaller networks with strong ties, while American users of social media were found to have larger networks with weak ties.5 These differences provide a fertile avenue for a cross-country study of audience behavior on social media. Past studies explored the role of culture on consumer engagement with electronic word of mouth (eWOM) on social media5 or how peer communication over social media impacted purchases intentions.6 However, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, no study has examined the impact of ‘‘engagement motivations’’ on peer communication about products on social media and how they collectively impact ‘‘social’’ shopping behavior. Using consumer socialization as the theoretical framework, this study aims to use path analysis to compartmentalize and analyze how motivations such as integration and social interaction, information, and remuneration (antecedents) influence peer communication of products (socialization agent) and social media shopping behavior (outcome). Peers and their impact on shopping behavior are also analyzed. By testing the proposed model in both China and the United States, the study reveals important commonalities and differences in these two important markets. Additionally, it illuminates the process of social media peer communication and its impact on social media shopping behavior by demonstrating cross-cultural evidence. Practically, the study’s findings help local and international brands to use social media channels more effectively to market their products.
Temerlin Advertising Institute, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas. Department of Public Relations, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
595
596
MURALIDHARAN AND MEN
Consumer Socialization 7(p2)
Ward defined consumer socialization as the process by which ‘‘people acquire skills, knowledge, and attitudes relevant to their functioning as consumers in the marketplace.’’ Borrowing from Bandura’s8 social learning theory, socialization agents (e.g., peers) can influence learning via modeling, reinforcement, and social interaction.9 Modeling occurs when the individual consciously imitates the behavior of the socialization agent due to relevancy and availability,10 while the reinforcement mechanism involves learning through positive (reward) or negative (punishment) reinforcement.11 Finally, social interaction involves interactions with socialization agents in a social context and includes two components: the socialization agent and the style of influence.10 Based on the socialization framework, there are four major components: antecedents, socialization agents, socialization process, and outcomes.10 Four major hypotheses were derived from the literature (see Fig. 1). The following section elaborates on how the hypotheses were inferred for the present study. Social media shopping behavior
Starting with the outcome, social media shopping behavior or ‘‘social e-shopping’’ combines shopping with social networking.12 Social networking sites have provided consumers with platforms to support their favorite products and brands.13 For example, in the United States alone, it was found that 22% of Twitter users purchased a product after tweeting or retweeting, while 33% of Facebook users made a purchase after sharing, liking, or making a comment.14 Compared with traditional e-shopping, social networks provide users with a hedonistic consumer experience, while the former is more associated with utilitarian goals and functionalities.12,15 Past studies have used the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to understand the motivations behind social media usage. To illustrate, customers have found shopping through social networking sites to be an enjoyable experience, that is both convenient and useful.12,16 But there exist other motivations when it comes to peer communication and shopping for products on social media. Impact of antecedents on peer communication and social media shopping behavior
In terms of antecedents of peer communication on social media, past research has focused on tie strength and group identification.6 The current study borrows from the uses and gratifications model to focus on the kinds of motivations that
FIG. 1. Proposed consumer socialization model for peer communication of products.
would prompt individuals to use social media actively to exchange product-centric information. For this study, McQuail’s17 classification of motivations was used, as past research has shown its applicability in a social media context.18 Among the selected motivations, integration and social interaction is the motivation to connect and achieve a sense of belonging with family and friends. Having strong ties helps in transferring useful information19 and has a greater influence on an individual than weak ties.20 Sharing strong relationships with peers has shown to encourage peer communication on social media.6 Information motivation can be characterized by opinion and advice seeking21 and information exchange.22 Lastly, remuneration motivation is when people use social media to gain a reward or economic benefits21 such as product discounts, free samples, or prizes. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that the above-mentioned motivations may have an influence on how often people communicate with their peers about products. As mentioned earlier, shopping behavior on social media is considered as more of a hedonistic consumer experience,15 and activities such as socializing or being part of Facebook clubs or groups tend to correlate with recreational uses.23 In this study, social media shopping can be viewed as providing a hedonic and recreational benefit. However, informational use of social networking sites was found to correlate with civic and political action rather than recreation. Remuneration was found to be the most important motivation for visiting a brand’s Facebook page,24 and considering its focus on product related incentives, it is reasonable to assume its direct impact on shopping behavior as salient. Thus, it can be predicted that social interaction and remuneration will have a direct impact on shopping behavior, but information may influence behavior through peer communication. With this understanding, the following hypotheses are proposed: H1: Integration and social interaction motivation will have a direct impact on (a) peer communication and (b) social media shopping behavior. H2: Information motivation will have a direct impact on peer communication. H3: Remuneration will have a direct impact on (a) peer communication and (b) social media shopping behavior.
