A social marketing website you can trust
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

A social marketing website you can trust

on

  • 4,366 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
4,366
Views on SlideShare
4,325
Embed Views
41

Actions

Likes
4
Downloads
46
Comments
0

4 Embeds 41

http://www.scoop.it 31
http://www.slideshare.net 8
http://zachbrowne.com 1
http://www.linkedin.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

A social marketing website you can trust A social marketing website you can trust Presentation Transcript

  • A social marketing website you can trust National Social Marketing Centre Second National Social Marketing Conference 24 September 2007 Brian Cugelman, Mike Thelwall, Phil Dawes University of Wolverhampton Statistical Cybermetrics Research Group and the Wolverhampton Business School http://cybermetrics.wlv.ac.uk
  • Presentation overview
    • Growing Internet usage
    • Online behavioural change interventions
    • ‘ Costs’ on the Internet
    • Credibility, trust and behaviour
    • Enhancing e-credibility for online social marketing
  • 1. Growing Internet usage
  • Computers, hosts and users Computer Industry Almanac, Forrester, International Telecommunication Union, The Domain Survey
  • Web 2.0 Alexa using the reach measure. http://www.alexa.com/site/help/traffic_learn_more
  • 2. Online behavioural change interventions
  • Online behavioural interventions
    • Meta-analysis of 22 articles compared web-based versus non-web-based health interventions, showed online interventions increased participants’ knowledge and health related behaviour (Wantland et al., 2004)
    • Continuous email reminders can improve participants level of physical activity and eating habits (Franklin et al., 2006)
    • Foot-in-the-door technique operates by email (Gueguen, 2002)
    • Personalized web content improves attempts to quit smoking (Dijkstra, 2006)
    • Internet applications can be more persuasive : they provide anonymity, are persistent, manage vast amounts of information, can present issue in multiple ways (Fogg, 2003)
    • However , outside experimental settings, mistrust is significant .
  • 3. ‘Costs’ on the Internet (crime, deception and mistrust)
  • Costs to businesses from e-fraud (billions) CYBERSOURCE (2007) 8th annual online fraud report. CyberSource Corporation.
  • Costs to individuals from e-fraud (millions) National White Collar Crime Center, Federal Bureau of Investigation (2006) Internet Crime Report
  • Oxford Internet Survey 2007 Report: The Internet in Britain DUTTON, W. H. & HELSPER, E. (2007) Oxford Internet Survey 2007 Report: The Internet in Britain. Oxford Internet Institute.
  • Social and charitable risks
    • In 2007, MySpace removed 29,000 convicted sex offenders from its service
    • In 2005, bogus charities distributed email scams designed to divert donations intended for tsunami victims
    • After 9/11, US officials froze assets of charities funding terrorists organizations ; donations solicited online (HLF)
    Reuters (2007); Long and Chiagouris (2006); US Government (2001); Internet Archive (2001)
  • Conclusion
    • The more people fear spammers, phishers, identity thieves, con artists, hackers, cyber stalkers, sex offenders, cyber bullies, misinformation, propaganda and hate advocates, the more it will take to build online trust
  • 4. Credibility, trust and behaviour
  • Credibility (believability)
    • Source credibility: A communicator’s positive characteristics that influence the receivers acceptance of a message
    • Credibility = Trustworthiness + Expertise
    • + Attractiveness
    Kotler and Roberto (1989); Fogg and Tseng (1999); Ohanian (2001) Knowledgeable Competent Intelligent Capable Experienced Powerful Expertise Classy Beautiful Elegant Sexy (Cool) Attractiveness Trustworthy Good Truthful Well-intentioned Unbiased Honest Credible Believable Reputable Trustable Trustworthiness Credibility
  • Credibility and source attribution
    • Perceptions of credibility impact the degree to which audiences are likely to adopt new behaviours (Kotler and Roberto, 1989)
    • Website design may have a greater impact on consumers’ attitudes towards websites than their offline perceptions of the organizations (Long, Chiagouris 2006)
  • Credibility and behaviour
    • Correlations between purchase intentions and an endorser’s perceived credibility
    OHANIAN, R. (1990) Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19, 39-52. *N=265, P <0.05 one tailed Correlation Credibility dimensions .485* Expertise .145* Trustworthiness .374* Attractiveness
  • Which photo could increase or decrease text credibility? NGUYEN, H. & MASTHOFF, J. (2007) Is it me or what I say? Source image and persuasion. Persuasive 07. Springer.
  • Credibility and imagery
    • Text credibility is influenced by image credibility
    • Experiment compared same content with photos of low and high credibility doctors, and no image
    NGUYEN, H. & MASTHOFF, J. (2007) Is it me or what I say? Source image and persuasion. Persuasive 07. Springer. Middle Lower Higher Goodwill Middle Middle No image Lower Lower Low credibility Higher Higher High credibility Credibility Trust Photo
