Abstract
The advance of web 2.0 that facilitates contents to be created, shared and exchanged through online platforms has led to profound changes in consumer behavior. Modern consumers appreciate nonprofessional-produced contents as they are perceived to be more trustworthy. As a result, electronic Word-of-Mouth (eWOM) and user-generated content (UGC) have become two of the most frequent researched objects over the last ten years in marketing area. However, extant studies have confounded these two concepts which may cause significant academic problems. In this paper the authors aim to disentangle eWOM and UGC by comparing their fundamental attributes. Findings prove that despite sharing similar attributes, eWOM and UGC are two distinctive concepts with different scope and meaning. It is thus concluded that eWOM and UGC cannot be used interchangeably. The results of this study provide important implications for future research. Keywords: eWOM, UGC, creation, dissemination, publicity. DOI: 10.7176/JMCR/65-04 Publication date: February 29 th 2020
Highlights
The advent of web 2.0, which has enabled Internet users to produce and distribute home-made contents, has resulted in a proliferation of non-professional contents in cyberspace
Owusu, Mutshinda, Antai, Dadzie, & Winston (2016, p.25) contend that “User-generated content (UGC) is a form of Electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM)”, whereas, Smith, Fischer, & Yongjian (2012, p.103) insist that “UGC is broader than eWOM”
This inconsistence leads to confusion for researchers and may engender considerable problems in certain aspects of academic research
Summary
The advent of web 2.0, which has enabled Internet users to produce and distribute home-made contents, has resulted in a proliferation of non-professional contents in cyberspace. In respect of scope, Owusu, Mutshinda, Antai, Dadzie, & Winston (2016, p.25) contend that “UGC is a form of eWOM”, whereas, Smith, Fischer, & Yongjian (2012, p.103) insist that “UGC is broader than eWOM” This inconsistence leads to confusion for researchers and may engender considerable problems in certain aspects of academic research (i.e. study of the motivations for creating eWOM or UGC requires an explicit clarification of its meaning and forms). Contrary to Web 1.0 which limits users to the passive viewing and download of copyrighted information (Liburd & Christensen, 2013; Liburd, 2012), Web 2.0 creates users who actively take part in generating viewed contents, through which it satisfies the Internet users’ wish to share their lives with others as well as their need for visibility and public statement of opinion in the form of small comments, ‘‘likes’’ and smileys etc. Web 2.0 encourages Internet users that were previously passive to engage in creating databases (Yi, 2014), everyone has been given the chance to voice their opinion and spread information to all interested parties
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
