Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Lean persuasive design of electronic word-of-mouth (e-WOM) indexes for e-commerce stores based on fogg behavior model

  • Published:
Electronic Commerce Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Modeling the persuasiveness of electronic word-of-mouth (e-WOM) indexes helps e-sellers to implement lean persuasive design and shape consumers’ behaviors. This paper develops a quantitative and flexible Fogg Behavior Model for Consumer Purchase Decision-making (FBMCPD) to finely depict the non-linear and the threshold effect of the persuasiveness of e-WOM indexes during the three-stage consumers’ decision-making process. The FBMCPD captures the characteristics of decision-making in each stage including the Halo effect and loss aversion, by introducing various non-linear functions. A hybrid genetic algorithm–particle swarm optimization (GA-PSO) algorithm is proposed to find the model that fits best. Based on the FBMCPD, the four hierarchies of index importance are constructed and the lean improvement curves are plotted, providing guidelines for lean e-WOM indexes persuasive design for online stores. Using data from Taobao.com, the experiment results show that FBMCPD performs better in describing consumers’ purchase behavior and improving e-WOM indexes’ persuasive design.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abubakar, A. M., & Ilkan, M. (2016). Impact of online WOM on destination trust and intention to travel: A medical tourism perspective. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 5(3), 192–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2015.12.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hasan, B. (2016). Perceived irritation in online shopping: The impact of website design characteristics. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 224–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jongmans, E., Jeannot, F., Liang, L., & Dampérat, M. (2022). Impact of website visual design on user experience and website evaluation: The sequential mediating roles of usability and pleasure. Journal of Marketing Management, 38, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2022.2085315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Reimer, T., & Benkenstein, M. (2016). When good WOM hurts and bad WOM gains: The effect of untrustworthy online reviews. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), 5993–6001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.05.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Park, S., & Nicolau, J. L. (2015). Asymmetric effects of online consumer reviews. Annals of Tourism Research, 50, 67–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2014.10.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Choi, H., & Leon, S. (2020). An empirical investigation of online review helpfulness: A big data perspective. Decision Support Systems, 139, 113403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2020.113403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Merchant Service Centre of Taobao. (n.d.). What are the search ranking rules of Taobao? Retrieved February 22, 2023, from https://sellerhelp.taobao.com/servicehall/knowledge_detail?kwdContentId=10234782513368066&searchKey=784b78e152a640ec9692220be66f141e1&source=6&spm=service_hall.25034502.shcSearchResult_kuph4mbg.10234782513368066&hcSessionId=3-1281-4f179283-16fe-45f6-8aeb-85a925c27091.

  8. Zhuang, M., Cui, G., & Peng, L. (2018). Manufactured opinions: The effect of manipulating online product reviews. Journal of Business Research, 87, 24–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.02.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chong, A. Y. L., & Ch’ngLiuLi, E. M. J. B. (2017). Predicting consumer product demands via big data: The roles of online promotional marketing and online reviews. International Journal of Production Research, 55(17), 5142–5156. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1066519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Vlachos, I., & Bogdanovic, A. (2013). Lean thinking in the European hotel industry. Tourism Management, 36, 354–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.10.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dai, H., Xiao, Q., Yan, N., Xu, X., & Tong, T. (2022). Item-level forecasting for E-commerce demand with high-dimensional data using a two-stage feature Selection algorithm. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 31(2), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11518-022-5520-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Li, X., Wu, C., & Mai, F. (2019). The effect of online reviews on product sales: A joint sentiment-topic analysis. Information & Management, 56(2), 172–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.04.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Zhang, C., Tian, Y.-X., & Fan, Z.-P. (2022). Forecasting sales using online review and search engine data: A method based on PCA–DSFOA–BPNN. International Journal of Forecasting, 38(3), 1005–1024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2021.07.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Astbury, B., & Leeuw, F. L. (2010). Unpacking black boxes: Mechanisms and theory building in evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 31(3), 363–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214010371972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fogg, B. (2009). A behavior model for persuasive design. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on persuasive technology-persuasive ’09. Presented at the the 4th international conference, Claremont, California: ACM Press. p. 1. https://doi.org/10.1145/1541948.1541999.

