01 -Final Thesis in PDF

7/30/2019 01 -Final Thesis in PDF

1/79

PROGRAMME AND ECTS

e ro e o ran rus n on necommunities

r en u o s qv s !Michael Popp

ra eg c ar e ng w n epen an pro ec !30.0 hp

Halmstad Hgskolan 2013


2/79

Halmstad Hgskolan 2013

e ro e o ran rus n on necommunities

r en u o s qv s !Michael Popp

ra eg c ar e ng w n epen an pro ec !30.0 hp


3/79

The$role$of$brand$trust$in$online$communities$$

[1]!

Acknowledgements.

We desire to express our gratitude toward all people who have contributed to our

thesis.

We want to thank all the people who have helped us to spread the survey and

answering it.

We would also are grateful for our supervisor: Reinert Venilton who helped us all the

way to the end to product this thesis.

We also want to thank to our colleagues who offered constructive criticisms that have

enabled us to improve our thesis.

We also thank Vera and Jrgen Popp as well as Laura Pttmann for the contribution

they have made to this thesis. Without them it probably would not be what it is now.


4/79


[2]!

Title: The role of brand trust in online communitiesAuthors: Adrien Dubois Ahlqvist & Michael PoppSupervisor: Reinert VeniltonLevel: Bachelor Thesis in Business AdministrationKey words: Brand trust, online communities, eBook, Internet, retailing, brand

loyalty, brandPurpose: The purpose of this paper to understand how brand trust is built in online

communitiesMethod: A quantitative, descriptive study conducted on 286 people. A

questionnaire has been used.

Theoretical framework: The framework consists of theories and models

about online communities and brand trustConclusion: It was found that certain factors influence brand trust: Knowledge

about the eBook market, sunk cost, non-overlapping attributes, functional promises,

past experience with the brand, past experience of other community members with the

brand and information about the eBook retailer

Brand trust in online communities spreads in a similar way like information. Most

people in online communities join them to consume information and only a relatively

small amount of people provides the information about brand trust. The framework

of a community influences the way brand trust spreads with roles of members, their

evolution and social identity as most important mechanisms.


5/79


[3]!

Table.of.Contents.

Acknowledgements..1$

Introduction..6$

Background..6 $

Problem..8 $

Purpose. .9$

Delimitations:..9 $

Theoretical.framework..10$

Brand.Trust. .10$

Definition$of$Brand$...............................................................................................................................$10$

Definition$of$trust$..................................................................................................................................$10$

Definition$of$Brand$Trust$...................................................................................................................$11$

Development.of.brand.trust. .11$

Why$brand$trust$is$needed$................................................................................................................$11$

How.brand.trust.is.built.on.an.individual.level. .12$

Brand$trust$develops$over$time$......................................................................................................$12$

Brand$trust$development$and$promises$........................................................ .............................$13$

Main$factors$influencing$brand$trust$development$......................................................... .......$13$

The.Role.of.Brand.trust.in.online.communities. .14$

What.is.a.Community. .14$

Difference$between$communities$and$segmentation$............................................................$16$

Social.identity. .17$

Reasons.why.people.are.ready.to.involve.themselves.in.communities. .17$

Sharing$knowledge$...............................................................................................................................$17$

Celebrating$similarities$and$distinction$from$the$outside$world$.....................................$18$

Shared$rituals$..........................................................................................................................................$18$

How.are.communities.organized.and.Membership.life.cycle. .19$

Types$of$classification$.........................................................................................................................$19$

Evolution$in$the$role$of$people$........................................................................................................$20$

Methodology..20$

Method. .21$

Qualitative$or$quantitative$................................................................................................................$21$


6/79


[4]!

Type.of.research. .22$

Exploratory$$Descriptive$$Explanatory$....................................................................................$22$

Population.and.sample. .23$

Population$................................................................................................................................................$23$

Type$of$sample:$Randomly$and$nonrandomly$........................................................................$24$

Sample$Size$..............................................................................................................................................$25$

Instrument.to.collect.the.data:.Questionnaire. .26$

Advantages$and$disadvantages$of$online$research$.......................................................... .......$26$

Reasons$for$choosing$a$questionnaire$................................................. ........................................$28$

Data$collection$........................................................................................................................................$29$

Statistical$Methods$used$for$analysis$............................. ..............................................................$33$

Empirical.Study..35$

Preliminary.questions. .35$

Questions.relative.to.eBooks..and.eBook.retailer. .36$

Question.related.to.brand.trust. .41$

Questions.relative.to.communities. .45$

Multivariable.analysis. .48$

Discussion.of.empirical.data..50$

Why.brand.trust.is.needed.for.eBook.retailer. .50$

Brand$trust$and$the$absence$of$full$information$................................................... ..................$50$

Is$brand$trust$related$to$the$knowledge$of$the$market?$.......................................................$50$

Brand.and.sunk.costs. .53$

Brand.trust.and.nonoverlapping.attributes. .54$

How.brand.trust.is.built.on.an.individual.level. .55$

Brand$trust$and$different$types$of$promises$.............................................................................$55$

Brand.trust.and.factors.which.influence.the.individual.level.of.brand.trust..56$

Influence$of$the$three$main$factors$of$brand$trust$........................................................... .......$56$

Findings$of$questions$related$to$past$experience$............................................................. .......$58$

How.the.spreading.of.information.influences.brand.trust. .58$

Experience$of$other$community$members$.................................................................................$58$

Relationship$between$membership$of$a$brand$community$and$brand$trust$..............$59$

Goal$orientation$of$communities$....................................................................................................$59$

Mechanisms.of.online.communities.which.influence.the.way.brand.trust.

spreads. .60$


7/79


[5]!

Different$roles$in$an$online$community$.......................................................... .............................$60$

Evolution$of$People$in$an$online$community$............................................................................$61$

Most$important$places$for$online$communities$to$meet$......................................................$61$

Conclusion..63$

Contribution.to.research.and.practice. .64$

Further.studies. .64$

Limitations. .64$

Bibliography..65$


8/79


[6]!

Introduction.

Background.

This thesis is going to discuss the role of brand trust in online communities for eBook

retailer. In this first part of the introduction the importance of brand trust and online

communities is shown. Furthermore it is pointed out how these concepts belong

together and why the eBook retailing market has been chosen.

Apple is with more than 416 billion the most valuable company in the world (Forbes,

2013). Companies like Wal-Mart, McDonalds, IBM or Coca-Cola are also valued

billions. What do they have in common? They are respected and well-known brands.

One thing which they all have in common is that they have created brand trust.

Brand trust has many advantages like loyalty, elevated expectations and is sometimes

more important than the product itself.

Brand trust creates loyalty that makes the customers stay with the brand, even though

competitors product might be more favorable according to objective criteria

(Ruparelia, White, & Hughes, 2010).

Trust can sometimes be more important than the product itself. Positive experience

can strengthen belief to overconfidence resulting into liking and trusting brand

products irrationally (Wright & Lynch, 1994).

Additionally it is clear that brands make promises and raise customers expectations

about the product (Anker, Kappel, Eadie, & Sandoe, 2012), which then is associated

with more benefits.

Brand trust, however, is not a natural state of customers but has be established in them

somehow. Online communities play an important part in spreading brand trust

through the internet (de Valck , H. van Bruggen , & Wierenga , 2009) with for

instance having Facebook having 250 thousand members in Europe

(Internetworldstats, 2012). With Facebook just being one of many online

communities the amount of members and therefore also their great influence can be

seen well. Communities are now an essential social component that marketing has to


9/79


[7]!

take into consideration: they have empowered buyers as never did before, creating

new challenges for marketing: communities are more engaged, more active and more

powerful than individuals and having them trusting in the brand is essential for its

success (MUNIZ, Albert M. and O'Guinn, Thomas, 2001). Communities are also a

great way to reach a massive amount of people that are already highly engaged with

certain products or topics (SEO , Jangwon et al., 2011). Having communities trusting

a brand and spreading this trust might be far superior traditional ways of advertising.

