网络社区交互对消费者购买意愿的影响
|
摘要
网络社区已经成为新的消费者交互平台。网络社区的出现所带来的消费者之间交互行为的改变已经引起了学术界和企业界的重视。虚拟社区和SNS是网络社区的主流形式，二者具有显著的差异，并且会长期共存，企业的实际工作涉及到这二个社区环境下的营销策略问题。因此，本论文的研究目标是揭示网络社区环境下交互对消费者购买意愿的影响机制，以及对比该影响机制在虚拟社区与SNS二个环境下的差异。
本论文以技术接受模型（TAM）为理论基础，以交互维度为外部刺激变量，以感知有用、认知信任和感知期望匹配维度为心理反应变量，以购买意愿维度为行为反应变量，提出了网络社区环境下交互对消费者购买意愿影响的概念模型；通过对消费者购买前网络社区交互经历的调查获取研究数据，在此基础上，采用统计实证分析法对概念模型进行了验证。整个实证研究过程分为二个预研究、一个基本概念模型检验和一个调节变量检验四个部分，这四个部分的研究内容及得出的主要结论如下：
预研究一：构建计划-交互-反应模型。本部分通过对TAM进行修改构建了解释交互情形中消费者心理和行为反应过程的“计划-交互-反应模型”。以数码/家电类产品购买为研究情形，通过对有过这类产品购买前网络社区交互经历的消费者进行调查，获取研究数据，采用PLS统计分析方法对该模型进行了检验，并对比了该模型与TAM的解释能力。研究结果表明计划-交互-反应模型能够用来解释交互情形中的消费者反应过程：感知有用、认知信任和感知期望匹配是购买意愿的重要前因，感知有用和认知信任对感知期望匹配有显著影响，同时，认知信任对感知有用有显著影响；另外，从解释能力来看，在整体的网络社区环境下，计划-交互-反应模型比TAM的解释能力提高了3%（R2=3%）；在虚拟社区环境下，计划-交互-反应模型比TAM2的解释能力也提高了3%（R=3%）；在SNS环境下，计划-交互-反应模型比TAM2的解释能力提高了4%（R=4%）。
预研究二：构建交互维度。本部分以信息传播模式为理论基础提出了交互的维度，并开发了测量量表。通过对有过购买前网络社区交互经历的消费者的交互活动特征进行调查，获取研究数据，采用PLS统计分析方法进行了验证性因子分析。研究结果表明：可以从信源质量、关系强度、信息质量和交互氛围四个维度来测量消费者的网络社区交互活动。
基本概念模型：构建网络社区环境下交互对消费者购买意愿的影响机制模型。本部分在二个预研究结论的基础上，通过对有过购买前网络社区交互经历的消费者的交互活动特征和反应过程进行调查，获取研究数据，采用PLS统计分析方法对不含调节变量的基本概念模型进行检验。研究结果表明：感知有用、认知信任和感知期望匹配是影响消费者购买意愿的前因，感知有用和认知信任对感知期望匹配有显著影响，认知信任、信息质量和交互氛围对感知有用有显著影响，另外，信源质量、关系强度、信息质量和交互氛围对认知信任有显著影响。
调节变量检验：比较虚拟社区与SNS环境下的差异。本部分将基本概念模型检验部分收集的数据按交互平台的差异分为虚拟社区和SNS两类，采用PLS统计分析方法分别检验二个社区环境下交互对消费者购买意愿的影响机制模型，并采用多组分析方法比较二个模型的差异。研究结果表明：信源质量、信息质量和交互氛围对感知有用的影响在二个社区环境下存在差异；信源质量、关系强度和信息质量对认知信任的影响在二个社区环境下存在差异；其它路径在二个社区环境下不存在差异。
此外，本研究根据实证研究得出的结论，提出了相应的营销启示。
Online community has become the new interactive platform for consumers.Consumers’ interactive behavior in online community, which is different from interactivebehavior in traditional context, has attracted much attention from both academic andindustrial fields. Virtual community and SNS are two main types of online community.There are remarkable differences between the two communities. Virtual community andSNS will coexist for a long time. Companies’ businesses involve how to promote in thesecommunities. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to explore the influence of interaction onconsumers’ purchase intention in the context of online communities, and compare thedifference of the influence between virtual community and SNS context.
Based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), this paper developed atheoretical model to predict the influence of interaction on consumers’ purchase intentionin online communities. The theoretical model took interaction dimensions as stimulus,perceived usefulness, cognitive trust and perceived expectation fit as psychologicalreaction, and purchase intention as behavioral reaction. Using data from online surveys,the proposed model was tested by using the Partial Least Squares (PLS) technique. Theprocess of data analyses contains four parts: two preliminary studies, a full model analysis(not containing moderator) and a moderator analysis. The contents and results of theseparts are as follow:
First, the first preliminary study: the development of a plan-interaction-reactionmodel. Based on the TAM, this paper developed a theoretical model to predict thepsychological and behavioral reaction of consumers in the context of interaction in onlinecommunities, which is named plan-interaction-reaction model. Using data from onlinesurveys of consumers who have the experience of interaction in online communitiesbefore purchasing digital products/household appliance, the proposed model was tested byusing PLS. The results show that the plan-interaction-reaction model is well suitedto explain consumers’ reaction process of interaction in online communities: perceivedusefulness, cognitive trust and perceived expectation fit are antecedents of purchaseintention; perceived usefulness and cognitive trust have positive impact on perceived expectation fit; cognitive trust has a positive impact on perceived usefulness. In addition,the plan-interaction-reaction model explained a significant proportion of the variance inconsumers’ purchase intention, which is3%higher than TAM in the whole onlinecommunities context (R2=3%) and3%higher than TAM in the virtual communitiescontext (R2=3%) and4%higher than TAM in the SNS context (R2=4%).
Second, the second preliminary study: the development of interaction dimensions.Based on the Information Communication Model, this paper developed the dimensionsand scale of interaction in online communities. Using data from online surveys ofconsumers who have the experience of interaction in online communities beforepurchasing products, the scale was tested by using PLS. The results show that consumers’interaction characteristics in online communities can be tested by using four dimensions,namely source quality, tie strength, information quality and interaction atmosphere.
Third, the full proposed model (not containing moderator): the development of atheoretical model to predict the influence of interaction on consumers’ purchase intentionin online communities. Based on the conclusions of the two preliminary studies, usingdata from online surveys of consumers who have the experience of interaction in onlinecommunities before purchasing products, the full proposed model was tested by using PLS.The results show: perceived usefulness, cognitive trust and perceived expectation fit areantecedents of purchase intention; perceived usefulness and cognitive trust have positiveimpact on perceived expectation fit; cognitive trust, information quality and interactionatmosphere have positive impact on perceived usefulness; source quality, tie strength,information quality and interaction atmosphere have positive impact on cognitive trust.
Fourth, the analysis of moderator: a comparison between virtual community and SNS.By using data collected in the third study, the full proposed model was tested in thecontext of virtual community and SNS context by using PLS. Then, multi-groups analysiswas explored to compare the difference between the two groups. The results show: sourcequality has significant effect on perceived usefulness in virtual community context, buthas none in SNS context; tie strength has no significant effect on perceived usefulness inboth communities; information quality and interaction atmosphere have significant effecton perceived usefulness in virtual community context, but has none in SNS context;source quality has significant effect on cognitive trust in both communities, but more stronger in SNS context; tie strength and information quality have significant effect oncognitive trust in virtual community context, but has none in SNS context; interactionatmosphere has significant effect on cognitive trust in both communities.
As last, some marketing implications were developed based on the conclusion of theempirical studies.