Impact of peer communication on social media shopping behavior
External sources such as an individual or a group (organization) can qualify as socialization agents25 and peers
PEER COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL MEDIA SHOPPING BEHAVIOR
such as friends.10,11,26 Peers have been found to influence consumption-oriented decision making,27 attitudes toward product placement,28 and purchase intentions.6 With the advent of social media, enabling connections and forging relationships with like-minded peers has become a reality. Individuals can now share or seek out product information from their personal social networks,29 even strangers. Peers can communicate their experiences and opinions of products on social media, and modeling can occur when the consumer mirrors similar perceptions. The reinforcement mechanism can materialize through peer influence and can be exerted through product reviews, comments, suggestions, discussions, or experiences.6(p201) A consumer can be coerced to conform to group norms through group inclusion (incentive) or group exclusion (punishment).11 Due to the collaborative environment it provides, social media has been instrumental in satisfying the need of gaining approval from others. The importance of peer communication through social media has received less attention30 but for a few studies. Chu and Choi5 found culture to impact eWOM on social media, where Chinese users were found to have smaller networks but emphasized tight relationships, while American users had extensive networks with loose contacts. Wang et al.6 found peer communication of products on social media to impact purchase decisions directly through peer conformity and indirectly by reinforcing product involvement. The authors confirmed the importance of peers as socialization agents. However, little is known regarding how this socialization process, and peer influence may affect consumer’s actual shopping behavior. The current study aims to fill this void, and thus the following hypothesis is proposed:
597
H4: Peer communication will have a direct impact on social media shopping behavior.
Method
An online survey was conducted with adult social media users in China and the United States who were recruited by an international sampling firm that had a presence in both countries. For China, the questionnaire was developed first in English and then translated into Chinese. Back-translation was conducted by bilingual third parties to ensure the accuracy of translation. To achieve a representative and comparable sample, stratified and quota random sampling strategies were applied to solicit respondents from different age groups, genders, incomes, and education levels. The final sample contained 328 Americans and 304 Chinese respondents. Complete demographic details are provided in Table 1. Measures
Social media motivations were adopted from Muntinga et al.,18 and each motivation was measured using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = ‘‘strongly disagree’’ to 7 = ‘‘strongly agree’’). Integration and social interaction consisted of three items (China = 0.80; United States = 0.79); information motivation consisted of three items (China = 0.83; United States = 0.73); and remuneration motivation consisted of a single item. Social media peer communication about products was adopted from Wang et al.6 and measured using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = ‘‘strongly disagree’’ to 7 = ‘‘strongly agree’’) that included five items (China = 0.93; United States = 0.90).
Table 1. Demographic Profile by Country China Age, M (SD) Sex Male Female Education No college (secondary education or below) Vocational (including diploma or higher and associate) Some college Bachelor’s degree Master’s degree Doctoral degree Family income 1.645 (one-tailed test) or >1.96 (two-tailed test), they were said to be different.32 As shown in Table 3, significant differences were observed only for the impact of integration and social interaction on peer communication. This impact was stronger for China than it was for the United States. Hypotheses H1b, H3b, and H4 proposed the positive effects of integration and social interaction, remuneration, and peer communication about products on social shopping behavior. Results provided support for all hypotheses. Specifically, integration and social interaction demonstrated a large positive effect on Chinese consumers’ social shopping behavior (b = 0.22, p < 0.001) but a much smaller effect on American consumers’ social shopping behavior (b = 0.07, p < 0.05). Remuneration demonstrated a small positive effect on Chinese consumers’ social shopping behavior (b = 0.15, p < 0.001) but a large positive effect on American consumers’ social shopping behaviors (b = 0.27, p < 0.001). Finally, social media peer communication about products demonstrated strong positive effect on consumers’ social shopping behavior in both countries (bChina = 0.51, p < 0.001; bUS = 0.52, p < 0.001). As per Fisher’s test (see Table 3), only the impact of integration and social interaction on shopping behavior was found to be significantly stronger for China than for the United States. Therefore, the model was largely
supported by the American sample and Chinese sample, with some minor variations on effect sizes. Discussion
The objective of this study was to create a structural model to examine the antecedents and behavioral outcomes of social media peer communication about products in a crosscultural context. The study extended the theory of consumer socialization to include motivations and shopping behavior on social media, which has been the subject of limited investigations thus far. Among the antecedents for peer communication, the findings showed that information had the greatest impact, meaning that consumers who use social media mainly to gather and exchange information or seek opinions and advice from others are more likely to communicate with their peers about products on social media. The motivation of socializing and connecting with like-minded individuals drove consumers in both China and the United States to discuss products with their peers on social media. Integration and social interaction appeared as a more important driver for Chinese consumers’ social media peer communication compared with their American counterparts. This can be attributed to their collectivistic mind-set, as past research has indicated that Chinese users of social media have stronger ties with their peers than Americans have.5 For remuneration, consumers who use social media to gain economic benefits (e.g., coupons, free samples, sweepstakes, and other promotional value) are more likely to engage in conversations with their peers about products. Information seeking and remuneration can be categorized as individualistic motivations,33 but no differences
FIG. 3. Consumer socialization model for peer communication of product (United States). *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001. d2, disturbance for peer communication; d4, disturbance for shopping behavior.