Brand trust in an online community spreads the same way any information will spread

and will use the same mediums to do so (V. Kozinets, de Valck, C.Wojnicki, &

J.S.Wilner, 2010). Most of the time new information is given to the community by the

most influential persons in the group, usually those considered as the "elders" (Toder-

Alon, Brunei , & Schneier Siegal , 2001): they are leader of the community who then

spread the information or brand trust to the rest of a community (Toder-Alon, Brunei ,

& Schneier Siegal , 2001). At some point information can become viral and then

reach the whole community and even spread beyond the realm of the online

community (de Valck , H. van Bruggen , & Wierenga , 2009).

Organizational structures of communities went from a society of hierarchy to a

society of networks; this has an important impact on its peoples mentality and on

organizations as they are now more flexible, more reactive, more goal driven and they

also focus much more on performance and control than ever before (Raab & Kenis ,

2009).

The Internet has increased the power of communities by allowing form groups to put

companies under pressure. Today communities are able to make a big organizationbow because they for instance didnt like the end of a computer game (EA and Mass

Effect 3 (BBC, 2012)), because they want a TV show to continue (Hero Corp

(Allocin, 2012)) or simply shutting on or off companies or countries from the

internet just because they agree or disagree to their policies such as the PSN Gate

where the company saw its services being shut down by a group of hackers from the

Anonymous movement (Eudes, 2011).


10/79


[8]!

As the role of brand trust in online communities cannot be studied in the vacuum it

was decided to focus on an area with great potential which has not yet been studied

much in this regard: the eBook retailing market. This market is, new, big and

growing: the US market for instance, reached 3,371 Billion in 2012 and has a

forecasted market volume of 5,571 billion in 2015 (PricewatershouseCoopers, 2013).

Furthermore some segments are especially attractive, like the export sales of eBooks

by American retailer which grew from 4,9 million in 2010 to 21,9 million in 2011, an

increase of 333% (Greenfield, 2012)

EBook retailer have also been chosen because brand loyalty is important in highly

competitive industries where costs of entrance are low (Elena & Munuera-Alemn,

2000) as eBooks can be everyone who has the right website. Brand trust may create a

substantial entry barrier for competitors, leading to a higher revenue and market share

(Elena & Munuera-Alemn, 2000). This market fits very well to online communities

because when buying an eBook the buyer has to rely on the experience of other

community members (A. Chevalier & Mayzlin , 2003).

Problem.

Convincing individuals of buying a certain brand is not easy and convincing a group

of people is even harder. However a brand, who succeeds in doing so, will transform

the community into an ambassadors of the brand who will then convince more people

around them with a reduced need for the brand to actively reinforce that trust (Steve

Blank, 2012). Compared to brand trust, brand distrust spreads much faster in online

communities because bad buzz becomes viral much easier than positive information

about the brand and can quickly have highly destructive effects on a it (Arnaud De

Bruyn, 2008). Distrust would have high consequences: customers would switch more

easily to other brands, be more prices sensitive and this would result in a lower

market share and a decrease in revenue. (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001)

Distrust also leads to close-mindedness, which makes influencing the customer more

difficult (Ruparelia, White, & Hughes, 2010) and as a consequence of that values

projected by the company are not accepted and the unique symbolic benefits that they

want to convey will not be seen by the customer (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001).


11/79


[9]!

If brand trust, however, can be established then the great benefit is that the brand is

more likely to be chosen first in the product category (Muthukrishnan, 1995).

Purpose.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how brand trust is build and how it spreads

in communities. To accomplish these four need to be covered:

-The need of brand trust for eBook retailer

-How brand trust is built on an individual level

-How brand trust is spreading in online communities

-How the organization of communities can influence the spreading of brand trust

Therefore the research question is: How is brand trust build in online communities?

Delimitations:.

This thesis researches why brand trust is needed, how it is built on an individual level,

how information the information about brand trust spreads in online communities and

how the mechanisms which define the framework of an online community influence

the way brand trust spreads. It is not talked about the benefits of brand trust, if brands

are needed or the importance of online communities. It is also not talked about the

role of brand trust for magazines, scientific articles or other written information, even

though it is assumed that findings in these areas might be similar.


12/79


[10]!

Theoretical.framework.

In this part brand trust will be defined, by defining Brand and Trust individually

and putting these definitions together. Then it is defined in detail what an online

community is, what they are after and the big picture will be painted of how

communities organize themselves in order to reach their goals. This analysis is crucial

to understand how information is transmitted in a community and consequently how

brand trust spreads in online communities. These definitions are important to

understand how online communities develop and understand implications for the

advantages which brand trust might bring.

Brand.Trust.

Definition.of.Brand.

A brand is a set of symbolic values that differentiate products, services, persons or

places from other functionally equivalent entities (Anker, Kappel, Eadie, & Sandoe,

2012). A brand also triggers these associations in other people, letting them recall the

presented values and ideas of the brand, attaching them to the company (Valatoutsu &

Moutinho, 2008).

Definition.of.trust.

Trust is more difficult to describe as it is a complex construct that has many

dimensions, variables and that is not easy to quantify (Rousseau, Sitkin, Burt, & C.,

1998). The most precise definition is a psychological state comprising the intention

to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intention or behavior

of another under conditions of risk and interdependence (Ruparelia, White, &

Hughes, 2010). This definition gives a true, yet vague idea of what trust is. Trust is

also described as the belief, that someone fulfills his obligations or relying on an

exchange partner who one has confidence in (Schurr & Ozanne, 1985). Another

definition of trust is the willingness of the average consumer to rely on the ability of

the brand to perform its stated function (Alam & Yasin, 2010). The main


13/79


[11]!

commonality these definitions have is that trust is about a belief of the fulfillment of a

promise. Consequently it is important to understand what a promise is. According to

Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary, [] the most basic meaning of making a

promise is to assure somebody that one will do or not do something (Anker, Kappel,

Eadie, & Sandoe, 2012).

Definition.of.Brand.Trust.

Combining these two Ideas brand trust is the belief that the projected symbolic values

of the company will be given with the product or service. The trust in the promise is

important up to the point where the customer decides to try the product and thenmakes up his own mind about it and then the trust gets approved or disapproved

(Anker, Kappel, Eadie, & Sandoe, 2012). Trust is not confidence in the performance

of the company, not the belief that the company is fair minded or truthful, not a

statement about the high quality of the companys products, not predictability of

future performance, not positive personal experience, yet these factors highly

correlate with trust (Ruparelia, White, & Hughes, 2010).

Development.of.brand.trust.

Why.brand.trust.is.needed.

One of the reasons why brand trust is needed is the absence of full information (Alba

& Wesley, 1987). People have an imperfect memory and therefore cannot know

everything. They either do not know exactly all features of all retailers or do not know

everything about the products, the eBooks available.

Another problem is that brands sometimes possess non-overlapping attributes (Slovic

& MacPhilammy, 1974). Some eBook retailers might have certain features like better

customer service, better data security or very user-friendly websites. As a

consequence of that customers, even when having full information, cannot objectively

decide which retailer is better as they all have different and non-comparable

attributes. Even though this does not directly creates a need for brand trust, having

brand trust in a company would in this case make it easier for the customer to decide


14/79


[12]!

where to buy, because he knows what he values and where he gets it.

Customers also decide to build brand trust if sunk costs are involved (Samuelson &

Zeckhauser, 1988). In the case of eBook retailer the sunk-costs would be representing

by the time and energy which a customer has spent in entering has data in the website,

learning to navigate fast through the website and other aspects. He sometimes would

chose to trust the brand instead of taking the effort to switch the eBook retailer.

