The Impact of Sharing Mechanism Design on Content Sharing in Online Social Networks

References

• Abadie A, Diamond A, Hainmueller J (2012) Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: Estimating the effect of California’s tobacco control program. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 105(490):493–505.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aggarwal P, McGill AL (2007) Is that car smiling at me? Schema congruity as a basis for evaluating anthropomorphized products. J. Consumer Res. 34(4):468–479.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aral S, Walker D (2011) Creating social contagion through viral product design: A randomized trial of peer influence in networks. Management Sci. 57(9):1623–1639.Link, Google Scholar
• Aral S, Dellarocas C, Godes D (2013) Social media and business transformation: A framework for research. Inform. Systems Res. 24(1):3–13.Link, Google Scholar
• Ariely D (2000) Controlling the information flow: Effects on consumers’ decision making and preferences. J. Consumer Res. 27(2):233–248.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bampo M, Ewing MT, Mather DR, Stewart D, Wallace M (2008) The effects of the social structure of digital networks on viral marketing performance. Inform. Systems Res. 19(3):273–290.Link, Google Scholar
• Barasch A, Berger J (2014) Broadcasting and narrowcasting: How audience size affects what people share. J. Marketing Res. 51(3):286–299.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF, Leary MR (1995) The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psych. Bull. 117(3):497–529.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berger J, Iyengar R (2013) Communication channels and word of mouth: How the medium shapes the message. J. Consumer Res. 40(3):567–579.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berger J, Milkman KL (2012) What makes online content viral? J. Marketing Res. 49(2):192–205.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bertrand M, Duflo E, Mullainathan S (2004) How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? Quart. J. Econom. 119(1):249–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brandtzæg PB, Lüders M, Skjetne JH (2010) Too many Facebook “friends”? Content sharing and sociability versus the need for privacy in social network sites. Internat. J. Human–Comput. Interaction 26(11–12):1006–1030.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Breakwell GM, Fife-Schaw C (1988) Ageing and the impact of new technology. Soc. Behav. 3(2):119–130.Google Scholar
• Burt RS (2005) Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital: An Introduction to Social Capital (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Chen H, Prabuddha D, Hu YJ (2015) IT-enabled broadcasting in social media: An empirical study of artists’ activities and music sales. Inform. Systems Res. 26(3):513–531.Link, Google Scholar
• Chevalier J, Mayzlin D (2006) The effect of word-of-mouth on sales: Online book reviews. J. Marketing Res. 43(3):345–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Choi BC, Jiang Z, Xiao B, Kim SS (2015) Embarrassing exposures in online social networks: An integrated perspective of privacy invasion and relationship bonding. Inform. Systems Res. 26(4):675–694.Link, Google Scholar
• Costa PT, McCrae RR (1992) Revised neo personality inventory (neo pi-r) and neo five-factor inventory (neo-ffi). Psychological Assessment Resources Odessa, FL.Google Scholar
• Crook J (2013) Facebook like button, viewed 22 B times a day on 7.5 M websites, gets a redesign. TechCrunch (November 6), http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/06/facebook-like-button-viewed-22b-times-a-day-on-7–5m-websites-gets-a-redesign/.Google Scholar
• Dellarocas C, Sutanto J, Calin M, Palme E (2015) Attention allocation in information-rich environments: The case of news aggregators. Management Sci. 62(9):2543–2562.Link, Google Scholar
• Dou Y, Niculescu MF, Wu D (2013) Engineering optimal network effects via social media features and seeding in markets for digital goods and services. Inform. Systems Res. 24(1):164–185.Link, Google Scholar
• Fang X, Jen-Hwa HP, Zhepeng L, Weiyu T (2013) Predicting adoption probabilities in social networks. Inform. Systems Res. 24(1):128–145.Link, Google Scholar
• Festinger L (1962) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).Google Scholar
• Flesch R (1948) A new readability yardstick. J. Appl. Psych. 32(3):221–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flynn LR, Goldsmith RE, Eastman JK (1996) Opinion leaders and opinion seekers: Two new measurement scales. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 24(2):137–147.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Forman C, Ghose A, Wiesenfeld B (2008) Examining the relationship between reviews and sales: The role of reviewer identity disclosure in electronic markets. Inform. Systems Res. 19(3):291–313.Link, Google Scholar