本论文以技术接受模型（TAM）为理论基础，以交互维度为外部刺激变量，以感知有用、认知信任和感知期望匹配维度为心理反应变量，以购买意愿维度为行为反应变量，提出了网络社区环境下交互对消费者购买意愿影响的概念模型；通过对消费者购买前网络社区交互经历的调查获取研究数据，在此基础上，采用统计实证分析法对概念模型进行了验证。整个实证研究过程分为二个预研究、一个基本概念模型检验和一个调节变量检验四个部分，这四个部分的研究内容及得出的主要结论如下：
预研究一：构建计划-交互-反应模型。本部分通过对TAM进行修改构建了解释交互情形中消费者心理和行为反应过程的“计划-交互-反应模型”。以数码/家电类产品购买为研究情形，通过对有过这类产品购买前网络社区交互经历的消费者进行调查，获取研究数据，采用PLS统计分析方法对该模型进行了检验，并对比了该模型与TAM的解释能力。研究结果表明计划-交互-反应模型能够用来解释交互情形中的消费者反应过程：感知有用、认知信任和感知期望匹配是购买意愿的重要前因，感知有用和认知信任对感知期望匹配有显著影响，同时，认知信任对感知有用有显著影响；另外，从解释能力来看，在整体的网络社区环境下，计划-交互-反应模型比TAM的解释能力提高了3%（R2=3%）；在虚拟社区环境下，计划-交互-反应模型比TAM2的解释能力也提高了3%（R=3%）；在SNS环境下，计划-交互-反应模型比TAM2的解释能力提高了4%（R=4%）。
预研究二：构建交互维度。本部分以信息传播模式为理论基础提出了交互的维度，并开发了测量量表。通过对有过购买前网络社区交互经历的消费者的交互活动特征进行调查，获取研究数据，采用PLS统计分析方法进行了验证性因子分析。研究结果表明：可以从信源质量、关系强度、信息质量和交互氛围四个维度来测量消费者的网络社区交互活动。
基本概念模型：构建网络社区环境下交互对消费者购买意愿的影响机制模型。本部分在二个预研究结论的基础上，通过对有过购买前网络社区交互经历的消费者的交互活动特征和反应过程进行调查，获取研究数据，采用PLS统计分析方法对不含调节变量的基本概念模型进行检验。研究结果表明：感知有用、认知信任和感知期望匹配是影响消费者购买意愿的前因，感知有用和认知信任对感知期望匹配有显著影响，认知信任、信息质量和交互氛围对感知有用有显著影响，另外，信源质量、关系强度、信息质量和交互氛围对认知信任有显著影响。
调节变量检验：比较虚拟社区与SNS环境下的差异。本部分将基本概念模型检验部分收集的数据按交互平台的差异分为虚拟社区和SNS两类，采用PLS统计分析方法分别检验二个社区环境下交互对消费者购买意愿的影响机制模型，并采用多组分析方法比较二个模型的差异。研究结果表明：信源质量、信息质量和交互氛围对感知有用的影响在二个社区环境下存在差异；信源质量、关系强度和信息质量对认知信任的影响在二个社区环境下存在差异；其它路径在二个社区环境下不存在差异。
此外，本研究根据实证研究得出的结论，提出了相应的营销启示。
Online community has become the new interactive platform for consumers.Consumers’ interactive behavior in online community, which is different from interactivebehavior in traditional context, has attracted much attention from both academic andindustrial fields. Virtual community and SNS are two main types of online community.There are remarkable differences between the two communities. Virtual community andSNS will coexist for a long time. Companies’ businesses involve how to promote in thesecommunities. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to explore the influence of interaction onconsumers’ purchase intention in the context of online communities, and compare thedifference of the influence between virtual community and SNS context.
Based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), this paper developed atheoretical model to predict the influence of interaction on consumers’ purchase intentionin online communities. The theoretical model took interaction dimensions as stimulus,perceived usefulness, cognitive trust and perceived expectation fit as psychologicalreaction, and purchase intention as behavioral reaction. Using data from online surveys,the proposed model was tested by using the Partial Least Squares (PLS) technique. Theprocess of data analyses contains four parts: two preliminary studies, a full model analysis(not containing moderator) and a moderator analysis. The contents and results of theseparts are as follow:
First, the first preliminary study: the development of a plan-interaction-reactionmodel. Based on the TAM, this paper developed a theoretical model to predict thepsychological and behavioral reaction of consumers in the context of interaction in onlinecommunities, which is named plan-interaction-reaction model. Using data from onlinesurveys of consumers who have the experience of interaction in online communitiesbefore purchasing digital products/household appliance, the proposed model was tested byusing PLS. The results show that the plan-interaction-reaction model is well suitedto explain consumers’ reaction process of interaction in online communities: perceivedusefulness, cognitive trust and perceived expectation fit are antecedents of purchaseintention; perceived usefulness and cognitive trust have positive impact on perceived expectation fit; cognitive trust has a positive impact on perceived usefulness. In addition,the plan-interaction-reaction model explained a significant proportion of the variance inconsumers’ purchase intention, which is3%higher than TAM in the whole onlinecommunities context (R2=3%) and3%higher than TAM in the virtual communitiescontext (R2=3%) and4%higher than TAM in the SNS context (R2=4%).
Second, the second preliminary study: the development of interaction dimensions.Based on the Information Communication Model, this paper developed the dimensionsand scale of interaction in online communities. Using data from online surveys ofconsumers who have the experience of interaction in online communities beforepurchasing products, the scale was tested by using PLS. The results show that consumers’interaction characteristics in online communities can be tested by using four dimensions,namely source quality, tie strength, information quality and interaction atmosphere.
Third, the full proposed model (not containing moderator): the development of atheoretical model to predict the influence of interaction on consumers’ purchase intentionin online communities. Based on the conclusions of the two preliminary studies, usingdata from online surveys of consumers who have the experience of interaction in onlinecommunities before purchasing products, the full proposed model was tested by using PLS.The results show: perceived usefulness, cognitive trust and perceived expectation fit areantecedents of purchase intention; perceived usefulness and cognitive trust have positiveimpact on perceived expectation fit; cognitive trust, information quality and interactionatmosphere have positive impact on perceived usefulness; source quality, tie strength,information quality and interaction atmosphere have positive impact on cognitive trust.
Fourth, the analysis of moderator: a comparison between virtual community and SNS.By using data collected in the third study, the full proposed model was tested in thecontext of virtual community and SNS context by using PLS. Then, multi-groups analysiswas explored to compare the difference between the two groups. The results show: sourcequality has significant effect on perceived usefulness in virtual community context, buthas none in SNS context; tie strength has no significant effect on perceived usefulness inboth communities; information quality and interaction atmosphere have significant effecton perceived usefulness in virtual community context, but has none in SNS context;source quality has significant effect on cognitive trust in both communities, but more stronger in SNS context; tie strength and information quality have significant effect oncognitive trust in virtual community context, but has none in SNS context; interactionatmosphere has significant effect on cognitive trust in both communities.
As last, some marketing implications were developed based on the conclusion of theempirical studies.