Regret avoidance also plays a big role in showing, why trust is important

(Muthukrishnan, 1995): people have a tendency to avoid regret instead of gaining

similar amounts of pleasure (Muthukrishnan, 1995), therefore preferring to stay at a

trusted eBook retailer instead of changing and risking to be disappointed.

Now that brand trust and the need for brand trust have been explained it is to show

how brand trust is build inside of individuals and how these individuals will spread

this trust trough online communities

How.brand.trust.is.built.on.an.individual.level.

Brand.trust.develops.over.time.

Brand trust does not occur immediately but is rather growing over time when

customers expectation of the product are met and they consequently are willing to use

it again (Ruparelia, White, & Hughes, 2010). This means that when purchases are

made at the eBook retailer and the customer is for instance satisfied with the quality

of the transaction, the eBook and the data security trust is building up. Even though it

takes time to build trust, trust can be lost very quickly when consumers are

disappointed and it is very hard or even impossible to get them trusting the brand

again (Ruparelia, White, & Hughes, 2010). This means that eBook retailer have to

work consistently because mistakes destroy trust quickly.


15/79


[13]!

Brand.trust.development.and.promises.

Promises of eBook retailers shape the expectation of the customer (Ruparelia, White,

& Hughes, 2010). EBook retailers make three main types of promises: functional,

symbolic and experiential. Functional promises focus on solving a clear problem or

on fulfilling a task, for instance when an eBook is bought because it contains certain

information (Anker, Kappel, Eadie, & Sandoe, 2012). Symbolic promises are those

where beyond the eBook other advantages are promised to be given like becoming fit

from reading a book about sport or being more liked by other people. These symbolic

promises usually involve the participation of the customer to keep them (Evans &

Hastings, 2008). The last type of promise is an experiencial, a promise whichaddresses to the need of the customer of stimulation or variety (Chandler & Vargo,

2011), for instance the story or information contained in an eBook. Understanding the

types of promises is crucial, as their nature influences the way trust is developed.

Finding out which promises influence trust the most could be helpful for building

brand trust.

Main.factors.influencing.brand.trust.development.

The three main factors influencing brand trust are word of mouth, information about

the brand and past experience (Ruparelia, White, & Hughes, 2010). It is important to

notice that in the case of eBook retailers companies do not have full influence on

these 3 factors. Word of mouth is created by customers for customers, information is

also found in different sources and past experience is relative. It would be important

to understand how much each of these 3 factors influence brand trust to be able to

take actions against negative sources of influence.


16/79


[14]!

Figure 1: Chart which illustrates the development of brand trust based on the

information of the theoretical framework (Michael & Adrien, 2013)

Now that it is explained how brand trust is established in customers as individuals

free of any context it is to show how this trust will spread in communities. In the

following it is explained how communities are organized and why people are inside of

them. These two aspects are the most important ones to understand how brand trust

spreads in an online community.

The.Role.of.Brand.trust.in.online.communities.

What.is.a.Community.

Definition(of(an(online(community(

In a first part it is defined what a community is in general and then specified in which

ways online communities may differ.

(

A community can be defined as a body of individuals who have a sense of common

identity may be defined as a community. They may share geographic, political,

religious or social similarities (Slack, 1998). This definition clearly puts people and

identity in the center of the definition a community but it is also a common purpose,

which bounds individuals to improve their lots and that of their fellows (Slack,

Absence$of$full$information,$Sunk$cost,$regret$avoidance$

Need$for$brand$trust$

$

Brand$trust$builds$over$time$through$kept$promises,$satisfaction,$word$of$mouth$and$Information$about$brand$


17/79


18/79


[16]!

information, ideas and beliefs are exchanged. One important theory that our thesis is

going to test is if brand trust can spread in online communities in the same way as

information does.

Difference.between.communities.and.segmentation.

It is important to point out the difference between communities and segments,

because these two concepts on the first glance might seem identical. Kotler,

Armstrong, Wong & Saunders (2008) define segmentation as being the need to

dividing a market into distinct groups of buyers who have distinct needs,characteristics, or behavior and who might require separate products or marketing

mixes, in practice segmentation is usually done by demographic criteria such as the

age, the gender of the person, where they live but also behaviors and psychological

factors (Martin, 2011) but in the end a good segmentation is one where each person fit

in one and only one segment (Kotler, Armstrong, Wong, & Saunders, 2008). Smith

considers that market segmentation involves viewing a heterogeneous market as a

number of smaller homogeneous market in response to differing preferences

attributable to the desires of customers for more precise satisfaction of their

variations (Wedel, 2011). Based on this analysis it can be said that people never

being two times in different segments is the most important thing in an effective

segmentation.

It was seen earlier that communities can be based on many different common

elements in many different domains that can be shared by individuals and that people

are often part of several communities at the same time: family is a community, a town

or a country is another one, then people can have several passions and can choose to

be part of each community that have been built around this hobby or interest.

Researches have defined actives communities as shared cultural, socials and

intellectual values (Seraj, 2012) involving self-governed community culture, co

creation and interactions.


19/79


[17]!

Through these two definitions it becomes really clear that these are two completely

different concepts that imply two differing approaches on marketing to these groups.

Segmentation takes away the freedom of choice to its future customers whereas a

community based approach lets the people say to what group(s) of people they want

to be assimilated. The difference is that in one case individuals are passive whereas in

the other one they are already active, already interact together and have clearly

defined rules and behaviors. There cant be a community if there is no conscience of

a kind (Muniz & O'Guinn, 2001), a mindset which is shared by all of them.

Social.identity.

Sharing(values(and(norms(

Values are defined as principles or standards of behavior; ones judgment of what is

important in life by the oxford dictionary (Oxford University, 2013). Communities

dont only stand for a goal, an objective but sometimes for values (Belton, 2012). A

great example for this is the amazon.com community. People not only buy products

but also discuss and express their opinion (Knappenberger, 2012). In case of eBooks

that means that they discuss about the eBook and give recommendations to buy or to

avoid it.

Reasons.why.people.are.ready.to.involve.themselves.in.communities.

Sharing.knowledge.

Knowledge is the reason why most communities are gathering: to exchange

information and receive support in receirch (Sharratt & Usoro , 2003). What people

are after in these networks is the satisfaction of helping or to know that having helped

they will be rewarded for it when they will need help themselves (Chao-Min , Meng-

Hsiang , & Wang , 2006). This exchange is crucial for a community to survive

because it gives users a purpose to meet and motivate them to continue their efforts.

Mutual exchange in a community is called the justice theory and it refers to the

fairness of the outcome that an individual gets considering what he has been giving


20/79


[18]!

(Bies & Moag, 1986). This fairness paradigm in communities is essential: if the

mutuality principle is not respected then the whole organization is at risk because

individuals would not be seeing the benefits of giving sharing valuable information.

(Seo , Croft , & Smith , 2011).

Communities not only value information from other members, but also from

companies.

When customers interact with companies they might absorb the companies values and

perceive the company as trusted advisers (Fller , Matzler , & Hoppe , 2008). This,

however, only happens the customer perceives the information given by the company

as valuable (Fller , Matzler , & Hoppe , 2008).

Celebrating.similarities.and.distinction.from.the.outside.world.

As it has been said before communities are a place where people sharing a common

trait (like reading), a common passion (like eBooks) or a common objective (like

learning) can be found to unite and meet other people like them: they identify

themselves with or distinguish themselves from other people (Bagozzi, Bergami,

Marzocchi, & Morandin, 2012). Many talks in communities are based around a joyful

recognition and identification; sometimes members will talk about how they came to

the community or whatever brought the community together which results in

tightening their bonds (de Valck , H. van Bruggen , & Wierenga , 2009). According to

Bagozzi (2012) they will also create a differentiation between them as a homogeneous

group and others; This barrier will be reinforced by the mutual bonds and links they

share inside the community. The close relationship of community members inside the

group causes their values to merge and amplify the trust or distrust for a brand.