• Frenzen J, Nakamoto K (1993) Structure, cooperation, and the flow of market information. J. Consumer Res. 20(3):360–375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garg R, Smith MD, Telang R (2011) Measuring information diffusion in an online community. J. Management Inform. Systems 28(2):11–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goh K-Y, Heng C-S, Lin Z (2013) Social media brand community and consumer behavior: Quantifying the relative impact of user- and marketer-generated content. Inform. Systems Res. 24(1):88–107.Link, Google Scholar
• Googleblog (2010) Using site speed in web search ranking. https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2010/04/using-site-speed-in-web-search-ranking.html.Google Scholar
• Gottfried J, Shearer E (2016) News use across social media platforms 2016. (May 26) http://www.journalism.org/2016/05/26/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2016/.Google Scholar
• Grgecic D, Holten R, Rosenkranz C (2015) The impact of functional affordances and symbolic expressions on the formation of beliefs. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 16(7):580–607.Google Scholar
• Gurses S, Diaz C (2013) Two tales of privacy in online social networks. IEEE Security Privacy 11(3):29–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haile T (2014) What you think you know about the web is wrong. Time (March 9), http://time.com/12933/what-you-think-you-know-about-the-web-is-wrong/.Google Scholar
• Hann I-H, Terwiesch C (2003) Measuring the frictional costs of online transactions: The case of a name-your-own-price channel. Management Sci. 49(1):1563–1579.Link, Google Scholar
• Hansen LK, Arvidsson A, Nielsen FÅ, Colleoni E, Etter M (2011) Good friends, bad news–affect and virality in Twitter. Park JJ, Yang LT, Lee C, eds. Future Information Technology, Comm. Comput. Inform. Sci., Vol. 185 (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg), 34–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Häubl G, Elrod T (1999) The impact of congruity between brand name and country of production on consumers’ product quality judgments. Internat. J. Res. Marketing 16(3):199–215.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heimbach I, Hinz O (2016) The impact of content sentiment and emotionality on content virality. Internat. J. Res. Marketing 33(3):695–701.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hennig-Thurau T, Gwinner KP, Walsh G, Gremler DD (2004) Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the Internet? J. Interactive Marketing 18(1):38–52.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hill S, Provost F, Volinsky C (2006) Network-based marketing: Identifying likely adopters via consumer networks. Statist. Sci. 21(2):256–276.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hinz O, Spann M (2008) The impact of information diffusion on bidding behavior in secret reserve price auctions. Inform. Systems Res. 19(3):351–368.Link, Google Scholar
• Hinz O, Hann I-H, Spann M (2015) Can’t buy me love…or can I? Social capital attainment through conspicuous consumption in virtual environments. Inform. Systems Res. 26(4):859–870.Link, Google Scholar
• Hinz O, Skiera B, Barrot C, Becker JU (2011) Seeding strategies for viral marketing: An empirical comparison. J. Marketing 75(6):55–71.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ho JY, Dempsey M (2010) Viral marketing: Motivations to forward online content. J. Bus. Res. 63(9):1000–1006.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holsti OR (1969) Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Hovland CI (1948) Social communication. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. 92(5):371–375.Google Scholar
• Imbens GM, Wooldridge JM (2009) Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. J. Econom. Literature 47(1):5–86.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iyer G, Katona Z (2015) Competing for attention in social communication markets. Management Sci. 62(8):2304–2320.Link, Google Scholar
• Jagre E, Watson JJ, Watson JG (2001) Sponsorship and congruity theory: A theoretical framework for explaining consumer attitude and recall of event sponsorship. Adv. Consumer Res. 28:439–445.Google Scholar
• Jiang Z, Heng CS, Choi BCF (2013) Privacy concerns and privacy-protective behavior in synchronous online social interactions. Inform. Systems Res. 24(3):579–595.Link, Google Scholar
• Jones Q, Ravid G, Rafaeli S (2004) Information overload and the message dynamics of online interaction spaces: A theoretical model and empirical exploration. Inform. Systems Res. 15(2):194–210.Link, Google Scholar
• Klayman J (1988) Cue discovery in probabilistic environments: Uncertainty and experimentation. J. Experiment. Psych.: Learn., Memory, Cognition 14(2):317–330.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laing RD, Phillipson H, Lee AR (1966) Interpersonal Perception: A Theory and a Method of Research (Springer, New York).Google Scholar
• Lange F, Dahlén M (2003) Let’s be strange: Brand familiarity and ad-brand incongruency. J. Product Brand Management 12(7):449–461.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leary MR, Kelly KM, Cottrell CA, Schreindorfer LS (2013) Construct validity of the need to belong scale: Mapping the nomological network. J. Personality Assessment 95(6):610–624.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mandler G (1982) The structure of value: Accounting for taste. Clark MS, Fiske ST, eds. Affect and Cognition: The Seventeenth Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ), 3–36.Google Scholar
• Markus ML, Silver MS (2008) A foundation for the study of IT effects: A new look at DeSanctis and Poole’s concepts of structural features and spirit. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 9(10):609–632.Google Scholar
• Maslach C, Stapp J, Santee RT (1985) Individuation: Conceptual analysis and assessment. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 49(3):729–738.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meier C (2014) “Klauen, klauen, klauen”: Bild.de-chef reichelt attackiert focus online. Meedia (June 4), http://meedia.de/2014/06/04/klauen-klauen-klauen-bild-de-chef-reichelt-greift-focus-online-an/.Google Scholar
• Meyer BD (1995) Natural and quasi-experiments in economics. J. Bus. Econom. Statist. 13(2):151–161.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Muchnik L, Aral S, Taylor SJ (2013) Social influence bias: A randomized experiment. Science 341(9):647–651.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nielsen J (1999) Designing Web Usability: The Practice of Simplicity (New Riders Publishing, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Oh H, Animesh A, Pinsonneault A (2016) Free versus for-a-fee: The impact of a paywall on the pattern and effectiveness of word-of-mouth via social media. MIS Quart. 40(1):31–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oh O, Chanyoung E, Rao HR (2015) Role of social media in social change: An analysis of collective sense making during the 2011 Egypt revolution. Inform. Systems Res. 26(1):210–223.Link, Google Scholar
• Pennebaker JW, Roger BJ, Francis ME (2007) LIWC2007: Linguistic inquiry and word count. http://liwc.wpengine.com/.Google Scholar
• Piaget J (1932) Le Jugement Moral Chez L’Enfant (Alcan, Paris).Google Scholar
• Raynes-Goldie KS (2012) Privacy in the age of Facebook: Discourse, architecture consequences. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.Google Scholar
• Richardson M, Domingos P (2002) Mining knowledge-sharing sites for viral marketing. Proc. 8th ACM SIGKDD Internat. Conf. Knowledge Discovery Data Mining (ACM, New York), 61–70.Google Scholar
• Schiller B, Heimbach I, Strufe T, Hinz O (2016) Development of social network usage in Germany since 2012. Technical report, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany.Google Scholar
• Schulze C, Schöler L, Skiera B (2014) Not all fun and games: Viral marketing for utilitarian products. J. Marketing 78(1):1–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shugan SM (1980) The cost of thinking. J. Consumer Res. 7(2):99–111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simmel G (1957) Fashion. Amer. J. Soc. 62(6):541–558 [originally published in Internat. Quart. 10(1904).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sirgy MJ, Johar JS, Samli AC, Claiborne CB (1991) Self-congruity versus functional congruity: Predictors of consumer behavior. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 19(4):363–375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stieglitz S, Dang-Xuan L (2013) Emotions and information diffusion in social media—Sentiment of microblogs and sharing behavior. J. Management Inform. Systems 29(4):217–248.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Susarla A, Oh J-H, Tan Y (2012) Social networks and the diffusion of user-generated content: Evidence from YouTube. Inform. Systems Res. 23(1):23–41.Link, Google Scholar
• Szabo G, Huberman BA (2010) Predicting the popularity of online content. Comm. ACM 53(8):80–88.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V (2000) Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Inform. Systems Res. 11(4):342–365.Link, Google Scholar
• Woollaston V (2016) Court rules against the use of Facebook’s like button: Shopping site accused of violating German privacy laws. DailyMail (March 9), http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3484050/Facebook-s-Like-button-violates-European-privacy-laws-Court-rules-feature-not-used-German-shopping-site.html.Google Scholar
• Zeng X, Wei L (2013) Social ties and user content generation: Evidence from Flickr. Inform. Systems Res. 24(1):71–87.Link, Google Scholar