600
MURALIDHARAN AND MEN
Table 3. Fisher’s z Transformation Test Relationships Impact on peer communication H1a: Integration and social interaction / Peer communication H2: Information / Peer communication H3a: Remuneration / Peer communication Impact on shopping behavior H1b: Integration and social interaction / Shopping behavior H3b: Remuneration / Shopping behavior H4: Peer communication / Shopping behavior
China (r)
United States (r)
z Scores
0.577*** 0.613*** 0.354***
0.456*** 0.556*** 0.348***
2.07* 1.08 0.09
0.582*** 0.426*** 0.692***
0.414*** 0.476*** 0.645***
2.81** 0.79 1.06
Significance of z scores for two-tailed test (>1.96) are reported. *p p 0.05; **p p 0.01; ***p p 0.001.
were observed between countries. China is considered as the world’s fastest-growing economy, showing trends of immense economic development, and past studies have indicated that as society progresses and becomes more industrialized, people become more individualistic, as access to resources and economic independence are now attainable.34 Globalization has allowed for greater exposure to different cultural viewpoints,35 and an emerging economy gives rise to growing affluence,36 higher education,34 and greater access to mass media,37 all contributing to the growth of an individualistic mind-set. In terms of antecedents and peer communication influencing shopping behavior, findings showed that peer communication had the greatest impact for both countries. The more consumers engage in discussions with their peers about products on social media, the more likely they will shop based on social media recommendations or shop through social networking sites. This specific finding reinforces the importance of peers as socialization agents in the realm of social media. Integration and social interaction played a more important role in influencing Chinese consumers’ social shopping behavior than in influencing their American counterparts, and this highlights the importance that Chinese users place on relationships with their peers. Finally, users who use social media mainly for economic benefits and promotional value are more likely to shop based on social recommendations or through social media. This effect was salient in both China and the United States. Marketers need to understand the importance of peer communication and its instrumental value in positively influencing shopping behavior of users from both countries. At the same time, cultural differences need to be considered, where integration and social interaction is more important to Chinese (than American) users with respect to peer communication and shopping behavior. Marketers can monitor which products are being communicated among peers on social media and try to promote products with declining sales by fostering peer communication through social media advertisements. Apart from its important findings, the study has limitations that need to be addressed. Only three antecedents were selected. Future research could include motivations such as entertainment, self-identity, and empowerment18 in the current model to test their impact on peer communication and shopping behavior. Peer communication was studied from a general sense. Future research should study the impact of message valence, that is, positive and negative peer
communication, and how this would affect shopping behavior. Other aspects of peer communication that could be explored are influence propagation38 and meaning, and studying the level of influence a peer has over fellow members in a social network. More specifically, individuals who enjoy a high sociometric popularity39 tend to be well liked and receive more offers of friendship from peers. Exploring the impact of these two variables on shopping behavior may help to extend the current study’s findings. Even though relevant, only China and the United States were studied. Future research could conduct a tri-nation study by comparing the current findings with India—a country that has a growing social media population. Acknowledgments
This project was funded by the Meadows Faculty Development Grant and the Temerlin Advertising Institute Research Grant. Author Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist. References
1. Correa T, Hinsley AW, Zu´n˜iga HG. Who interacts on the Web?: The intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior 2010; 26:247–253. 2. Men LR, Tsai WS. Toward an integrated model of public engagement on corporate social networking sites: antecedents, the process, and relational outcomes. International Journal of Strategic Communication 2013; 7:257–273. 3. Internet World Stats. (2014) World Internet usage and population statistics. www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm (accessed Apr. 2, 2015). 4. Chiu C, Lin D, Silverman A. (2012) China’s social media boom. McKinsey & Company. www.mckinsey.com/insights/ marketing_sales/chinas_social-media_boom (accessed Mar. 23, 2015). 5. Chu S, Choi SM. Electronic word-of-mouth in social networking sites: a cross-cultural study of the United States and China. Journal of Global Marketing 2011; 24:263–281. 6. Wang X, Yu C, Wei Y. Social media peer communication and impact on purchase intentions: a consumer socialization framework. Journal of Interactive Marketing 2012; 26:198–208. 7. Ward S. Consumer socialization. Journal of Consumer Research 1974; 1:1–16.