Shared.rituals.

People among communities also share certain rituals that have an important role in a

practical sense but also beyond it. They reinforce the feeling of being part of

something bigger than oneself and that is different from the rest of the world (Muniz& O'Guinn, 2001). They involve the recognition of the people inside the community


21/79


[19]!

and of people outside of it as well: it can be about reading the same books or

comparing ones library to another community members collection (Muniz &

O'Guinn, 2001). Some rituals just involve telling each his or her own story of how

they joined the community or discussing about the experience of products (Zaglia,

2013). This means that rituals are an important part of online communities to spread

brand trust, as experience and information are exchanged on a regular basis.

How.are.communities.organized.and.Membership.life.cycle.

Types.of.classification..

Communitys actors have a specific life style, in the way they integrate themselves

and interact inside the group. These steps can be related to the importance the person

will acquire in this specific group: It is distinguished between visitors who will read

but not interact and are quite outside of the community from novices and regulars (the

main difference between these two groups is that the former spends less time in the

community and has less knowledge), leaders who will bring new ideas to the

community and elders whose role is mainly to regulate the group (Toder-Alon, Brunei

, & Schneier Siegal , 2001).

There are, however other approaches to categorize community members lie the one of

De Valk (2009). He distinguishes between core members and peripheral members.

Core members are people who intensively use the knowledge reservoir of a

community and will also supply massive amount of it. They are extremely active and

are usually less than 10% of a community. Peripheral members can be divided into

other groups: Conversationalists and informationalists. The conversationalists are

people who will come often but for short visits during which their interactions are

intense. Informationalists are people who highly use and supply information

contained in a community; their interactions are comparable to those of

conversationalists but they come less often and spend less time talking to others.

Hobbyists are people who love to come often to see what is new in the community but

who wont spent much time supplying new knowledge to the group, they come even

more often that conversationalists and spend even more time. They usually spend

their time uploading music, pictures or cartoons; they will often represent around 20%


22/79


[20]!

of a community. The last groups in this approach are the opportunists: they are the

least frequent visitors whose visits are the shortest, they only use the community as a

giant knowledge reservoir from which they drain but dont supply anything useful for

others.

Understanding the composition of the community is important to understand how

brand trust spreads in it. Finding out for instance the rate of participation gives a great

insight in how many percent of people are spreading the brand trust in the community

and how many are receiving the information.

Evolution.in.the.role.of.people.

According to Kozinet (1999) a more dynamic approach has to be used to make

distinction about the different actors of a community. He argues that people not only

have a predefined role but rather dynamic perception of their role in the community.

This distinction is important because it is possible to not only identify the way brand

trust is spread but also gives the possibility to predict how it will spread in the future,

assuming that the rate of change can be calculated.

.

.

.

Methodology..

In this part of the thesis, it is shown which methods have been used to collect the

information needed. The following tools have been chosen because they fit best to the

purpose. As the main objectives are to understand how brand trust develops and how

brand trust spreads in communities the most suitable approach to our purpose has

been chosen.


23/79


[21]!

Method.

Qualitative.or.quantitative.

When collecting data, two different types of data can be found: qualitative and

quantitative data (Clarke, 1999).

Quantitative analysis is about variables, measured with numbers, and analyzed with

statistical procedures, in order to determine whether the predictive generalizations of

the theory hold true (Sogunro, 2002). According to this definition it can be said that

quantitative research is more about the numerical analysis of relationship, using

statistical tools and quantifying theories.

Qualitative research on the other hand is an inquiry process of understanding [] a

problem, based on building a complex picture, formed with words, reporting detailed

views of informants, and conducted in a natural setting (Sogunro, 2002). Qualitative

data consequently is used to describe the attributes of a situation or create a detailed

report of a situation.

A qualitative research has the risk of being subjective as the participants are asked to

give their opinion (Caillet & Guimbi, 2010) instead of receiving objective

descriptions of the reality. Moreover in qualitative analysis data is often taken from a

small number of subjects, as the analysis of the data of an individual takes more time

than in a qualitative analysis (Clarke, 1999): a lower survey sample size means a

lower objectivity.

In the theoretical framework the forces which are important about for role of brand

trust in online communities have been pointed out and therefore it is important to

understand the importance of different aspects instead and analyze, how strong they

are and how the correlate, for which a quantitative approach is more appropriate.

Concluding it can be said that a quantitative analysis fits better to our demands

regarding the data and also to the population, as access to many potential participants


24/79


[22]!

is available and therefore data can be collected from a great number of subjects, get

more objective results and therefore have more profound findings.

Type.of.research.

Exploratory..Descriptive..Explanatory.

There are three different types of research: descriptive, exploratory and explanatory

(Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2007).

Exploratory research is a research that is often made when no clear definition or

boundaries of a problem exist (Shields & Tajalli, 2006). This type of research is

mostly conducted when a theory or hypothesis is needed because there is not enough

information about this topic (Shields & Tajalli, 2006). The purpose of such a research

is commonly to formulate new hypothesis in order to be able to investigate more

efficient in the future (Shields & Tajalli, 2006).

The second type of research, explanatory research, and aims to understand how

certain aspects of a topic or phenomenon are relating to each other. (Saunders, Lewis,

& Thornhill, 2007).

Exploratory studies aim to analyze relationships and patterns as in of certain

phenomena, as almost everything does not exist in a vacuum but rather in an

interrelated system (Grimaldi & Engel, 2007).

Descriptive research on the other hand is used to describe attributes and

characteristics of the group or phenomenon that is analyzed (Shields & Tajalli, 2006).

This type of research does not aim to give explanation of causalities and relationships,

not answering why, how or when certain attributes occurred (Shields & Tajalli, 2006).

Quantitate descriptive research goes even further; It not only describes the situation as

it is but also uses numerical or graphical techniques to organize this data to give a

better description (Fisher, 2009).


25/79


[23]!

Looking at the three different types of research, two types of research seems to be the

most suitable one to our situation. Exploratory research does fit very well to the

theoretical framework of our thesis, as there has been no clear hypothesis formulated

yet. Explanatory research does not fit because the role of brand trust for eBook

retailer has not been studied much before and it is not clear that the theories are

correct. Therefore looking for explanations for them does not make sense. Descriptive

research, however, fits very well to the purpose: describing the situation is a good

way to fill the void that exists due to the lack of data about this topic: by gaining

clarity about this topic insights can be gained which might be used for further

research in for instance explanatory research.

Population.and.sample.

Population.

The population of eBook reading community members has not yet been studied and

therefore no numbers for this exist. It, however, can be said that 21% of all Europeans

read eBooks (Rainie, Zickuhr, Purcell, Madden, & Brenner, 2012) and 518.512.109

people use the internet in Europe (Internetworldstats, 2012). It can be said that every

internet user is a community member because practically everyone who collects

and/or shares information online has a social identity and can associate himself with

other people online, which is the criteria for being a member of an online community

(Slack, 1998). It is impossible to find out exactly how many people are community

members and also read eBooks because both aspects are constantly changing but

estimations can be made. Assuming that the reading of eBooks and the Internet

connection are independent elements it can be said the population is of eBook reading

community members is of about 108000000 people by taking 21% of all European

internet users. This assumption is rather unrealistic because Internet usage and eBook

consumption are very likely related but this is the only option available for

determining the population. Even though it might not be accurate it gives a rough

estimate of the size of the population.


26/79


[24]!

Type.of.sample:.Randomly.and.nonKrandomly.