  • Trust (dependability) Truster Trustee Bad outcome - Good outcome + DEUTSCH, M. (1962) Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln, University of Nebraska Press. A. Ambiguous path B. Trustee controls outcome Start with an object of motivational relevance C. Bad outweighs good
  • Trust and online behaviour
    • Trust is the primary intermediary between perceptions and willingness to purchase online (Jarvenpaa et al., 2000)
    • Trust plays an intermediary role between a website’s physical characteristics and user’s behavioural intentions . Trust varies across different types of websites depending on the risks and costs associated with the transactions (Bart et al., 2005)
    • Three concerns compose the three threats of online shopping: financial, product and time/convenience. The top fear in the top category is ‘not trusting the online company’ , and other trust concerns (Forsythe, Liu, Shannon and Chun, 2006)
  • Generalized trust and Internet use Analysis by Cugelman (2007) with data from the European Social Survey (the ESS) (r=0.232, N=45,414, P<0.01, one-tailed)
  • 5. Enhancing e-credibility for online social marketing
  • Improving credibility
    • “ What can social marketers do to raise or improve the credibility of their campaigns and programmes?” (Kotler and Roberto, 1989)
    • Lets quickly review some ways
  • Usability
    • I think that I would like to use this website frequently
    • I found the website unnecessarily complex
    • I thought the website was easy to use
    • I think that I would need the support of a technical person to be able to use this website
    • I found the various functions in this website were well integrated
    • I thought there was too much inconsistency in this website
    • I would imagine that most people would learn to use this website very quickly
    • I found the website very cumbersome to use
    • I felt very confident using the website
    • I needed to learn a lot of things before I could get going with this website
    Brooke, J. (1996) SUS: a &quot;quick and dirty&quot; usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. A. Weerdmeester & A. L. McClelland (eds.) Usability Evaluation in Industry. London: Taylor and Francis. TULLIS, T. & STETSON, J. (2004) A comparison of questionnaires for assessing website usability. UAP.
    • System Usability Scale (SUS)
    • Reach consensus with the fewest reviewers and 10 questions
    • Ask for specific examples if you want to pinpoint confusing and clear features
  • Credibility
    • Trustworthiness
    • Dependable --- Undependable
    • Honest --- Dishonest
    • Reliable --- Unreliable
    • Sincere --- Insincere
    • Trustworthy --- Untrustworthy
    • Expertise
    • Expert --- Not an expert
    • Experienced --- Inexperienced
    • Knowledgeable --- Unknowledgeable
    • Qualified --- Unqualified
    • Skilled --- Unskilled
    • Attractiveness
    • Attractive----Unattractive
    • Classy --- Not classy
    • Beautiful --- Ugly
    • Elegant --- Plain
    • Sexy --- Not sexy
    OHANIAN, R. (1990) Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19, 39-52.
    • Scale to measure celebrity endorsers
    • Designed to assess celebrity endorser credibility
    • Modify attractiveness with adjectives appropriate to your target audiences: cool, hip, conservative, etc..
    • Used to study the effects of image credibility on perceptions of content credibility
  • Trust
    • Honesty
    • The website provides truthful information
    • The information provided by the website is believable
    • The website content reflects expertise
    • Reputation
    • The website is respected
    • The website has a good reputation
    • Predictability
    • The website content is what I expected
    • There were no surprises in how the website responded to my actions
    • Risk
    • I am taking a chance interacting with this website
    • I feel it is unsafe to interact with this website
    • I feel I must be cautious when using this website
    • It is risky to interact with this website
    • Trust
    • I believe this website is trustworthy
    • I trust this website
    • Perceived ease of use
    • Learning to operate this website was easy for me
    • I found it easy to get this website to do what I wanted it to do
    • I found the website easy to use
    CORRITORE, C., WIEDENBECK, S., MARBLE, R. & KRACHER, B. (2005) Measuring online trust of websites: credibility, perceived ease of use, and risk. Elevenths Americas conference on information systems. Omaha, USA.
    • Measuring online trust of websites
    • From a research project designed to develop a survey of website credibility
    • These questions have been scaled down to the fewest questions with the highest factor loadings
    • Look up the full scale if you’re planning to use this system
  • Credibility guidelines Stanford University
    • Make it easy to verify the accuracy of the information on your site
    • Show that there's a real organization behind your site
    • Highlight the expertise in your organization and in the content and services you provide
    • Show that honest and trustworthy people stand behind your site.
    • Make it easy to contact you
    • Design your site so it looks professional (or is appropriate for your purpose)