引文
[1] Adjei, M. T., Noble, S. M., Noble, C. H. The influence of C2C communications inonline brand communities on customer purchase behavior. Journal of the Academyof Marketing Science,2010,38(5):634-653
[2] Ailawadi, K. L., Beauchamp, J. P., Donthu, N., et al. Communication andpromotion decisions in retailing: A review and directions for future research.Journal of Retailing,2009,85(1):42-55
[3] Anderson, E. W., Sullivan, M. W. The antecedents and consequences of customersatisfaction for firms, Marketing Science,1993,12(2):125-143
[4] Anderson, W. T. Communities in a world of open systems. Futures,1999,31(5):457-463
[5] Antheunis, M. L., Patti, M. V., Jochen, P. Getting acquainted through socialnetwork sites: Testing a model of online uncertainty reduction and social attraction.Computers in Human Behavior,2009,26(1):100-109
[6] Armano, D. Six social media trends for2010.2009-11-2. http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/11/six_social_media_trends. html
[7] Armstrong, A. G., Hagel, III. J. The real value of on-line communities. HarvardBusiness Review,1996,74(3):134-141
[8] Arndt, J. Role of product-related conversations in the diffusion of a new product.Journal of Marketing Research,1967,4(3):291-295
[9] Arnould, E. J., Price, L. L. River magic: Extraordinary experience and the extendedservice encounter. Journal of Consumer Research,1993,20(1):24-45
[10] Barker, V. Older adolescents’ motivations for social network site use: The influenceof gender, group identity, and collective self-esteem. Cyberpsychology&behavior,2009,12(2):209-213
[11] Bansal, H. S., Peter A. V. Word-of-mouth processeswithin a service purchasedecision context. Journal of Service Research,2000,3(2):166-177
[12] Bhattacherjee, A., Sanford, C. Influence process for information technologyacceptance: An elaboration like-hood model. MIS Quarterly,2006,30(4):805-825
[13] Bhattacherjee, A. Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly,2001,25(3):351-370
[14] Bishop, J. Factors shaping the form and participation in virtual communities,Digital Matrix Magazine,2007,85:22-24
[15] Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W., Engel, J. F. Consumer Behavior. Texas: HarcourtCollege Publishers,2003
[16] Bonacich, P. Communication dilemmas in social networks: An experimental study.American Sociological Review,1990,55(3):448-459
[17] Bone, P. F. Word-of-mouth effects on short-term and long-term product judgments.Journal of Business Research,1995,32(3):213-223
[18] boyd, D. M., Ellison, N. B. Social network sites: Definition, history, andscholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,2007,13(1):210-230
[19] boyd, D M. Friendster and publicly articulated social networking In Paper presentedat the conference on human factors and computing systems. Vienna.2004
[20] Brandtzag, P. B., Heim, J. Why people use social networking sites. Lecture Notes inComputer Science,2009,5621:143-152
[21] Brown, J. J., Reingen, P. H. Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior.Journal of Consumer Research,1987,14(3):350-362
[22] Cachia, R., Compa ó, R., Costa, O. D. Grasping the potential of online socialnetworks for foresight. Technological Forecasting&Social Change,2007,74(8):1179-1203
[23] Cardon, P., Marshall, B., Norris, D. T. Online and offline social ties of socialnetwork site users: An exploratory study. Journal of Computer Information Systems,2009,50(1):54-65
[24] Casaló, L., Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M. Determinants of the intention to participate infirm-hosted online travel communities and effects on consumer behavioralintentions. Tourism Management,2010,31(6):898-911
[25] Casaló, L., Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M. The impact of participation in virtual brandcommunities on consumer trust and loyalty: The case of free software. OnlineInformation Review,2007,31(6):775-792
[26] Cha, J. Shopping on social networking websites: Attitudes toward real versusvirtual items. Journal of Interactive Advertising,2009,10(1):77-93
[27] Chan, K. W., Li, S. Y. Understanding consumer-to-consumer interactions in virtualcommunities: The salience of reciprocity. Journal of Business Research,2010,63(9-10):1033-1040
[28] Chang, Y. P, Zhu, D. H. Adoption of Social Networking Sites. In Z. Yan(Ed.).Encyclopedia of Cyber Behavior. IGI Global: Hershey, PA.2012a, pp.600-607
[29] Chang, Y. P., Zhu, D. H, Wang, S. H. The influence of online game service qualityon loyalty: An empirical study of MMORPGs. Social Behavior and Personality,2011,39(10):1297-1302
[30] Chang, Y. P., Zhu, D. H. The role of perceived social capital and flow experience inbuilding users' continuance intention to social networking sites in China. Computersin Human Behavior,2012b,28(3):995-1001
[31] Chang, Y. P., Zhu, D. H. Understanding social networking sites adoption in China:A comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption. Computers in Human Behavior,2011,27(5):1840-1848
[32] Cheema, A., Kaikati, A. M. The effect of need for uniqueness on word of mouth.Journal of Marketing Research,2010,47(3):553-563
[33] Cheung, C. M. K., Lee, M. K. O. A theoretical model of intentional social action inonline social networks. Decision Support Systems,2010,49(1):24-30
[34] Chevalier, J. A., Mayzlin, D. The effect of word of mouth on sales: online bookreviews. Journal of Marketing Research,2006,43(3):345-354
[35] Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., Newsted, P. N. A partial least squares latent variablemodeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlosimulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. InformationSystems Research,2003,14(2):189-217
[36] Chiu, C. M., Hsu, M. H., Wang, E. T. G. Understanding knowledge sharing invirtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories.Decision support systems,2006,42(3):1872-1888
[37] Christy, M.K., Cheung, M. K.O. Lee, N. R. The impact of electronic word-of-mouth:The adoption of onlin e opinions in online customer communities. Internet Research,2008,18(3):229-247
[38] Chu, S. C., Kim, Y. Determinants of consumer engagement in electronicword-of-mouth (eWOM) in social networking sites. International Journal ofAdvertising,2011,30(1):47-75
[39] Churchill, G. A., Surprenant, C. J. An investigation into the determinants ofcustomer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research,1982,19(4):491-504
[40] Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., Warshaw, P. R. User acceptance of computertechnology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science,1989,35(8):982-1003
[41] Davis, F. D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance ofinformation technology. MIS Quarterly,1989,13(3):319-340
[42] Davis, F. D. User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics,user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-MachineStudies,1993,38(3):475-487
[43] Davis, F. D. A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-userinformation systems: Theory and results [Doctoral dissertation]. Massachusetts:Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,1986
[44] DeFleur, M. L. Theories of mass communication. New York: David McKayCompany Inc,1966.
[45] Dholakia, U. M., Bagozzir, P., Pearo, L. K. A social influence model of consumerparticipation in network and small-group-based virtual communities. InternationalJournal of Research in Marketing,2004,21(19):241-263
[46] Doney, P., Cannon, J. An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-sellerrelationships. Journal of Marketing,1997,61(2):35-51
[47] Dwyer, P. Measuring interpersonal influence in online conversations [MSI workingpaper]. Marketing Science Institute: Boston,2009
[48] Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., Lampe, C. Spatially bounded online social networksand social capital: the role of facebook. The Annual Conference of the InternationalCommunication Association in Dresden. Germany,2006