In this part the sampling choice will be explained

Two types of sampling are possible: Random sampling and non-random sampling

(Columbia Center for New Media Teaching and Learning, 2003)

Random sampling has a clear definition: each individual in the population of interest has

an equal likelihood of selection (Columbia Center for New Media Teaching and

Learning, 2003). This means that all subject of the population have to have the same

probability to be participate in the survey.

On the other hand, in a non-random sample is used when the likelihood of occurrence of acertain element is not known (Columbia Center for New Media Teaching and Learning,

2003). This might happen when the population is not known (Columbia Center for New

Media Teaching and Learning, 2003)

Four main types of non-probability sampling exist: availability sampling, quota Sampling,

purposive sampling and snowball sampling (Columbia Center for New Media Teaching

and Learning, 2003).

The availability sampling is a method to choose a sample by convenience (Business

Dictionairy, 2013). The advantage of this method is that it is easy to get volunteers as

there are not so strict criteria that have to be met compared to the other sampling methods

(Business Dictionary, 2013). The biggest disadvantage of this method is that the sample

might be biased: as by choosing an easy accessible group the whole population might not

be perfectly represented by them (Business Dictionary, 2013).

The second type of non-probability sampling is the quota sampling. When using quota

sampling the elements of the sample are chosen according to certain criteria that will make

them representable for the population (Heinz, 1998). An advantage is that it is more

reliable then the availability sampling, because the way of choosing makes the sample size

more resembling to the population (Heinz, 1998). The biggest disadvantage of this

sampling method is that the subjects are chosen according to specific criteria that always

involve the risk of having a non-representative sample. (Heinz, 1998)


27/79


[25]!

The third type of non-probability sampling is the purpose or judgmental sample (Tansey,

2007). In this sampling methods elements are chosen because they meet a certain criteria

(Tansey, 2007). This type of sampling is very efficient, when studying extreme or

abnormal cases, as those can be directly chosen and analyzed (Tansey, 2007). This being

said this sampling method can be rejected because the purpose is to study the development

of brand trust in an online community and there is no need to focus on special cases.

The third and last type of non-random sampling is snowball sampling. In the snowball

sampling subjects are chosen to participate in the study and the recruit further participants

(Handcock & Gile, 2011). This happens until there is enough data gathered until the

sample size is high enough for a reliable research (Handcock & Gile, 2011). This sampling

technique is often used to access populations that are difficult to find or are geographically

dispersed (Handcock & Gile, 2011) which is the case for members of online communities.

Snowball sampling, however, has two main disadvantages. The first is that there is a

community bias (Handcock & Gile, 2011). It means that certain members of the

population are more likely to be chosen than others, as they might have more contact, be

less feared or more liked (Handcock & Gile, 2011). The second disadvantage is that it

cannot be know how much the sample size is based through the snowball sampling

(Handcock & Gile, 2011). In our case this is a really big problem as role of users in an

online community are very diverse: for instance novices have a different role as leaders or

elders.

After looking at the sampling possibilities it is clear that only one method can supply a

perfect, unbiased sample: the random method. From the non-random method none willhave sufficient validity because each one of them includes a bias that will make it

impossible for us to make a reasonable quantitative analysis.

.

Sample.Size.

205 people are needed to have a confidence level of 99% with a confidence interval of 9%

and the assumed population (Macorr, 2013). It was decided for this sample size as the data


28/79


[26]!

will be relatively representative without the unreasonable effort of collecting to many

responses. If for instance the confidence interval should be decreased to 7%, 340

responses would be needed (Macorr, 2013). That is too much effort in for this slight

decrease in the confidence interval.

Instrument.to.collect.the.data:.Questionnaire.

The instrument to collect data is an online questionnaire. In the following it is going

to be explained why it was chosen to be done online and why a questionnaire has

been chosen.

.

Advantages.and.disadvantages.of.online.research.

Internet is one of the largest data sources available for market research (Kotler,

Armstrong, Wong, & Saunders, 2008). By collecting data in the Internet it is possible

to reach a very large amount of people.

Internet research, however, not only has advantages. One problem of online surveys is

the sampling (Andrews, Nonnecke, & Preece, 2003) since it is very difficult to

estimate the population that is surveyed and therefore probability samples are not

possible (Andrews, Nonnecke, & Preece, 2003). This could be seen as a problem, if

the population was not estimated already. This estimate can be seen in the

Population part. Making this online has no disadvantages compared to an offline

survey in our case, as still the same community members are interviewed, but just

with less effort.

Andrews, Nonnecke and Preece (2003) (Andrews, Nonnecke, & Preece, 2003) also

say that participants in online surveys are more likely to give bad data, as they might

lie about their demographic attributes. Other scientists, however, have discovered that

participants in online surveys are more honest (Couper M. P., 2000). It is true, that

participants in offline surveys cannot lie about certain aspects of their but it is also

fact that participants on offline studies might lie about sensitive attributes because of

the lack of anonymity (Couper M. P., 2000).


29/79


[27]!

Another problem often stated in relation to online surveys it he availability of

participants (Andrews, Nonnecke, & Preece, 2003). Even though there is a high

amount of potential survey participants, they could still ignore the surveys and

therefore no information would be gathered (Andrews, Nonnecke, & Preece, 2003).

This is not a problem for this thesis because the data will be collected from Facebook

friends and in Facebook groups where we have acquaintances and the risk of not

having the surveys answered is dramatically reduced. The same is true for e-mail

respondents.

There are, on the other hand, many advantages of making the data collection online: it

is possible to access target groups, which cannot be accessed otherwise because of

their unavailability (Andrews, Nonnecke, & Preece, 2003). Brand trust can spread

through online communities over the whole world and the members of online

communities can be found, as their name suggests, online. An offline survey would

not have any benefit compared to the online survey; the people who could be met

there could also be found online, as they have to have a connection to the internet to

be a member of an online community.

The second factor is time. Online research can reach a great amount of people over a

very short time (Couper M. P., 2000). This is important for the thesis as a quantitative

analysis is made and therefore a higher sample size during the same time of data

collection can be obtained, which is important to make a solid statistical analysis.

The third point is probably the most important one: People are more honest when they

communicate online (Couper M. P., 2000). This is particularly interesting, as some ofthe questions in our survey ask sensible information. When people are for instance

asked how many books they read, some might over- or understate the number to

protect their identity or to keep/get a better image.

As can be seen after the analysis of online data collection the advantages of collecting

data in this way outweighing the disadvantages by far, furthermore the disadvantages

are not a problem for the thesis as they either are not relevant or can be compensated

by other means. As a conclusion of this, the online survey is chosen.


30/79


[28]!

Reasons.for.choosing.a.questionnaire.

A questionnaire has certain advantages and disadvantages. Probably the biggest

disadvantage is that it cannot be seen how people react to information presented

(Popper, 2004). This results in misunderstandings of questions and consequently very

subjective results. To avoid this problem two things have been done:

First an easy language has been chosen. For example it was written do the group

members have a different role in the online community? instead of can

heterogeneous roles be found in the online community?. In this way it is more simple

for people to answer and the chances that they make mistakes decreases.The second step was to create clear scales. In one example where it is talked about

the importance of brand trust in a purchase not just 1 is low and 5 is high was

written but a more precise definition has been used : 5 is equally important to

product features and 1 does not have any influence at all on purchase. In this way

the subjectivity cannot be totally removed, but definitively reduced.

Another disadvantage of questionnaires is that it cannot be seen how much time the

participant took to complete the questionnaire (Couper, Tourangeau, & Conrad, 2004)

This might lead to wrong results, as participants might just read the questions

superficially and therefore miss important details, which would result in biased

answers. This pitfall has been avoided by making short, pregnant questions that are

very hard to misunderstand. Therefore such a bias is unlikely.