    • Make your site easy to use -- and useful
    • Update your site's content often (at least show it's been reviewed recently)
    • Use restraint with any promotional content (e.g., ads, offers)
    • Avoid errors of all types, no matter how small they seem
    Fogg, B.J. (May 2002). A Research Summary from the Stanford Persuasive Technology Lab. Stanford University. www.webcredibility.org/guidelines
    • From Stanford University’s Persuasive Technology Lab
    • Based on three years of research
    • Research engaged over 4,500 people
  • Pulling it all together
    • In the BCSO factors, fit mistrust as a cost, and online endorsements as others
    • During formative research, evaluate your e-campaign credibility with the prior scales
    • Fuse IT project management with health campaign planning: Spiral Technology Action Research Model
  • Thank you
    • For more information contact:
    • Brian Cugelman
    • [email_address]
    • http://Cybermetrics.wlv.ac.uk
  • References
    • Publications
    • BART, Y., SHANKAR, V., FAREENA, S. & URBAN, G. (2005) Are the drivers and roles of online trust the same for all web sites and consumers? A large-scale exploratory empirical study. journal of Marketing, 69, 133-152.
    • CORRITORE, C., WIEDENBECK, S., MARBLE, R. & KRACHER, B. (2005) Measuring online trust of websites: credibility, perceived ease of use, and risk. Elevenths Americas conference on information systems. Omaha, USA.
    • CUGELMAN, B., THELWALL, M. & DAWES, P. (2007) Can Brotherhood be Sold Like Soap…Online? An Online Social Marketing and Advocacy Pilot Study Synopsis. Springer.
    • CYBERSOURCE (2007) 8th annual online fraud report. CyberSource Corporation.
    • DEUTSCH, M. (1962) Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln, University of Nebraska Press.
    • DIJKSTRA, A. (2006) Technology adds new principles to persuasive psychology: Evidence from health education. Persuasive Technology. Germany, Springer.
    • DUTTON, W. H. & HELSPER, E. (2007) Oxford Internet Survey 2007 Report: The Internet in Britain. Oxford Internet Institute.
    • FOGG, B. J. & TSENG, H. (1999) The elements of computer credibility. CHI 99. Pittsburgh, USA.
    • FOGG, B. J. (2002) Stanford Guidelines for Web Credibility. A Research Summary from the Stanford Persuasive Technology Lab. Stanford University.
    • FOGG, B. J. (2003) Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do, San Francisco, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
    • FORSYTHE, S., LIU, C., SHANNON, D. & CHUN, G. (2006) Development of a scale to measure the perceived benefits and risks of online shopping. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 20, 55-75.
    • FRANKLIN, P., ROSENBAUM, P., CAREY, M. & ROIZEN, M. (2006) Using sequential email messages to promote health behaviors: Evidence of feasibility and reach in a worksite sample. Journal of Medical Internet Research.
    • GOVERNMENT., U. (2001) Fact Sheet on Shutting Down the Terrorist Financial Network White House.
    • GUEGUEN, N. (2002) Foot-in-the-door technique and computer mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 11-15.
    • JARVENPAA, S., TRACTINSKY, N. & VITALE, M. (2000) Consumer trust in an Internet store. Information and Technology Management, 1, 45-71.
    • KOTLER, P. & ROBERTO, E. (1989) Social Marketing, New York, The Free Press.
    • LONG, M. & CHIAGOURIS, L. (2006) The role of credibility in shaping attitudes towards nonprofit websites. International Journal of Nonprofit Voluntary Sector Marketing, 11.
    • National White Collar Crime Center, Federal Bureau of Investigation (2006) Internet Crime Report
    • NGUYEN, H. & MASTHOFF, J. (2007) Is it me or what I say? Source image and persuasion. Persuasive 07. Springer.
    • OHANIAN, R. (1990) Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19, 39-52.
    • PUTNAM, R. (2000) Bowling alone, New York, Simon and Schuster, Inc.
    • SKINNER, H. & MALEY, O. N., D (2006) Developing Internet-based e-health promotion programs: the spiral technology action research (STAR) model. Health Promotion Practice, 7, 406-417.
    • TULLIS, T. & STETSON, J. (2004) A comparison of questionnaires for assessing website usability. UAP.
    • UNKNOWN (2007) MySpace deletes 29,000 sex offenders. Reuters New York.
    • WANTLAND, D., PORTILLO, C., HOLZEMER, W. L., SLAUGHTER, R. & MCGHEE, E. (2004) The effectiveness of web-based vs. non-web-based interventions: a meta-analysis of behavioural change outcomes. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 6.
    • Other sources
    • Data for computer, hosts, users and domains graphs: Computer Industry Almanac; Forrester; International Telecommunication Union; The Domain Survey
    • Web 2.0 graphs by Alexa using the reach measure. http://www.alexa.com/site/help/traffic_learn_more
    • Internet Archive (2001) CAIR web link ‘Donate to the NY/DC Emergency Relief Fund’ leads to Holy Land Foundation which was outlawed for funding terrorism. http://web.archive.org/web/20010917013636/http://cair-net.org/
    • Analysis by Cugelman (2007) with data from the European Social Survey (the ESS). http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org