  16. Schmitt, B. (2010). Experience marketing: concepts, frameworks and consumer insights. Foundations and Trends® in Marketing, 5(2), 55–112. https://doi.org/10.1561/1700000027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Haselton, M. G., Bryant, G. A., Wilke, A., Frederick, D. A., Galperin, A., Frankenhuis, W. E., & Moore, T. (2009). Adaptive rationality: An evolutionary perspective on cognitive bias. Social Cognition, 27(5), 733–763. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2009.27.5.733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(4), 250–256. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.35.4.250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2013). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. World scientific handbook in financial economics series (Vol. 4, pp. 99–127). World Scientific. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814417358_0006

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Lam, C. K., Huang, X., & Chan, S. C. H. (2015). The threshold effect of participative leadership and the role of leader information sharing. Academy of Management Journal, 58(3), 836–855. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wallenius, J., Dyer, J. S., Fishburn, P. C., Steuer, R. E., Zionts, S., & Deb, K. (2008). Multiple criteria decision making, multiattribute utility theory: Recent accomplishments and what lies ahead. Management Science, 54(7), 1336–1349. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1070.0838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cyr, D., Head, M., Lim, E., & Stibe, A. (2018). Using the elaboration likelihood model to examine online persuasion through website design. Information & Management, 55(7), 807–821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.03.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ahmad, W. N. W., Mohamad, N., & Rizal, A. (2020). Understanding user emotions through interaction with persuasive technology. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2020.0110926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tran, L. T. T. (2020). Online reviews and purchase intention: A cosmopolitanism perspective. Tourism Management Perspectives, 35, 100722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Archak, N., Ghose, A., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2011). Deriving the pricing power of product features by mining consumer reviews. Management Science, 57(8), 1485–1509. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Yang, S.-B., Hlee, S., Lee, J., & Koo, C. (2017). An empirical examination of online restaurant reviews on Yelp.com: A dual coding theory perspective. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(2), 817–839. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2015-0643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ghose, A., Ipeirotis, P. G., & Li, B. (2014). Examining the impact of ranking on consumer behavior and search engine revenue. Management Science, 60(7), 1632–1654. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ghose, A., Ipeirotis, P. G., & Li, B. (2019). Modeling consumer footprints on search engines: An interplay with social media. Management Science, 65(3), 1363–1385. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Li, B., & Ch’ngChongBao, E.A.Y.-L.H. (2016). Predicting online e-marketplace sales performances: A big data approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 101, 565–571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2016.08.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Song, T., Huang, J., Tan, Y., & Yu, Y. (2019). Using user- and marketer-generated content for box office revenue prediction: Differences between microblogging and third-party platforms. Information Systems Research, 30(1), 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2018.0797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Fan, Z.-P., Che, Y.-J., & Chen, Z.-Y. (2017). Product sales forecasting using online reviews and historical sales data: A method combining the bass model and sentiment analysis. Journal of Business Research, 74, 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.01.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. He, X., Yan, H., & Gong, X. (2020). Gamification design of shared bicycle system based on fogg behavior model. In T. Ahram & C. Falcão (Eds.), Advances in usability and user experience (Vol. 972, pp. 662–671). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19135-1_65

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Guimaraes, M., Emmendorfer, L., & Adamatti, D. (2018). Persuasive agent based simulation for evaluation of the dynamic threshold line and trigger classification from the fogg behavior model. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 83, 18–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2018.01.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow (1st ed.). Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Zhang, C., Tian, Y.-X., Fan, Z.-P., Liu, Y., & Fan, L.-W. (2020). Product sales forecasting using macroeconomic indicators and online reviews: A method combining prospect theory and sentiment analysis. Soft Computing, 24(9), 6213–6226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-03742-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Yoon, Y., Polpanumas, C., & Park, Y. J. (2017). The impact of word of mouth via twitter on moviegoers’ decisions and film revenues: Revisiting prospect theory: how WOM about movies drives loss-aversion and reference-dependence behaviors. Journal of Advertising Research, 57(2), 144–158. https://doi.org/10.2501/JAR-2017-022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Li, Z., & Shimizu, A. (2018). Impact of online customer reviews on sales outcomes: An empirical study based on prospect theory. The Review of Socionetwork Strategies, 12(2), 135–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12626-018-0022-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Gigerenzer, G., & Gaissmaier, W. (2011). Heuristic decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 62(1), 451–482. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120709-145346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hu, X., & Yang, Y. (2020). Determinants of consumers’ choices in hotel online searches: A comparison of consideration and booking stages. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 86, 102370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Grcic, J. (n.d.). The halo effect fallacy, 6.