Popper (2004) also argues that it is not possible to see how truthful the respondents

answer to the questions. When too many people are untruthful in the survey this

would decrease the validity of the data. Surveys online however are more likely to be

answered truly (Couper M. P., 2000). Furthermore every respondent answers us

because of they want to help us, which reduce the risk of wrong answers.

Questionnaires also have advantages: they are easy and quick to process (Popper,

2004). Which is a very good as a high number of respondents is needed, which can

easily be obtained through the use of internet. This allows getting a higher sample size

and consequently better, more meaningful results.


31/79


[29]!

Collecting data with a questionnaire is more objective than collecting data in many

other ways (Couper, Tourangeau, & Conrad, 2004). In experiments wrong

observations can be made (Popper, 2004) and people are more likely to lie in face-to-

face and telephone interviews than online (Couper M. P., 2000).

After discussing the pros and cons it can be said that the questionnaire is good way to

collect the data. It has been seen that the disadvantages are not relevant for this work

and that reliable data can be collected easily and processed for the purpose of this

thesis.

Data.collection.

In order to collect data the social media platform Facebook and e-mail is used. Using

these tools it is possible reach the whole population: About 48% (48,40%) of Internet

users have Facebook (Internetworldstats, 2012). The other 52% (51,60%) have been

reached by e-mail, where it is assumed that every member of an online community

has who buys eBooks has e-mail. This is a fairly sound assumption as active

membership or online shopping (of eBooks) is not possible without an e-mail address.

This Method of data collection is chosen, because a larger amount of people who are

willing to answer can be found there, compared to just sending out an e-mail. E-mail

is still used complementary and by using both tools we get access to the whole

population. This allows using probabilistic methods.

The data collection will be done through Google Drive Survey. It is an easy way to

collect and treat data, their survey software is free and they guarantee privacy to a

certain extent. Moreover their survey forms are working on almost every computer,

thereby increasing the amount of answer can be collected.

To reach the potential respondents a Facebook-event has been made. This is a page

which where a description can be design and an expiration date can be set. There the


32/79


[30]!

questionnaire can be described and the potential respondents are given a link to the

survey.

The second way to collect data is posting our survey in several online communities on

Facebook. It has been decided to post them there because these communities have

many potential respondents. Furthermore in some of these communities, like regional

communities, we have acquaintances which improves the amount of responses. The

third way is to send the survey out by e-mail This will be done from the 20.04.2013 to

the 24.04.2013. This is a relatively short time period. This, however, is not a problem

because the purpose is to describe the role of brand trust which does not have a time

component; therefore a short time period is suiting to our purpose.

We will also ask some relatives to share this survey by email to their own contact list

in order to acquire more answer.


33/79


[31]!

The data will be collected in four categories:

Category Information contained

Preliminary Questions Age, How many communities

joined, Expectation of brands

Questions about e-book retailer Favorite retailer, Easy to change

retailer, Special attribute,

Knowledge about market offering

Questions about brand trust What influences brand trust the

most, how das past experience

influence brand trust, how das

information by the brand influence

your trust

Questions about communities Why do you join communities, how

much influence do you have on

communities, are there different

behaviors in communities, did your

role evolve in the community

Validity(and(reliability(of(the(data(

Validity

Validity answers the question whether the results obtained by an experiment or survey

meets the requirements for scientific work (Shuttleworth, 2008).

According to shuttle worth 6 types of validity can found in scientific research:

external validity, internal validity, test validity, content validity, construct validity and

face validity.


34/79


[32]!

External validity is concerned with generalization. If an experiment is externally valid

the findings about the sample are true for the whole population. This criterion is

fulfilled fairly well for this thesis for two reasons. First, the random sample represents

the population very well and second our sample size is relatively high. The latter is

increasing validity because it can be said that the findings are true for the population

in 99% of the cases.

An internal validity measure is used to prove the relation of causality between

elements so that it is sure that nothing else could have caused the observations. This

element is also fulfilled since the questions have been designed to understand each of

the people who answered to the survey and no other elements are involved.

Test validity is an indicator of how much meaning can be assigned to the findings and

is composed out of content validity and of construct validity. Content validity is high

since only questions are asked which are based on previous experience of the

surveyed interviewed people regarding their eBook buying behavior or community

membership. A strong construct validity can also be found as every theory from the

framework was used to design the questionnaire: their relation with the theoretical

background is therefore high which is the main criteria for construct validity.

The face validity also seems good since a clear structure in the survey can be seen

which is aiming to understand the way the sample buys and consumes eBooks and

how they will spread the trust they acquired to other members of their community.

Reliability((

According to Jacobsen (2002) reliability is the fact that the information gathered can

be used to provide answers to the questions of the purpose. The data should also be

similar when the experiment is repeated The survey was designed so that everyone

would understand it by using simple words, by explaining each concept that might be

confusing and by explaining each of the questions with a small sentence. The

questionnaire has also been tested by sending it to a group of 5 people before sending

the survey everyone else to make sure that each question is understandable and it ispossible to answer them easily


35/79


[33]!

Statistical.Methods.used.for.analysis.

This part is going to describe the statistical methods used in the discussion part. It will

only focus on the more complex methods, leaving out basic ideas like expectancy

value, median and others.

Chi;independency;test(

The chi-independency-test is a test to find out if two variables are dependent

(Missong & Mittnik, 2005).The chi Test consists of four steps (Missong & Mittnik,

2005):

1.)Null hypothesis:!! ! ! ,! ! = ! ! ! !!

!2.) Test variable: ! = (! !" ! !" )

! !"

!

!!! ~!(!)!

!!! !"#$%"&'$(!

With

-I and j being the columns

-h(ij) as the observed number of real answers

-h(ij) the numbers which would be observed in the table if i and j where independent

-m the being the degree of freedom (Kx-1)*(Ky-1)=1

-Kx and Ky being the number of columns for the x and y variable

3.) Realization of the variable Q

4.) Decision and interpretation:If q> q

m1- then the Null Hypothesis can be refused to with a probability of percent.


36/79


[34]!

With

- q being the test variable Q- qmbeing the realized variable of the chi distribution with m degrees of

freedom and at the point 1-

Cohens(w((

Cohens w is a measurement of correlation between two variables which is derived

from Cramers V(Cohen, 1988)

Cramers V is defined as with: k, l being the number of columns (Missong & Mittnik,

2005)

! = ! min

[! 1 ,

(! 1

)]

2 !

with:

=!

!

(! !" ! !" )

! !"

!

!!!!

!!! ,

-k, l being the number of columns,

-V ranging from 0 to 1

-and h and h defined as previously

Knowing Cramers V, Cohens w can be derived (Cohen, 1988).

! = ! min !, ! 1! !

Cohens w has the advantage that it is possible to interpret it better then Cramers V: A

result from 0,0-0,3 is a weak correlation, a result from 0,3-0,5 is a medium correlation

and a result from 0,5-1 is a strong correlation (Cohen, 1988)


37/79


[35]!

Empirical.Study.

In this part the results from the online survey are going to be shown and explained

107 Answers from Facebook and 148 from the e-mail survey where collected initially.

As a 52% of the answers should be from e-mail respondents and 48% from Facebook

respondents for every member of the population to have the same chance for every

member of the population to be chosen, data was collected until 143 Facebook

answers where received. Then the first 138 where taken, so the sample would meet

the condition, that every individual has the same chance to be chosen was met and

therefore a probabilistic sample was obtained.

Preliminary.questions.

This first row of question was designed to help to restrain the sample to people being

part of communities and reading eBooks so it is possible to separate them from those

not reading any eBooks and/or not being part of communities who are not the targets

of our thesis. If people did not read eBooks or where community members, they have

been ordered to leave the survey.