PEER COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL MEDIA SHOPPING BEHAVIOR
8. Bandura A. (1969) Principles of behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 9. Ko¨hler CF, Rohm AJ, Ruyter KD, et al. Return on interactivity: the impact of online agents on newcomer adjustment. Journal of Marketing 2011; 75:93–108. 10. Moschis GP, Churchill GA. Consumer socialization: a theoretical and empirical analysis. Journal of Marketing Research 1978; 15:599–609. 11. Lueg JE, Finney RZ. Interpersonal communication in the consumer socialization process: scale development and validation. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice 2007; 15:25–39. 12. Dennis C, Morgan A, Wright LT, et al. The influences of social e-shopping in enhancing young women’s online shopping behavior. Journal of Customer Behavior 2010; 9:151–174. 13. Pookulangara S, Koesler K. Cultural influence on consumers’ usage of social networks and its’ impact on online purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services 2011; 18:348–354. 14. Bennett S. (2013) How social media is changing the way your customers shop online. AdWeek. www.adweek.com/ socialtimes/social-media-shopping/491924 (accessed Mar. 23, 2015). 15. Palmer A, Koenig-Lewis N. An extended, community focused, experiential framework for relationship marketing. Journal of Customer Behavior 2009; 8:85–96. 16. Cha J. Shopping on social networking websites: attitude toward real and virtual items. Journal of Interactive Advertising 2009; 10:77–93. 17. McQuail D. (1983) Mass communication theory. London: Sage. 18. Muntinga DG, Moorman M, Smit EG. Introducing COBRAs: exploring motivations for brand-related social media use. International Journal of Advertising 2011; 30:13–46. 19. Levin DZ, Cross R. The strength of weak ties you can trust: the mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science 2004; 50:1477–1490. 20. De Bruyn A, Lilien GL. A multi-stage model of word-ofmouth influence through viral marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing 2008; 25:151–163. 21. Wang Y, Fesenmaier DR. Assessing motivation of contribution in online communities: an empirical investigation of an online travel community. Electronic Markets 2003; 13:33–45. 22. Ridings CM, Gefen D. (2004) Virtual community attraction: why people hang out online. Journal of ComputerMediated Communication. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/ issue1/ridings_gefen.html (accessed Apr. 10, 2015). 23. Park N, Kee KF, Valenzuela S. Being immersed in social networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications, and social outcomes. CyberPsychology & Behavior 2009; 12:729–733. 24. Tsai WS, Men LR. Motivations and antecedents of consumer engagement with brand pages on social networking sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising 2013; 13:76–87. 25. Bush AJ, Smith R, Martin C. The influence of consumer socialization variables on attitude toward advertising: a
26. 27.
28.
29. 30. 31.
32. 33.
34. 35. 36.
37. 38. 39.
601
comparison of African-Americans and Caucasians. Journal of Advertising 1999; 28:13–24. Brechwald WA, Prinstein MJ. Beyond homophily: a decade of advances in understanding peer influence processes. Journal of Research on Adolescence 2011; 21:166–179. Singh N, Chao MCH, Kwon IWG. A multivariate statistical approach to socialization and consumer activities of young adults: a cross-cultural study of ethnic groups in America. Marketing Management Journal 2006; 16:67–80. De Gregorio F, Sung Y. Understanding attitudes toward and in response to product placement: a consumer socialization framework. Journal of Advertising 2010; 39: 83–96. Dhar V, Chang E. Does chatter matter? The impact of usergenerated content on music sales. Journal of Interactive Marketing 2009; 23:300–307. Trusov M, Bodapati AV, Bucklin RE. Determining influential users in Internet social networks. Journal of Marketing Research 2010; 47:643–658. Patwardhan P, Yang J. Internet dependency relations and online consumer behavior: a media system dependency theory perspective on why people shop, chat, and read news online. Journal of Interactive Advertising 2003; 3:57–69. Cohen J, Cohen P. (1983) Applied multiple regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. La Ferle C, Kim HJ. Cultural influences on Internet motivations: a comparison of Korean and U.S. consumers. International Journal of Internet Marketing & Advertising 2006; 3:142–157. Triandis HC. (1995) Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Parker RS, Haytko DL, Hermans CM. Individualism and collectivism: considering old assumptions. Journal of International Business Research 2009; 8:127–139. Yang K. (1988) Will societal modernization eventually eliminate cross-cultural psychological differences? In Bond M, ed. The cross-cultural challenge to social psychology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 67–85. Hsu FLK. (1983) Rugged individualism reconsidered. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press. Agarwal N, Liu H, Tang L, et al. Modeling blogger influence in a community. Social Network Analysis & Mining 2011; 2:139–162. Parkhurst JT, Hopmeyer A. Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity: two distinct dimensions of peer status. Journal of Early Adolescence 1998; 18:125–144.
Address correspondence to: Dr. Sidharth Muralidharan Temerlin Advertising Institute Southern Methodist University P.O. Box 750113 Dallas, TX 75275 E-mail:
[email protected]