[49] Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., Lampe, C. The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Socialcapital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal ofComputer-Mediated Communication,2007,12(4), article1
[50] Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction totheory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA,1975
[51] Fornell, C., Johnson, M. D., Anderson, E. W., et al. The American customersatisfaction index: Nature, purpose, and findings. Journal of Marketing,1996,60(4):7-18
[52] Fornell, C., Larcker, D. F. Structural equation model with unobservable variablesand measurement error: algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research,1981,18(3):382-389
[53] Frenzen, J., Nakamoto, K. Structure, cooperation, and the flow of marketinformation. Journal of Consumer Research,1993,20(3):360-375
[54] Füller, J. Why consumers engage in virtual new product developments initiated byproducers. Advances in Consumer Research,2006,33(1):639-646
[55] Gangadharbatla, H. Facebook me: Collective self-esteem, need to belong andinternet self-efficacy as predictors of the iGeneration’s attitude toward socialnetworking sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising,2007,8(2):1-28
[56] Gauri, D., Bhatnagar, A., Rao, R. Role of word of mouth in online store loyalty:Comparing online store ratings with other e-store loyalty factors. Communicationsof the ACM,2008,51(3):89-91
[57] Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., Straub, D. W. Trust and TAM in online shopping: Anintegrated model. MIS Quarterly,2003,27(1):51-90
[58] Gefen, D., Straub, D. W., Boudreau, M. Structural equation modeling techniquesand regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of theAssociation for Information Systems,2000,4,1-77
[59] Gefen, D., Straub, D. W. Gender difference in the perception and use of e-mail: Anextension to the Technology Acceptance Model. MIS Quarterly,1997,21(4):389-400
[60] Godes, D., Mayzlin, D., Chen, Y. B., et al. The firm’s management of socialinteractions. Marketing Letters,2005,16(3-4):415-428
[61] Gremler, D. D., Gwinner, K. P., Brown, S. W. Generating positive word-of-mouthcommunication through customer-employee relationships. International Journal ofService Industry Management,2001,12(1):44-59
[62] Gruen, T. W., Osmonbekov, T., Czaplewski, A. J. Customer-to-customer exchange:Its MOA antecedents and its impact on value creation and loyalty. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science,2007,35(4):537-549
[63] Guo, C. Q., Shim, J. P., Otondo, R. Social network services in China: An integratedmodel of centrality, trust, and technology acceptance. Journal of Global InformationTechnology Management,2010,13(2):76-99
[64] Gupta, S., Kim, H. W. Virtual community: Concepts, implications, and futureresearch directions. Proceedings of the Tenth America’s Conference on InformationSystems, New York,2004
[65] Ha, L., James, L. Interactivity reexamined: A baseline analysis of early businesswebsites. Journal of Broadcasting&Electronic Media,1998,42(4):457-474
[66] Hagel,Ⅲ. J., Armstrong, A. G. Net gain: Expanding markets through virtualcommunities. Boston: Harvard Business School Press,1997
[67] Hannafin, M., Land, S., Oliver, K. Open learning environments: Foundations,methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories andmodels (Vol. II). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum,1999
[68] Hara, N., Hew, K. H. Knowledge-sharing in an online community of health-careprofessionals. Information Technology&People,2007,20(3):235-261
[69] Hargittai, E. Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of socialnetwork sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,2007,13(1):276-297
[70] Harris, K., Davies, B., Baron, S. Conversations during purchase consideration:Sales assistants and consumers. The International Reviewof Retail, Distribution andConsumer Research,1997,7(3):173-190
[71] Harris, K., Baron, S., Parker, D. Understanding the consumer experience: It’s “goodto talk”. Journal of Marketing Management,2000,16(1-3):111-127
[72] Heeter, C. Implications of new interactive technologies for conceptualizingcommunication. In J. L. Salvaggio&J. Bryant (Eds.), Media use in the informationage: Emerging patterns of adoption and computer use. Hillsdale, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum Associates,1989,217-235
[73] Hempel, J., Lehman, P. The MySpace Generation: They live online. They buyonline. They play online. Their power is growing. BusinessWeek (online),2005,December12:86
[74] Hennig-Thurau, T., Edward, C. M., Christian, F., et al. The impact of new media oncustomer relationships. Journal of Service Research,2010,13(3):311-330
[75] Hernández, B., Jiménez, J., Martín, M. J. Customer behavior in electroniccommerce: The moderating effect of e-purchasing experience. Journal of BusinessResearch,2010,63(9-10):964-971
[76] Herr, P. M., Kardes, F. R., Kim, J. Effects of word-of-mouth and product-attributeinformation on persuasion: An accessibility-diagnosticity perspective. Journal ofConsumer Research,1991,17(3):454-462
[77] Hoffman, D., Thomas, P. N. Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediatedenvironments: Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing,1996,60(3):50-58
[78] Hogan, J. E., Lemon, K. N., Libai, B. Quantifying the ripple: word of mouth andadvertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising Research,2004,44(3):271-280
[79] Huang, S., Hsu, C. H. C. The impact of customer-to-customer interaction on cruiseexperience and vacation satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research,2010,49(1):79-92
[80] Igbaria, M., Zinatelli, N., Cragg, P., et al. Personal computing acceptance factors insmall firms: A structural equation model. MIS Quarterly,1997,21(3):279-305
[81] Jepsen, A. Information search in virtual communities: Is it replacing use of off-lineommunication?. Journal of Marketing Communications,2006,12(4):247-261
[82] Ji, Y. G., Hwangbo, H., Yi, J. S, et al. The influence of cultural differences on theuse of social network services and the formation of social capital. InternationalJournal of Human-Computer Interaction,2010,26(11-12):1100-1121
[83] Johnson, D., Grayson, K. Cognitive and affective trust in service relationships.Journal of Business Research,2005,58(4):500-507
[84] Johnson-George, C., Swap, W. C. Measurement of specific interpersonal trust:Construction and validation of a scale to assess trust in a specific other. Journal ofPersonality&Social Psychology,1982,43(6):1306-1317
[85] Jung, T., Youn, H., McClung, S. Motivations and self-presentation strategies onKorean-based ‘‘Cyworld” weblog format personal homepages. CyberPsychologyand Behavior,2007,10(1):24-31
[86] Karahanna, E., Straub, D. W., Chervany, N. L. Information technology adoptionacross time: a cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs.MIS Quarterly,1999,23(2):183-213
[87] Kim, W., Jeong, O., Lee, S. On social web sites. Information Systems,2010,35(2):215-236
[88] Kim, Y., Sohn, D., Choi, S. M. Cultural difference in motivations for using socialnetwork sites: A comparative study of American and Korean college students.Computers in Human Behavior,2011,27(1):365-372
[89] King, W. R., He, J. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model.Information&Management,2006,43(6):740-755
[90] Koh. J., Kim, Y. G. Knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An e-businessperspective. Expert System with Applications,2004,26(2):155-166
[91] Komiak, S., Benbasat, I. The effects of personalization and familiarity on trust andadoption of recommendation agents. MIS Quarterly,2006,30(4):941-996
[92] Komiak, S., Benbasat, I. Understanding customer trust in agent-mediated electroniccommerce, web-mediated electronic commerce, and traditional commerce.Information Technology and Management,2004,5(1-2):181-207