This graph shows that most people in our sample have in general one to two

communities in which they interact since they represent 59% of the asked population.

92$

77$

39$

27$

32$

19$

In.how.many.online.communities.

are.you.part.of?.

1$

2$

3$

4$

5$

More$than$5$


38/79


[36]!

It can clearly be seen that two big groups emerge from this graph: On the one hand

those who read eBooks occasionally (less than 10 eBooks a year) are about 67% of

the sample. On the other hand the compulsive eBook readers can be seen who

represent roughly one third of the population who read more then 10 eBooks.

About 2/3 of the sample expects more when buying branded products.

Questions.relative.to.eBooks..and.eBook.retailer.

The second part of the survey was dedicated to understanding how our sample has

been consuming eBooks, what they were expecting form their eBook retailers and

how consumers related to their eBook retailer.

126$

66$

47$

34$13$

How.many.ebook.did.you.read.

last.year?.

From$1$to$5$

From$6$to$10$

From$11$to$15$

From$16$to$20$

More$than$20$

197$

89$

Do.you.expect.more.when.you.

buy.a.branded.product?.

Yes,$the$product$or$

service$has$to$be$better$

somehow$better$

No,$I$decide$on$a$

productbased$level$


39/79


[37]!

60% of the sample use amazon kindle, which is the most important eBook retailer for

the sample. Some people also told that they mostly used piracy and peer to peer in

order to get their eBooks.

It can be seen that price is the most important criteria when buying eBooks before

choice, availability or the quality and price of the devices. The extra services seem to

be unimportant to the European eBook consumer since only 6% of them said it was

what made their eBook retailer their favorite.

171$71$

6$ 38$

Do.you.have.a.favorite.ebook.

retailer?.

Amazon$Kindle$

Apple$iBook$

Barne$&$Noble's$Nook$

else$

49$

76$

46$

18$

49$

48$

0$ 20$ 40$ 60$ 80$

Choice$

Price$

Quality$/$Price$of$ebook$reading$

Extra$services$

Availability$

else$

Why.are.they.your.favorite.ebook.retailer?.


40/79


[38]!

This graph shows that people have a relatively positive opinion about their eBook

retailer's suggestions: on 286 people 198 say they trust the suggestions (ratings from 3

to 5) their online eBook retailer offer.

Of 286 persons 203 consider that changing their eBook retailer is not an easy thing to

do (rating from 3 to 5). This indicates that people tend to stay with one eBook retailer

for some time and not change retailer each time they want to buy a book.

21$

68$

147$

33$17$

0$

50$

100$

150$

200$

1:$not$at$all$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$a$lot$

How.much.do.you.trust.your.

ebook.retailer.with.reading.

suggestions?.

92$

41$

69$63$

21$

0$

20$

40$

60$

80$

100$

1:$yes$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$no$

Is.it.easy.for.you.to.change.ebook.

retailer?.


41/79


[39]!

This graph clearly shows that people don't feel that much of a difference from one

eBook retailer to another and that customers choice seems to be much more driven

by their habits rather by rational choices and decisions.

This graph is shows us that the most of the promises which the eBook retailer fulfills

are of functional and experiential nature. Symbolic promises play a rather minor role.

0$

50$

100$

150$

200$

1:$no$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$yes$

Do.you.have.any.bonuses.arising.

from.your.membership.with.your.

ebook.retailer?.

150$

37$

99$

0$ 50$ 100$ 150$ 200$

Which.of.theses.promises.are.

fullYilled.by.your.ebook.retailer?.

Experiential$(Great$

experience,$"pleasure$

obtain$by$reading$the$

book")$

Symbolical$("Makes$

people$like$you$more,$

gives$you$status,$makes$

you$cooler")$

Functional$("Give$you$

information")$


42/79


[40]!

It varies how much effort it took to reach comfortability status but for most of the

sample it was easy.

This graph shows that most of the eBook retailer do not have a specific attribute

which sets them apart from others.

96$

65$

88$

23$14$

0$

20$

40$

60$

80$

100$

120$

1:$a$few$hours$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$more$than$2$

months$

Did.it.take.much.effort.to.reach.

the.status.of.comfortability.at.

your.eBook.retailer?.

59$

227$

Does.your.ebook.retailer.have.

special.attribute?.

Yes$

No$


43/79


[41]!

This graph allow us to say that people don't know much about the eBook retailer

market and it might be one of the reasons why they don't change their retailer.

Question.related.to.brand.trust.

This part has been dedicated to understanding each person from the sample in relation

to brand trust: what was most important to them, how their trust could be influenced

but also the importance of repeated interactions with the brand or the company for the

establishment of their trust in the brand.

137$

76$

51$

22$

0$0$

20$

40$

60$

80$

100$

120$

140$

160$

1:$not$at$all$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$a$lot$

How.well.do.you.think.you.know.

the.market.of.ebook.retailers?.

31$ 34$

77$

106$

38$

0$

20$

40$

60$

80$

100$

120$

1:$not$at$all$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$a$lot$

How.much.does.OUR.past.

experience.with.the.brand.

inYluence.your.trust.in.it?.


44/79


[42]!

This graph shows the importance of own past experience. For 255 people past

experience has an influence on brand trust.

This graphs shows that communities play an important role in building brand trust for

individuals trough past experiences of other members of the same community.

This graph shows that most people, if they feel betrayed by an eBook retailer, would

consider that trust cannot be regained easily.

21$

48$

122$

87$

8$

0$

50$

100$

150$

1:$not$at$all$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$a$lot$

How.much.does.past.experience.

OF.OTHER.COMMUNIT.

MEMBERS.with.the.brand.

inYluence.your.trust.in.it?.

23$

263$

If.an.ebook.retailer.had.lost.your.

trust,.could.it.be.restored.without.

great.effort?.

Yes$

No$


45/79


[43]!

This graph shows that the most important promises are functional and experiential for

the sample if they would believe them.

This graphs shows that brand trust is also built through the active efforts of the brand

to provide more information to their customers since 80% of our sample is telling that

it has an important influence (rating 3 to 5).

101$

57$

128$

If.you.would.belive.in.the.

promises.of.a.brand,.which.one.is.

the.most.attractive.to.you?.

Functional$("Give$you$

information")$

Symbolical$("Makes$

people$like$you$more,$

gives$you$status,$makes$

you$cooler")$

Experiential$(Great$

experience,$"pleasure$of$

using$the$product")$

15$

40$

112$104$

15$

0$

20$

40$

60$

80$

100$

120$

1:$not$at$all$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$a$lot$

How.much.does.information.

provided.by.the.brand.inYluence.

your.trust.in.it?.


46/79


[44]!

It can be seen that for all but 18 people brand loyalty is built through many

interactions.

This graph allow us to say that for 47% of our sample relate closely their social

identity to the communities they are in but to the 53% else they declare that it is not

one of the prior element of their identity.

18$25$

72$

106$

65$

0$

20$

40$

60$

80$

100$

120$

1:$not$at$all$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$a$lot$

Are.you.more.loyal.to.brands.if.

you've.had.many.interactions.

with.them?..

135$

151$

Is.your.social.identity.closely.

related.to.the.communities.you.

participate.in?.

Yes$

No$


47/79


[45]!

This graph is particularly interesting since it shows the main interest people have to

join an online community: for the biggest majority it's about sharing and accessing

knowledge with people that are similar to oneself.

Questions.relative.to.communities.

This last part of the survey was made so it was possible to understand how people

from our population interacted in their community, why they implicated themselves in

such time consuming activities and how todays communities are organized.

102$

109$

16$

13$

41$

5$

0$ 20$ 40$ 60$ 80$ 100$ 120$

Sharing$and$accessing$knowledge$

Be$with$people$having$the$same$

interests$as$you$

Obtain$an$identity$

Participate$in$something$bigger$than$

yourself$

Discuss$with$a$bigger$group$of$people$

about$interest$

else$

Why.do.you.join.communities.for?.

64$

222$

Are.you.part.of.a.brand.

community?.

Yes$I$am$

No$I$ain't$


48/79


[46]!

This graph shows us that only a bit more than 1/5 of our sample considers being part

of a brand community and for close to 80% they say that they are not inside any of

them.

This graph shows us that even tough some people take advantage of the new ways to

communicate directly with companies the biggest majority of people just don't have

any use in interacting directly with brands or companies.

Most people declare having only a small impact to their community and only a small

part of our population declares that they have a major impact in their group.

87$

112$

64$

17$6$

0$

20$

40$

60$

80$

100$

120$

1:$not$at$all$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$a$lot$

How.often.do.you.interact.with.

brands.or.companies?.

72$

92$

111$

9$2$

0$

20$

40$

60$

80$

100$

120$

1:$not$at$all$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$a$lot$

How.much.inYluence.do.you.think.

you.have.in.your.community?.


49/79


[47]!

It can be seen that social networks are the most often visited community.

This graphs shows that a variety of different behaviors is observed by the sample in

all but 12 cases.

194$

61$

18$

13$

0$ 50$ 100$ 150$ 200$ 250$

Social$networks$

Online$forums$

Chat$rooms$

else$

Where.do.you.go.most.often.to.

meet.with.your.community?.

12$

52$

107$

89$

26$

0$

20$

40$

60$

80$

100$

120$

1:$not$at$all$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$a$lot$

Are.there.many.different.

behaviours.in.your.community?.


50/79


[48]!

In here it can be seen that for a big part of the sample doesnt change their role

strongly in their communities but it can still clearly be seen that there are movements

inside communities since 88% of asked people said their role changed inside of the

community.

Multivariable.analysis.

In some cases it has been important to see the data in two dimensions to extract

relevant information.

Are you in a brand community

(I)/Social Identity closely related to

community

Yes no Sum

Yes 28 33 64

No 107 118 222

Sum 135 151 286

This table gives an insight in the relationship the trait Member of a brand

community and Social identity is closely related to that community.

37$

83$

107$

56$

3$

0$

20$

40$

60$

80$

100$

120$

1:$not$at$all$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5:$a$lot$

How.much.did.your.role.in.your.

community.evolved.last.yeat?.


51/79


[49]!

Trust suggestions of eBook

retailer (i) / Knowledge about

market offering (j)

1 till 2 3 till 5 Sum

1 39 98 137

2 till 5 50 99 149

Sum 89 197 286 (Total)

This table shows the relationship between Trust in the eBook retailer (vertical) and

Knowledge about market offering(Horizontal)

Difficulty

to change

retailer

(i)/

Amount

of

Bonuses

(j)

1 2 3 4 5 Sum

1 57 25 39 38 12 171

2 7 4 6 5 1 23

3 17 9 18 15 6 65

4 7 3 4 3 1 18

5 4 0 2 2 1 9

Sum 92 41 69 63 21 286

This table shows how the aspects Difficulty to change retailer and Amount of

bonuses arising from membershipuses arising from membership.


52/79


[50]!

.

Discussion.of.empirical.data.

Which role does brand trust play for eBook retailer?

This part is going to focus discuss the role which brand trust plays for eBook retailer

and the hypothesis related to that.

Why.brand.trust.is.needed.for.eBook.retailer.

Brand.trust.and.the.absence.of.full.information.

In the following part a chi-square independence tests will be made to find out if brand

trust and the absence of full information are related to each other, as Alba and Wesley

(1987) suggested.

.

Is.brand.trust.related.to.the.knowledge.of.the.market?.

This question will be answered by making a chi square analysis of the relationship of

the questions How much do you trust your eBook retailers reading suggestions? and

How well do you know the eBook market?

In order to have a reliable chi-square independence test it is important to have at least

5 answers in each column (Missong & Mittnik, 2005). Therefore the table from the

analysis part is taken which is suitable for the chi- independency-test:


53/79


[51]!

Trust suggestions of retailer (i) /

Knowledge about market

offering (j)

1 till 2 3 till 5 Sum

1 39 98 137

2 till 5 50 99 149

Sum 89 197

286 (Total)

Another table is necessary for the chi-square independency test: the values which

would occur if both variables where independent.

Trust suggestions of retailer (i) /

Knowledge about market offering (j)

1 till 2 3 till

5

Sum

1 42,6 94,4 137,0

2 till 5 46,4 102,6 149,0

Sum 89,0 197,0 286,0

With these information the chi-square test can be done in 4 steps:

1.)Null hypothesis:!! ! ! ,! ! = ! ! ! !!

!2.) Test variable: ! = (! !" ! !" )

! !"

!

!!! ~!(!)!

!!! !"#$%"&'$(!

With

-h(ij) as the observed number of answers in the table

-h(ij) the numbers which would be observed in the table if i and j where independent

-m the being the degree of freedom (Kx-1)*(Ky-1)=1

-Kx and Ky being the number of columns for the x and y variable


54/79


[52]!

Realization of the variable Q

i, j h(x(i), y(j)) h(x(i),

y(j))

( )

!

(i=1, j=1) 98 42,6 72,0460094

(i=1, j=2) 137 94,4 19,2241525

i=2, j=1 99 46,4 59,6284483

(i=2, j=2) 149 102,6 20,9840156

Sum 483 286 171,882626

Q is therefore 171,88

Decision and interpretation:

If q> qm1- then the Null Hypothesis can be refused to with a probability of percent.

qm1-=q11-0.01= 2.71 < 171,88

Therefore it can be said that with a probability of error of less 1 percent the null

hypothesis can be refused.

This would mean that there is a relationship between the knowledge about the eBook

market and the trust in eBook retailer. There seems to be a very strong relationship

between these two aspects but it is important to be suspicious when looking at this

high number and look at this data critically:

First of all the summary of the data might have influenced the result as the columns

and therefore lost a part of the information that existed in the primary data. Then the

extreme (no trust) was measured against other degrees of the attribute trust in the

suggestions of eBook retailer. This also might have influenced the result as for

instance people who have very high standards for trust and knowledge about the

market has chosen the lowest ends of the spectrum because in their opinion it

requires much more to fulfil these criteria.

Nonetheless the result is remarkable and the relationships of these two aspects should

be analysed further. It would be interesting to find out why the relationship is so


55/79


[53]!

strong and if it is possible to pinpoint certain aspects of information or brand trust

which are mostly responsible this high q-value.

Brand.and.sunk.costs..

Brand trust is needed when there is a high risk involving in changing brands

(Samuelson & Zeckhauser, 1988). To find out if this is the case for eBook it is

important to know if there is a relationship between the questions How easy is it for

you to change eBook retailer? and Do you have any bonuses arising from your

membership at a certain eBook retailer? The sunk costs, in this case, are represented

by the membership benefits as they are lost when changing the eBook retailer.

To answer of this question Cohens w (Cohen, 1988) will be locked at. For Cohens W,

however first Cramrs V is needed.

The table of the observation from the analysis part together with this table is used to

determine Cramers V. This table shows what would be observed if these aspects

where totally independent.

Difficulty to change

(i)/ Amount of

Bonuses (j)

1 2 3 4 5

1 53,196 25,74 42,9 37,752 13,728

2 7,0928 3,432 5,72 5,0336 1,8304

3 20,3918 9,867 16,445 14,4716 5,2624

4 5,3196 2,574 4,29 3,7752 1,37285 2,6598 1,287 2,145 1,8876 0,6864

Cramers V is defined as with: k, l being the numbe

01 -Final Thesis in PDF

Documents

Transcript of 01 -Final Thesis in PDF