The Significant Effect of Word of Mouth (WOM) on the Attitude of Potential Consumers
International Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization
Volume 4, Issue 6, December 2016, Pages: 59-63
Received: Sep. 26, 2016; Accepted: Nov. 17, 2016; Published: Mar. 10, 2017
Views 1875      Downloads 75
Owusu Alfred, Marketing Department, Kumasi Technical University, Kumasi, Ghana
Article Tools
Follow on us
The purpose of this study was to seek evidence of the significant effect of word of mouth (WOM) on the attitudes of potential consumers. The study tested the following two research hypotheses. (1) WOM will have both positive and negative effect on the probability of consumers purchase and attitudes towards products. (2) That negative WOM effect on consumers purchase and attitude towards a product will be stronger than the positive. The results of the study indicate that WOM, both have negative and positive, and can influence the attitudes and predict purchase behavior of consumers. This study cannot give reliable estimates of the precise magnitude of this effect due to the lack of significant differences between the experimental groups and the control group. It is contended by several authors that the influence of negative WOM is more than positive, however, this proposition was not supported by this study.
Negative Word of Mouth, Customer Dissatisfaction, Retention, Attitude Measurement
To cite this article
Owusu Alfred, The Significant Effect of Word of Mouth (WOM) on the Attitude of Potential Consumers, International Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. Vol. 4, No. 6, 2016, pp. 59-63. doi: 10.11648/j.ijebo.20160406.13
Copyright © 2016 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License ( which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
A C Nielsen (1967). Consumers Nielsen Update. A. C. Nielsen Co.: Northbrook, Illinois.
Arndt J (1967a). Role of product-related conversations in the diffusion of a new product. Journal of Marketing Research, 4, 3, 291-295.
Arndt J (2007b). Word of mouth advertising: A review of the literature. Advertising Research Foundation.
Day R; Grabicke K; Schaetzle T & Staubach F (2001). The hidden agenda of consumer complaining. Journal of Retailing, 57, 3, 86-106.
Hart, CWL; Heskett, JL & Sasser WE (1997). The profitable art of service recovery. Harvard Business Review, 68, 148-156.
Herr PM; Kardes FR & Kim J (1999). Effects of word-of-mouth and product attribute Information on persuasion: An accessibility-diagnosticity perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (March), 454-462.
Jacoby J (2008). Consumer research: A state of the art review. Journal of Marketing, 42, April, 87-96.
Kotler P (2001). Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and Control. Sydney: Prentice Hall.
Lutz RJ (2005). Changing brand attitudes through modification of cognitive structure. Journal of Consumer Research, 1, 49-59.
RW (2002). An attribution explanation of the disproportionate influence of unfavorable information. Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (December), 301-310.
Richins ML (1997). Negative word-of-mouth by dissatisfied consumers: A pilot study. Journal of Marketing, 47, 68-78.
Richins ML (1997). A multivariate analysis of responses to dissatisfaction. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 15, 3, 24-31.
Seymour P; Brennan M & Esslemont D (2004). Predicting purchase quantities: Further investigation of the Juster Scale. Marketing Bulletin, 5, 21-36.
Assistance Research Programs (2007). Consumer complaint handling in America: Summary of findings and recommendations. U. S. Office of Consumer Affairs Washington DC.
Technical Assistance Research Programs (2008). Consumer complaint handling.
America: An update study. White House Office of Consumer Affairs: Washington DC.
Turkey JW (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading: Massachusetts, Addison-Wesley.
MG & Dillon WR (1980). The effects of unfavorable product rating information. Advances in Consumer Research, 7, 528-532.
Wright P (1974). The harassed decision maker: Time pressures, distractions, and the use of evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 5, 555-561.
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
Tel: (001)347-983-5186