[93] Kowatsch, T., Maass, W. In-store consumer behavior: How mobilerecommendation agents influence usage intentions, product purchases, and storepreferences. Computers in Human Behavior,2010,26(4):697-704
[94] Krisanic, K. Motivations and impression management: Predictors of socialnetworking site use and user behavior [Master Dissertation]. Columbia: Universityof Missouri-Columbia,2008
[95] Ku, L. Impacts of interactivity from computer-mediated conmmunication in anorganizational setting: A study of electronic mail [Doctor Dissertation]. EastLansing MI: Michigan State University,1992
[96] Kwon, O., Wen, Y. An empirical study of the factors affecting social networkservice use. Computers in Human Behavior,2010,26(2):254-263
[97] Lasswell, H. The structure and function of communication in society. In L. Bryson(Ed.), The communication of ideas. New York, NY: Harper and Row,1948,37-51
[98] Lee, F. S. L., Vogel, D., Limayem, M. Virtual community informatics: What weknow and what we need to know. Proceedings of the35th Hawaii InternationalConference on System Sciences,2002
[99] Lee, J., Lee, J. N. Understanding the product information inference process inelectronic word-of-mouth: An objectivity-subjectivity dichotomy perspective.Information&Management,2009,46(6):302-311
[100] Lee. T. G. Trust in complementary medicine: The case of cranial osteopathy. TheSociological Review,2002,50(1):48-68
[101] Legris, P., Ingham, I., Collerette, P. Why do people use information technology? Acritical review of the technology acceptance model. Information&Management,2003,40(3):191-204
[102] Levin, D. Z., Cross, R. The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating roleof trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science,2004,50(11):1477-1490
[103] Levy, S. E. The hospitality of the host: A cross-cultural examination of manageriallyfacilitated consumer-to-consumer interactions. International Journal of HospitalityManagement,2010,29(2):319-327
[104] Levy, S. E., Getz, D., Hudson, S. A field experimental investigation of manageriallyfacilitated consumer-to-consumer interaction. Journal of Travel&TourismMarketing,2011,28(6):656-674
[105] Lewandowski, J., Rosenberg, B. D., Parks, M. J., et al. The effect of informal socialsupport: Face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication. Computers inHuman Behavior,2011,27(5):1806-1814
[106] Lewin, K. A dynamic theory of personality. New York: Mac Graw-Hill,1935
[107] Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., Gonzalez, M., et al. Tastes, ties, and time: A new socialnetwork dataset using Facebook. com. Social Networks,2008,30(4):330-342
[108] Libai, B., Bolton, R., Bügel, M. S., et al. Customer-to-customer interactions:Broadening the scope of word of mouth research. Journal of Service Research,2010,13(3):267-282
[109] Licklider, J. C. R. Libraries of the Future. Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press,1965
[110] Li, H. Virtual community studies: A literature review, synthesis and researchagenda. Proceedings of the America’s Conference on Information Systems, NewYork,2004
[111] Liu, Y. Word of mouth for movies: Its dynamics and impact on box office revenue.Journal of Marketing,2006,70(3):74-89
[112] Lu, Y., Zhao, L., Wang, B. From virtual community members to C2C e-commercebuyers: Trust in virtual communities and its effect on consumers’ purchase intention.Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,2010,9:346-360
[113] Marsden, F. V., Campbell, K. E. Measuring tie strength. Social Forces,1984,63(2):482-501
[114] Massey, B., Levy, M. Interactivity in online journalism and English-language webnewspapers in Asia. Journalism&Mass Communication Quarterly,1999,76(l):138-151
[115] Martin, C. L., Clark, T. Networks of customer-to-customer relationships inmarketing. In D. Iacobucci (Ed.), Networks in Marketing, Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications,1996
[116] Martin, C. L., Pranter, C. A. Compatibility management: customer-to-customerrelationships in service environments. Journal of Services Marketing,1989,3(3):5-15
[117] Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D. An integrative model of organizationaltrust. Academy of Management Review,1995,20(3),709-734
[118] Mayfield, R. Social network dynamics and participatory politics. In J. Lebkowskyand M. Ratcliffe (Eds.), Extreme Democracy,2005:116-132
[119] McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., Kacmar, C. The impact of initial consumer truston intentions to transact with a web site: A trust building model. Journal ofStrategic Information System,2002,11(3-4):297-323
[120] McMillan, S. J. What is interactivity and what does it do? The Association forEducation in Journalism and Mass Media Communication. Phoenix: AZ,2000
[121] Meyer, A., Westerbarkey, P. Incentive and feedback system tools for improvingservice quality. QUIS3Quality in Services Conference Proceedings, InternationalService Quality Association, New York, NY,1994
[122] Milgram, S. The small world problem. Psychology Today,1967,2(1):60-67
[123] Moore, R., Moore, M. L., Capella, M. The impact of customer-to-customerinteractions in a high personal contact service setting. Journal of ServicesMarketing,2005,19(7):482-491
[124] Morgan, R. M., Hunt, S. D. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing.Journal of Marketing,1994,58(3):20-38
[125] Nicholls, R. New directions for customer-to-customer interaction research. Journalof Services Marketing,2010,24(1):87-97
[126] Nunnally, J. C. Psychometric Theory (1nd Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill,1967
[127] Nunnally, J. C. Psychometric Theory (2nd Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill,1978
[128] Okleshen, C., Grossbart, S. Usenet groups, virtual community and consumerbehaviors. Advances in Consumer Research,1998,25(2):276-282
[129] Oliver, R. L. A cognitive model for the antecedents and consequences ofsatisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research,1980,17(4):460-469
[130] Oliver, R. L. Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response.Journal of Consumer Research,1993,20(3):418-430
[131] Patterson, P. G., Johnson, L. W., Spreng, R. A. Modeling the determinants ofcustomer satisfaction for business-to-business professional services. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science,1997,25(1):4-17
[132] Preece, J. Sociability and usability in online communities: Determining andmeasuring success. Behaviour&Information Technology,2001,20(5):347-356
[133] Raacke, J., Bonds-Raacke, J. MySpace and facebook: Applying the uses andgratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. Cyberpsychology&Behavior,2008,11(2):169-174
[134] Rafaeli, S. Interactivity: From new media to communication. In R. P. Hawkins, J.M. Wieman, S. Pingree (Eds.), Advancing Communication Science: Merging Massand Interpersonal Processes. Newbury, CA: Sage,1988,110-134
[135] Rafaeli, S., Sudweeks, F. Networked interactivity. Journal of Computer MediatedCommunication,1997,2(4). Available online at http://www. ascusc. org/jcmc/vol2/issue4/editorsintro. html
[136] Rau, P. L. P., Gao, Q., Ding, Y. Relationship between the level of intimacy andlurking in online social network services. Computers in Human Behavior,2008,24(6):2757-2770
[137] Reid, E. Virtual worlds: Culture and imagination. In S. G. Jones (Ed.), Cybersociety:Computer-Mediated Communication and Community. London: Sage,1995:164-183
[138] Rheingold, H. Virtual community: Homesteading on the electronic frontier, reading,mass. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley,1993
[139] Ridings, C. M., Gefen, D. Virtual community attraction: Why people hangoutonline. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,2004,10(1): article4
[140] Roblyer M. D., Michelle, M., Marsena, W., et al. Findings on Facebook in highereducation: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions ofsocial networking sites. Internet and Higher Education,2010,13(3):134-140
[141] Schubert, P., Ginsburg, M. Virtual communities of transaction: The role ofpersonalization in electronic commerce. Electronic Markets,2000,10(1):45-55
[142] Severin, B. On the efficiency of competitive markets for operating licenses.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1988,103(2):357-385
[143] Shang, R.A., Chen, Y.C., Liao, H.J. The value of participation in virtual consumercommunities on brand loyalty. Internet Research,2006,16(4):398-418
[144] Shannon, C. E. A mathematical theory of communication. Part I, Bell SystemsTechnical Journal,1948,27:379-423
[145] Shannon, C. E., Weaver, W. A mathematical model of communication. Urbana, IL:University of Illinois Press,1949
[146] Shankar, V., Balasubramanian, S. Mobile marketing: A synthesis and prognosis.Journal of Interactive Marketing,2009,23(2):118-129
[147] Sia, C. L., Lim, K. H., Leung, K., et al. Web strategies to promote internet shopping:Is cultural-customization needed?. MIS Quarterly,2009,33(3):491-512
[148] Smedberg, A. How to combine the online community with ask the expert system ina health care site. Proceedings of the first international conference on the digitalsociety,2007
[149] Smith, T. Asynchronous discussions: Importance, design, facilitation, andevaluation.2001, http://www. ion. illinois. edu/pointers/2002_11/pagel. html
[150] Stefan, W. H. K., Dekimpe, M. G., Gijsbrechts, E., et al. The connected customer:The changing nature of consumer and business markets. New York: Routledge,2010
[151] Steinfield, C., Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C. Social capital, self-esteem, and use ofonline social network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of AppliedDevelopmental Psychology,2008,29(6):434-445
[152] Subrahmanyam, K., Reich, S. M., Waechter, N. Online and offline social networks:Use of social networking sites by emerging adults. Journal of AppliedDevelopmental Psychology,2008,29(6):420-433
[153] Sussman, S. W., Siegal, W. S. Informational influence in organizations: Anintegrated approach to knowledge adoption. Information Systems Research,2003,14(1):47-65
[154] Sweeney, J. C., Soutar, G. N., Mazzarol, T. Factors influencing word of moutheffectiveness: Receiver perspectives. European Journal of Marketing,2008,42(3-4):344-364
[155] Szuprowicz, B. O. Multimedia Networking. New York: McGraw-Hill,1995
[156] Thelwall, M. Social network sites: Users and uses. Advances in Computers,2009,76(9):19-73
[157] Thomas, J. B., Peters, C. O., Tolson, H. An exploratory investigation of the virtualcommunity MySpace. com: What are consumers saying about fashion?. Journal ofFashion Marketing and Management,2007,11(4):587-603
[158] Triandis, H. C. Interpersonal Behavior. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole,1977
[159] Trusov, M., Bucklin, R. E., Pauwels, K. Effects of word-of-mouth versus traditionalmarketing: Findings from an Internet social networking site. Journal of Marketing,2009,73(5):90-102
[160] Tse, D. K., Wilton, P. C. Models of consumer satisfaction: An extension. Journal ofMarketing Research,1988,25(2):204-212
[161] Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., Schouten, A. P. Friend networking sites and theirrelationship to adolescents’ well being and social self-esteem. CyberPsychologyand Behavior,2006,9(5):584590
[162] Vara, V. Researchers Mine Web for Focus Groups. The Wall Street Journal Online,2004, November17
[163] Venkatesh, V., Davis, F. D. A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use:Development and test. Decision Sciences,1996,27(3):451-481
[164] Venkatesh, V., Davis, F. D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptancemodel: F our longitudinal field studies. Management Science,2000,46(2):186-204
[165] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G.. Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions?Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usagebehavior. MIS Quarterly,2000,24(1):115-139
[166] Walther, J. B., Pingree, S., Hawkins, R., Buller, D. Attributes of interactive onlinehealth information systems. Journal of Medical Internet Research,2005,7(3):1-10
[167] Wang, C. C., Lai, C. Y. Knowledge contribution in the online virtual community:Capability and motivation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,2006,4092:442-453
[168] Wang, H. C., Doong, H. S. Argument form and spokesperson type: Therecommendation strategy of virtual salespersons. International Journal ofInformation Management,2010,30(6):493-501
[169] Wang, Y., Fesenmaier, D. R. Towards understanding members’ general participationin and active contribution to an online travel community. Tourism Management,2004,25(6):709-722
[170] Wang, Y., Yu, Q., Fesenmaier, D. R. Defining the virtual tourist community:implications for tourism marketing. Tourism Management,2002,23(4):407-417
[171] Wasko, M. M., Faraj, S. Why should I share? Examining social capital andknowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly,2005,29(1):35-57
[172] Weaver, R. L. Understanding interpersonal communication. Scott: Foresman,1984
[173] Weiner, B. Attribution, emotion, and action. In R. M. Sorrentino and E. T. Higgins(Eds.), Handbook of Motivation and Cognition, Guilford, New York, NY,1986
[174] Weitz, B. A. Relationship between salesperson performance and understanding ofcustomer decision making. Journal of Marketing Research,1978,15(4):501-516
[175] Wellman, B., Salaff, J., Dimitrova, D., et al. Computer networks as social networks:Collaborative work, telework, and virtual community. Annual Review of Sociology,1996,22(4):213-238
[176] Westbrook, R. A., Reilly, M. D. Value-percept disparity: An alternative to thedisconfirmation of expectation theory of consumer satisfaction. Advances inConsumer Research,1983,10:256-261
[177] Wiener, D. N. Subtle and obvious keys for the MMPI. Journal of ConsultingPsychology,1948,12:164-170
[178] Williams, F., Ronald, R., Everett R. Research Methods and the New Media. NewYork, NY: The Free Press,1988
[179] Wind, Y. Preference of relevant others and individual choice models. Journal ofConsumer Research,1976,3(1):50-57
[180] Wu, W. V. EFL optimal learning environment: Perspectives of faculty and studentsin a Taiwanese technical university. USA, Vermillion: The University of SouthDakota,2006
[181] Wu, C. H. The impact of customer-to-customer interaction and customerhomogeneity on customer satisfaction in tourism service-The service encounterprospective. Tourism Management,2007,28(6):1518-1528
[182] Wu, C. H. The influence of customer-to-customer interactions and role typology oncustomer reaction. Service Industries Journal,2008,28(10):1501-1513
[183] Wu, S. C., Fang, W. C. The effect of consumer-to-consumer interactions on ideageneration in virtual brand community relationships. Technovation,2010,30(11-12):570-581
[184] Yousafzai, S. Y., Foxall, G. R., Pallister, J. G. Technology acceptance: ameta-analysis of the TAM. Journal of Modelling in Management,2007,2(3):251-280
[185] CNNIC.第29次中国互联网络发展状况统计报告.2012-01-16http://www. cnnic. cn/research/bgxz/tjbg/201201/t20120116_23668. html
[186] iResearch.2009年中国网络社区研究简版报告.2009-11-6http://report. iresearch. cn/Reports/Charge/1323. html
[187]曹再辉,余东先.知识管理理论对构建虚拟学习社区的启示.现代远程教育研究,2007,6:28-31
[188]常亚平,刘兴菊,阎俊等.虚拟社区知识共享之于消费者购买意向的研究.管理科学学报,2011(b),14(4):86-96
[189]常亚平,邱媛媛,阎俊等.虚拟社区知识共享主体对首购意愿的作用机理研究.管理科学,2011(a),42(2):74-84
[190]常亚平,朱东红.社交网站用户参与动机的测量.图书情报工作,2011,55(14):32-35
[191]常亚平,朱东红,张金隆.虚拟社区知识共享与消费者品牌转换的关系研究.管理学报,2009,6(11):1536-1540
[192]丁欣,李尧,李烨.决胜SNS.北京:人民邮电出版社,2009
[193]范晓屏,杨艳,卢艳峰.基于知识交流的虚拟社区管理方式研究.经济论坛,2005,19:53-56
[194]高功敬. BBS虚拟社区的人际互动[硕士学位论文].山东:山东大学,2005
[195]胡雷芳.虚拟社区C2C知识交换对客户价值及忠诚度影响的实证研究.成组技术与生产现代化,2006,23(3):17-21
[196]黄海,罗友丰,陈志英. SPSS10.0for Windows统计分析.北京:人民邮电出版社,2001
[197]刘龙.关于网络经济中虚拟社区与品牌塑造的研究.经济问题探索,2002,9:118-120
[198]刘丽群,宋咏梅.虚拟社区中知识交流的行为动机与影响因素研究.新闻与传播研究,2007,14(1):43-52
[199]刘兴菊. SNS环境中消费者交互行为对购买意向的影响机制研究[硕士学位论文].武汉:华中科技大学,2010.