  41. Moe, W. W. (2006). An empirical two-stage choice model with varying decision rules applied to internet clickstream data. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 680–692. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.43.4.680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Agha, S., Tollefson, D., Paul, S., Green, D., & Babigumira, J. B. (2019). Use of the fogg behavior model to assess the impact of a social marketing campaign on condom use in Pakistan. Journal of Health Communication, 24(3), 284–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2019.1597952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. ECRC. (2021). Monthly activity data report of E-commerce APP in September 2021. 100EC.CN. Retrieved from http://www.100ec.cn/zt/20219appbg/.

  44. AliResearch. (2021). Research on rural E-commerce going out of the village to the city: The example of Ali platform. Retrieved from http://www.aliresearch.com/ch/information/informationdetails?articleCode=216741073748365312&type=%E6%8A%A5%E5%91%8A.

  45. De Maeyer, P. (2012). Impact of online consumer reviews on sales and price strategies: A review and directions for future research. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 21(2), 132–139. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610421211215599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Cheung, C. M. K., & Thadani, D. R. (2012). The impact of electronic word-of-mouth communication: A literature analysis and integrative model. Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 461–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.06.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Lurie, N. H., & Mason, C. H. (2007). Visual representation: Implications for decision making. Journal of Marketing, 71(1), 160–177. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.1.160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Melnik, M. I., & Alm, J. (2003). Does a seller’s eCommerce reputation matter? Evidence from eBay auctions. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 50(3), 337–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6451.00180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Xu, N., Bai, S., & Wan, X. (2017). Adding pay-on-delivery to pay-to-order: The value of two payment schemes to online sellers. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 21, 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2016.12.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Mastrobuoni, G., Peracchi, F., & Tetenov, A. (2014). Price as a signal of product quality: Some experimental evidence. Journal of Wine Economics, 9(2), 135–152. https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2014.17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Gu, Z., & Yang, S. (2010). Quantity-discount-dependent consumer preferences and competitive nonlinear pricing. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(6), 1100–1113. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.47.6.1100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Schmitt, B., & Zarantonello, L. (2013). Consumer experience and experiential marketing: A critical review. In N. K. Malhotra (Ed.), Review of marketing research (Vol. 10, pp. 25–61). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1548-6435(2013)0000010006

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  53. Sexton, R. S., Dorsey, R. E., & Johnson, J. D. (1999). Optimization of neural networks: A comparative analysis of the genetic algorithm and simulated annealing. European Journal of Operational Research, 114(3), 589–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00114-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Hassan, R., Cohanim, B., de Weck, O., & Venter, G. (2005). A comparison of particle swarm optimization and the genetic algorithm. In 46th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics and materials conference. Presented at the 46th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics and materials conference, Austin, Texas: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2005-1897.

  55. Garg, H. (2016). A hybrid PSO-GA algorithm for constrained optimization problems. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 274, 292–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2015.11.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Hamdia, K. M., Zhuang, X., & Rabczuk, T. (2021). An efficient optimization approach for designing machine learning models based on genetic algorithm. Neural Computing and Applications, 33(6), 1923–1933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-020-05035-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Greene, W. H. (2012). Econometric analysis (7th ed.). Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Antoch, J., Hanousek, J., Horváth, L., Hušková, M., & Wang, S. (2019). Structural breaks in panel data: Large number of panels and short length time series. Econometric Reviews, 38(7), 828–855. https://doi.org/10.1080/07474938.2018.1454378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., & Courville, A. (2016). Deep learning. The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Chinese National Natural Science Foundation (No. 71871135 and No. 72271155).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management, Shanghai University, 99 Shangda Road, Baoshan District, Shanghai, 200444, People’s Republic of China

    Shugang Li, Fang Liu & Yuqi Zhang

  2. Department of Automation, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai, 200237, People’s Republic of China

    Zhaoxu Yu

Authors
  1. Shugang Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yuqi Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhaoxu Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuqi Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, S., Liu, F., Zhang, Y. et al. Lean persuasive design of electronic word-of-mouth (e-WOM) indexes for e-commerce stores based on fogg behavior model. Electron Commer Res (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-023-09753-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-023-09753-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation