Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
research-article

Social Sharing, Public Perception, and Brand Competition in a Horizontally Differentiated Market

Published: 01 June 2023 Publication History

Abstract

We examine how social sharing of consumers’ brand purchases (via posting selfies on social media platforms) affects brand competition in a market where different types of consumers, characterized by their distinct personal characteristics (i.e., personalities, hobbies, and lifestyles) and brand preferences (i.e., being loyal to one of two horizontally differentiated brands or neither), all desire accurate public perception of their true type. Our analysis shows that social sharing enhances the profit of the advantaged brand that attracts a larger size of loyal consumers but can hurt the profit of the disadvantaged brand that attracts a smaller size of loyal consumers. That is, in a horizontally differentiated market, social sharing may further strengthen the competitive status of the advantaged brand. Interestingly, the disadvantaged brand may become more likely to suffer from social sharing if it follows the conventional wisdom to expand the loyal segment. When the public can learn a consumer’s true type from other information sources (e.g., the consumer’s online blog), social sharing of consumers’ brand purchases brings a smaller profit gain to the advantaged brand. Our theoretical findings shed light on how brands can devise competitive strategies to leverage the power of social media.

Abstract

We examine how social sharing of consumers’ brand purchases affects brand competition in a market where different types of consumers, characterized by their distinct personal characteristics (i.e., personalities, hobbies, and lifestyles) and brand preferences (i.e., being loyal to one of two horizontally differentiated brands or neither), all desire accurate public perception of their true type. Social sharing of a consumer’s brand purchase allows the public to infer the consumer’s type, but such inference can be mistaken if a brand is purchased by multiple types of consumers. A consumer receives a higher public-perception utility from purchasing a brand if social sharing of the consumer’s purchase leads to a higher chance of accurate public perception. Our analysis shows that social sharing enhances the profit of the advantaged brand that attracts a larger size of loyal consumers but can hurt the profit of the disadvantaged brand that attracts a smaller size of loyal consumers. That is, in a horizontally differentiated market, social sharing may further strengthen the competitive status of the advantaged brand. Interestingly, the disadvantaged brand may become more likely to suffer from social sharing if it follows the conventional wisdom to expand the loyal segment. When the public can learn a consumer’s true type from other information sources (e.g., the consumer’s online blog), social sharing of consumers’ brand purchases brings a smaller profit gain to the advantaged brand. The disadvantaged brand may be better off or worse off, depending on the size of its loyal segment. Our theoretical findings shed light on how brands can devise competitive strategies to leverage the power of social media.
History: Michael Zhang, Senior Editor; Hong Xu, Associate Editor.
Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2022.1132.

References

[1]
Aaker D (1996) Building Strong Brands (The Free Press, New York).
[2]
Aaker JL (1997) Dimensions of brand personality. J. Marketing Res. 34(3):347–356.
[3]
Aaker JL (1999) The malleable self: The role of self-expression in persuasion. J. Marketing Res. 36(1):45–57.
[4]
Amaldoss W, Jain S (2005) Conspicuous consumption and sophisticated thinking. Management Sci. 51(10):1449–1466.
[5]
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.
[6]
Arnold M, Li C, Saliba C, Zhang L (2011) Asymmetric market shares, advertising and pricing: Equilibrium with an information gatekeeper. J. Industrial Econom. 59(1):63–84.
[7]
Berger J, Heath C (2007) Where consumers diverge from others: Identity signaling and product domains. J. Consumer Res. 34(2):121–134.
[8]
Berger J, Heath C (2008) Who drives divergence? Identity-signaling, outgroup dissimilarity, and the abandonment of cultural tastes. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 95(3):593–607.
[9]
Birdwell, ALE (1968) A study of influence of image congruence on consumer choice. J. Bus. 41(1):76–88.
[10]
Blattberg RC, Sen SK (1974) Market segmentation using models of multidimensional purchasing behavior: A new segmentation strategy designed to provide better information to the marketing decision maker. J Marketing 38(4):17–28.
[11]
Cabral L (2011) Dynamic price competition with network effects. Rev. Econom. Stud. 78(1):83–111.
[12]
Chernev A, Hamilton R, Gal D (2011) Competing for consumer identity: Limits to self-expression and the perils of lifestyle branding. J. Marketing 75(3):66–82.
[13]
Chen Y, Narasimhan C, John Zhang Z (2001) Individual marketing with imperfect targetability. Marketing Sci. 20(1):23–41.
[14]
Chen J, Xu H, Whinston AB (2011) Moderated online communities and quality of user-generated content. J. Management Inform. Systems 28(2):237–268.
[15]
Cheng HK, Liu Y (2012) Optimal software free trial strategy: The impact of network externalities and consumer uncertainty. Inform. Systems Res. 23(2):488–504.
[16]
Crawford VP, Haller H (1990) Learning how to cooperate: Optimal play in repeated coordination games. Econometrica 58(3):571–595.
[17]
Dunning D (2005) Self-Insight: Roadblocks and Detours on the Path to Knowing Thyself (Psychology Press, New York).
[18]
Escalas JE, Bettman JR (2005) Self-construal, reference groups, and brand meaning. J. Consumer Res. 32(3):378–389.
[19]
Farrell J (1988) Communication, coordination, and Nash equilibrium. Econom. Lett. 27(3):209–214.
[20]
Forehand MR, Deshpandé R, Reed A II (2002) Identity salience and the influence of the social self-schema on advertising response. J. Appl. Psych. 87(6):1086–1099.
[21]
Godes D, Mayzlin D (2004) Using on-line conversations to study word-of-mouth communication. Marketing Sci. 23(4):545–560.
[22]
Greeno DW, Sommers MS, Kernan JB (1973) Personality and implicit behavior patterns. J. Marketing Res. 10(1):63–69.
[23]
Grubb EL, Hupp G (1968) Perception of self, generalized stereotypes, and brand selection. J. Marketing Res. 5(1):58–63.
[24]
Grubb EL, Stern BL (1971) Self-concept and significant others. J. Marketing Res. 8(3):382–385.
[25]
Gutierrez K (2014) Studies confirm the power of visuals in eLearning. Accessed June 1, 2021, http://info.shiftelearning.com/blog/bid/350326/studies-confirm-the-power-of-visuals-in-elearning.
[26]
Hamm BC, Cundiff EW (1969) Self-actualization and product perception. J. Marketing Res. 6(4):470–472.
[27]
Harsanyi JC, Selten R (1988) A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
[28]
Ho YC, Wu J, Tan Y (2017) Disconfirmation effect on online rating behavior: A structural model. Inform. Systems Res. 28(3):626–642.
[29]
Jiang Y, Guo H (2015) Design of consumer review systems and product pricing. Inform. Systems Res. 26(4):714–730.
[30]
Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–291.
[31]
Karni E, Schmeidler D (1990) Fixed preferences and changing tastes. Amer. Econom. Rev. 80(2):262–267.
[32]
Katona Z, Zubcsek PP, Sarvary M (2011) Network effects and personal influences: The diffusion of an online social network. J. Marketing Res. 48(3):425–443.
[33]
Katz ML, Shapiro C (1985) Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. Amer. Econom. Rev. 75(3):424–440.
[34]
Kuksov D (2007) Brand value in social interaction. Management Sci. 53(10):1634–1644.
[35]
Kuksov D, Xie Y (2012) Competition in a status goods market. J. Marketing Res. 49(5):609–623.
[36]
Kuksov D, Shachar R, Wang K (2013) Advertising and consumers’ communications. Marketing Sci. 32(2):294–309.
[37]
Li X, Hitt LM (2008) Self selection and information role of online product reviews. Inform. Systems Res. 19(4):456–474.
[38]
Narasimhan C (1988) Competitive promotional strategies. J. Bus. 61(4):427–449.
[39]
Pesendorfer W (1995) Design innovation and fashion cycles. Amer. Econom. Rev. 85(4):771–792.
[40]
Qiu L, Tang Q, Whinston AB (2016) Two formulas for success in social media: Learning and network effects. J. Management Inform. Systems 32(4):78–108.
[41]
Rogers CR (1947) Some observations on the organization of personality. Amer. Psych. 2(September):358–368.
[42]
Safdar K (2017) Why streetwear brand Supreme is worth $1 billion and Abercrombie isn’t. Wall Street Journal, October 18. Accessed June 1, 2021, https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-streetwear-brand-supreme-is-worth-1-billion-and-abercrombie-isnt-1508331601.
[43]
Sinitsyn M (2008) Price promotions in asymmetric duopolies with heterogeneous consumers. Management Sci. 54(12):2081–2087.
[44]
Sirgy MJ (1982) Self-concept in consumer behavior: A critical review. J. Consumer Res. 9(3):287–300.
[45]
Steele CM (1988) The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. Adv. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 21:261–302.
[46]
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.
[47]
Tesser A (1988) Toward a self-evaluation maintenance model of social behavior. Adv. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 21:181–227.
[48]
White K, Dahl D (2007) Are all out-groups created equal? Consumer identity and dissociative influence. J. Consumer Res. 34(4):525–536.
[49]
Wu J, Sun H, Tan Y (2013) Social media research: A review. J. Systems Sci. Systems Engrg. 22(3):257–282.
[50]
Yoganarasimhan H (2012) Cloak or flaunt? The fashion dilemma. Marketing Sci. 31(1):74–95.
[51]
Zhu F, Zhang X (2010) Impact of online consumer reviews on sales: The moderating role of product and consumer characteristics. J. Marketing 74(2):133–148.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Information Systems Research
Information Systems Research  Volume 34, Issue 2
June 2023
418 pages
ISSN:1526-5536
DOI:10.1287/isre.2023.34.issue-2
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

INFORMS

Linthicum, MD, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 June 2023
Accepted: 25 March 2022
Received: 11 August 2019

Author Tags

  1. public perception
  2. social sharing
  3. competitive strategies
  4. horizontal differentiation
  5. game theory

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 0
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 23 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

View options

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media