[200]卢冰泉.面向知识共享的高校网络教学虚拟社区的研究.皁阳师范学院学报（社会科学版）,2007,4:112-113
[201]尼尔森.网络时代人们最信任哪种广告?2007-10-9http://www.20ju. com/content/V12042. htm
[202]邵兵家,高志欣,师蕾.消费者社交网站购物态度影响因素的实证研.情报杂志,2010,29(8):203-206
[203]苏秦,李钊,徐翼.基于交互模型的客户服务质量与关系质量的实证研究.南开管理评论,2007,1(1):44-49
[204]王飞绒,柴晋颖,池仁勇.基于SECI模型的虚拟社区的知识共享与知识创新研究.中国青年科技,2007,154(4):16-22
[205]汪涛,李燕萍.虚拟社区中推荐者特征对推荐效果的影响.商业经济与管理,2007,193(11):50-56
[206]温忠麟,张雷,侯杰泰等.中介效应检验程序及其应用.心理学报,2004,36(5):614-620
[207]向海华.电子商务环境中虚拟社区的知识共享活动.情报杂志.2004,23(7):75-76
[208]徐小龙,王方华.虚拟社区的知识共享机制研究.自然辩证法研究,2007b,23(8):83-86
[209]徐小龙,王方华.虚拟社区研究前沿探析.外国经济与管理,2007a,29(9):10-16
[210]杨堤雅.因特网虚拟社区成员之角色与沟通互动之探讨[硕士学位论文].台湾:中正大学企业管理所,1999
[211]袁海波,袁海燕.网络虚拟社区的营销价值.江苏商论,2003,11(6):82-83
[2] Ailawadi, K. L., Beauchamp, J. P., Donthu, N., et al. Communication andpromotion decisions in retailing: A review and directions for future research.Journal of Retailing,2009,85(1):42-55
[3] Anderson, E. W., Sullivan, M. W. The antecedents and consequences of customersatisfaction for firms, Marketing Science,1993,12(2):125-143
[4] Anderson, W. T. Communities in a world of open systems. Futures,1999,31(5):457-463
[5] Antheunis, M. L., Patti, M. V., Jochen, P. Getting acquainted through socialnetwork sites: Testing a model of online uncertainty reduction and social attraction.Computers in Human Behavior,2009,26(1):100-109
[6] Armano, D. Six social media trends for2010.2009-11-2. http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/11/six_social_media_trends. html
[7] Armstrong, A. G., Hagel, III. J. The real value of on-line communities. HarvardBusiness Review,1996,74(3):134-141
[8] Arndt, J. Role of product-related conversations in the diffusion of a new product.Journal of Marketing Research,1967,4(3):291-295
[9] Arnould, E. J., Price, L. L. River magic: Extraordinary experience and the extendedservice encounter. Journal of Consumer Research,1993,20(1):24-45
[10] Barker, V. Older adolescents’ motivations for social network site use: The influenceof gender, group identity, and collective self-esteem. Cyberpsychology&behavior,2009,12(2):209-213
[11] Bansal, H. S., Peter A. V. Word-of-mouth processeswithin a service purchasedecision context. Journal of Service Research,2000,3(2):166-177
[12] Bhattacherjee, A., Sanford, C. Influence process for information technologyacceptance: An elaboration like-hood model. MIS Quarterly,2006,30(4):805-825
[13] Bhattacherjee, A. Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly,2001,25(3):351-370
[14] Bishop, J. Factors shaping the form and participation in virtual communities,Digital Matrix Magazine,2007,85:22-24
[15] Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W., Engel, J. F. Consumer Behavior. Texas: HarcourtCollege Publishers,2003
[16] Bonacich, P. Communication dilemmas in social networks: An experimental study.American Sociological Review,1990,55(3):448-459
[17] Bone, P. F. Word-of-mouth effects on short-term and long-term product judgments.Journal of Business Research,1995,32(3):213-223
[18] boyd, D. M., Ellison, N. B. Social network sites: Definition, history, andscholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,2007,13(1):210-230
[19] boyd, D M. Friendster and publicly articulated social networking In Paper presentedat the conference on human factors and computing systems. Vienna.2004
[20] Brandtzag, P. B., Heim, J. Why people use social networking sites. Lecture Notes inComputer Science,2009,5621:143-152
[21] Brown, J. J., Reingen, P. H. Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior.Journal of Consumer Research,1987,14(3):350-362
[22] Cachia, R., Compa ó, R., Costa, O. D. Grasping the potential of online socialnetworks for foresight. Technological Forecasting&Social Change,2007,74(8):1179-1203
[23] Cardon, P., Marshall, B., Norris, D. T. Online and offline social ties of socialnetwork site users: An exploratory study. Journal of Computer Information Systems,2009,50(1):54-65
[24] Casaló, L., Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M. Determinants of the intention to participate infirm-hosted online travel communities and effects on consumer behavioralintentions. Tourism Management,2010,31(6):898-911
[25] Casaló, L., Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M. The impact of participation in virtual brandcommunities on consumer trust and loyalty: The case of free software. OnlineInformation Review,2007,31(6):775-792
[26] Cha, J. Shopping on social networking websites: Attitudes toward real versusvirtual items. Journal of Interactive Advertising,2009,10(1):77-93
[27] Chan, K. W., Li, S. Y. Understanding consumer-to-consumer interactions in virtualcommunities: The salience of reciprocity. Journal of Business Research,2010,63(9-10):1033-1040
[28] Chang, Y. P, Zhu, D. H. Adoption of Social Networking Sites. In Z. Yan(Ed.).Encyclopedia of Cyber Behavior. IGI Global: Hershey, PA.2012a, pp.600-607
[29] Chang, Y. P., Zhu, D. H, Wang, S. H. The influence of online game service qualityon loyalty: An empirical study of MMORPGs. Social Behavior and Personality,2011,39(10):1297-1302
[30] Chang, Y. P., Zhu, D. H. The role of perceived social capital and flow experience inbuilding users' continuance intention to social networking sites in China. Computersin Human Behavior,2012b,28(3):995-1001
[31] Chang, Y. P., Zhu, D. H. Understanding social networking sites adoption in China:A comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption. Computers in Human Behavior,2011,27(5):1840-1848
[32] Cheema, A., Kaikati, A. M. The effect of need for uniqueness on word of mouth.Journal of Marketing Research,2010,47(3):553-563
[33] Cheung, C. M. K., Lee, M. K. O. A theoretical model of intentional social action inonline social networks. Decision Support Systems,2010,49(1):24-30
[34] Chevalier, J. A., Mayzlin, D. The effect of word of mouth on sales: online bookreviews. Journal of Marketing Research,2006,43(3):345-354
[35] Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., Newsted, P. N. A partial least squares latent variablemodeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlosimulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. InformationSystems Research,2003,14(2):189-217
[36] Chiu, C. M., Hsu, M. H., Wang, E. T. G. Understanding knowledge sharing invirtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories.Decision support systems,2006,42(3):1872-1888
[37] Christy, M.K., Cheung, M. K.O. Lee, N. R. The impact of electronic word-of-mouth:The adoption of onlin e opinions in online customer communities. Internet Research,2008,18(3):229-247
[38] Chu, S. C., Kim, Y. Determinants of consumer engagement in electronicword-of-mouth (eWOM) in social networking sites. International Journal ofAdvertising,2011,30(1):47-75
[39] Churchill, G. A., Surprenant, C. J. An investigation into the determinants ofcustomer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research,1982,19(4):491-504
[40] Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., Warshaw, P. R. User acceptance of computertechnology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science,1989,35(8):982-1003
[41] Davis, F. D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance ofinformation technology. MIS Quarterly,1989,13(3):319-340
[42] Davis, F. D. User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics,user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-MachineStudies,1993,38(3):475-487
[43] Davis, F. D. A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-userinformation systems: Theory and results [Doctoral dissertation]. Massachusetts:Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,1986
[44] DeFleur, M. L. Theories of mass communication. New York: David McKayCompany Inc,1966.
[45] Dholakia, U. M., Bagozzir, P., Pearo, L. K. A social influence model of consumerparticipation in network and small-group-based virtual communities. InternationalJournal of Research in Marketing,2004,21(19):241-263
[46] Doney, P., Cannon, J. An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-sellerrelationships. Journal of Marketing,1997,61(2):35-51
[47] Dwyer, P. Measuring interpersonal influence in online conversations [MSI workingpaper]. Marketing Science Institute: Boston,2009
[48] Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., Lampe, C. Spatially bounded online social networksand social capital: the role of facebook. The Annual Conference of the InternationalCommunication Association in Dresden. Germany,2006
[49] Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., Lampe, C. The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Socialcapital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal ofComputer-Mediated Communication,2007,12(4), article1
[50] Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction totheory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA,1975
[51] Fornell, C., Johnson, M. D., Anderson, E. W., et al. The American customersatisfaction index: Nature, purpose, and findings. Journal of Marketing,1996,60(4):7-18
[52] Fornell, C., Larcker, D. F. Structural equation model with unobservable variablesand measurement error: algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research,1981,18(3):382-389
[53] Frenzen, J., Nakamoto, K. Structure, cooperation, and the flow of marketinformation. Journal of Consumer Research,1993,20(3):360-375
[54] Füller, J. Why consumers engage in virtual new product developments initiated byproducers. Advances in Consumer Research,2006,33(1):639-646
[55] Gangadharbatla, H. Facebook me: Collective self-esteem, need to belong andinternet self-efficacy as predictors of the iGeneration’s attitude toward socialnetworking sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising,2007,8(2):1-28
[56] Gauri, D., Bhatnagar, A., Rao, R. Role of word of mouth in online store loyalty:Comparing online store ratings with other e-store loyalty factors. Communicationsof the ACM,2008,51(3):89-91
[57] Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., Straub, D. W. Trust and TAM in online shopping: Anintegrated model. MIS Quarterly,2003,27(1):51-90
[58] Gefen, D., Straub, D. W., Boudreau, M. Structural equation modeling techniquesand regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of theAssociation for Information Systems,2000,4,1-77
[59] Gefen, D., Straub, D. W. Gender difference in the perception and use of e-mail: Anextension to the Technology Acceptance Model. MIS Quarterly,1997,21(4):389-400
[60] Godes, D., Mayzlin, D., Chen, Y. B., et al. The firm’s management of socialinteractions. Marketing Letters,2005,16(3-4):415-428
[61] Gremler, D. D., Gwinner, K. P., Brown, S. W. Generating positive word-of-mouthcommunication through customer-employee relationships. International Journal ofService Industry Management,2001,12(1):44-59
[62] Gruen, T. W., Osmonbekov, T., Czaplewski, A. J. Customer-to-customer exchange:Its MOA antecedents and its impact on value creation and loyalty. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science,2007,35(4):537-549
[63] Guo, C. Q., Shim, J. P., Otondo, R. Social network services in China: An integratedmodel of centrality, trust, and technology acceptance. Journal of Global InformationTechnology Management,2010,13(2):76-99
[64] Gupta, S., Kim, H. W. Virtual community: Concepts, implications, and futureresearch directions. Proceedings of the Tenth America’s Conference on InformationSystems, New York,2004
[65] Ha, L., James, L. Interactivity reexamined: A baseline analysis of early businesswebsites. Journal of Broadcasting&Electronic Media,1998,42(4):457-474
[66] Hagel,Ⅲ. J., Armstrong, A. G. Net gain: Expanding markets through virtualcommunities. Boston: Harvard Business School Press,1997
[67] Hannafin, M., Land, S., Oliver, K. Open learning environments: Foundations,methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories andmodels (Vol. II). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum,1999
[68] Hara, N., Hew, K. H. Knowledge-sharing in an online community of health-careprofessionals. Information Technology&People,2007,20(3):235-261
[69] Hargittai, E. Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of socialnetwork sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,2007,13(1):276-297
[70] Harris, K., Davies, B., Baron, S. Conversations during purchase consideration:Sales assistants and consumers. The International Reviewof Retail, Distribution andConsumer Research,1997,7(3):173-190
[71] Harris, K., Baron, S., Parker, D. Understanding the consumer experience: It’s “goodto talk”. Journal of Marketing Management,2000,16(1-3):111-127
[72] Heeter, C. Implications of new interactive technologies for conceptualizingcommunication. In J. L. Salvaggio&J. Bryant (Eds.), Media use in the informationage: Emerging patterns of adoption and computer use. Hillsdale, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum Associates,1989,217-235
[73] Hempel, J., Lehman, P. The MySpace Generation: They live online. They buyonline. They play online. Their power is growing. BusinessWeek (online),2005,December12:86
[74] Hennig-Thurau, T., Edward, C. M., Christian, F., et al. The impact of new media oncustomer relationships. Journal of Service Research,2010,13(3):311-330
[75] Hernández, B., Jiménez, J., Martín, M. J. Customer behavior in electroniccommerce: The moderating effect of e-purchasing experience. Journal of BusinessResearch,2010,63(9-10):964-971
[76] Herr, P. M., Kardes, F. R., Kim, J. Effects of word-of-mouth and product-attributeinformation on persuasion: An accessibility-diagnosticity perspective. Journal ofConsumer Research,1991,17(3):454-462
[77] Hoffman, D., Thomas, P. N. Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediatedenvironments: Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing,1996,60(3):50-58
[78] Hogan, J. E., Lemon, K. N., Libai, B. Quantifying the ripple: word of mouth andadvertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising Research,2004,44(3):271-280
[79] Huang, S., Hsu, C. H. C. The impact of customer-to-customer interaction on cruiseexperience and vacation satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research,2010,49(1):79-92
[80] Igbaria, M., Zinatelli, N., Cragg, P., et al. Personal computing acceptance factors insmall firms: A structural equation model. MIS Quarterly,1997,21(3):279-305
[81] Jepsen, A. Information search in virtual communities: Is it replacing use of off-lineommunication?. Journal of Marketing Communications,2006,12(4):247-261
[82] Ji, Y. G., Hwangbo, H., Yi, J. S, et al. The influence of cultural differences on theuse of social network services and the formation of social capital. InternationalJournal of Human-Computer Interaction,2010,26(11-12):1100-1121
[83] Johnson, D., Grayson, K. Cognitive and affective trust in service relationships.Journal of Business Research,2005,58(4):500-507
[84] Johnson-George, C., Swap, W. C. Measurement of specific interpersonal trust:Construction and validation of a scale to assess trust in a specific other. Journal ofPersonality&Social Psychology,1982,43(6):1306-1317
[85] Jung, T., Youn, H., McClung, S. Motivations and self-presentation strategies onKorean-based ‘‘Cyworld” weblog format personal homepages. CyberPsychologyand Behavior,2007,10(1):24-31
[86] Karahanna, E., Straub, D. W., Chervany, N. L. Information technology adoptionacross time: a cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs.MIS Quarterly,1999,23(2):183-213
[87] Kim, W., Jeong, O., Lee, S. On social web sites. Information Systems,2010,35(2):215-236
[88] Kim, Y., Sohn, D., Choi, S. M. Cultural difference in motivations for using socialnetwork sites: A comparative study of American and Korean college students.Computers in Human Behavior,2011,27(1):365-372
[89] King, W. R., He, J. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model.Information&Management,2006,43(6):740-755
[90] Koh. J., Kim, Y. G. Knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An e-businessperspective. Expert System with Applications,2004,26(2):155-166
[91] Komiak, S., Benbasat, I. The effects of personalization and familiarity on trust andadoption of recommendation agents. MIS Quarterly,2006,30(4):941-996
[92] Komiak, S., Benbasat, I. Understanding customer trust in agent-mediated electroniccommerce, web-mediated electronic commerce, and traditional commerce.Information Technology and Management,2004,5(1-2):181-207
[93] Kowatsch, T., Maass, W. In-store consumer behavior: How mobilerecommendation agents influence usage intentions, product purchases, and storepreferences. Computers in Human Behavior,2010,26(4):697-704
[94] Krisanic, K. Motivations and impression management: Predictors of socialnetworking site use and user behavior [Master Dissertation]. Columbia: Universityof Missouri-Columbia,2008
[95] Ku, L. Impacts of interactivity from computer-mediated conmmunication in anorganizational setting: A study of electronic mail [Doctor Dissertation]. EastLansing MI: Michigan State University,1992
[96] Kwon, O., Wen, Y. An empirical study of the factors affecting social networkservice use. Computers in Human Behavior,2010,26(2):254-263
[97] Lasswell, H. The structure and function of communication in society. In L. Bryson(Ed.), The communication of ideas. New York, NY: Harper and Row,1948,37-51
[98] Lee, F. S. L., Vogel, D., Limayem, M. Virtual community informatics: What weknow and what we need to know. Proceedings of the35th Hawaii InternationalConference on System Sciences,2002
[99] Lee, J., Lee, J. N. Understanding the product information inference process inelectronic word-of-mouth: An objectivity-subjectivity dichotomy perspective.Information&Management,2009,46(6):302-311
[100] Lee. T. G. Trust in complementary medicine: The case of cranial osteopathy. TheSociological Review,2002,50(1):48-68
[101] Legris, P., Ingham, I., Collerette, P. Why do people use information technology? Acritical review of the technology acceptance model. Information&Management,2003,40(3):191-204
[102] Levin, D. Z., Cross, R. The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating roleof trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science,2004,50(11):1477-1490
[103] Levy, S. E. The hospitality of the host: A cross-cultural examination of manageriallyfacilitated consumer-to-consumer interactions. International Journal of HospitalityManagement,2010,29(2):319-327
[104] Levy, S. E., Getz, D., Hudson, S. A field experimental investigation of manageriallyfacilitated consumer-to-consumer interaction. Journal of Travel&TourismMarketing,2011,28(6):656-674
[105] Lewandowski, J., Rosenberg, B. D., Parks, M. J., et al. The effect of informal socialsupport: Face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication. Computers inHuman Behavior,2011,27(5):1806-1814
[106] Lewin, K. A dynamic theory of personality. New York: Mac Graw-Hill,1935
[107] Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., Gonzalez, M., et al. Tastes, ties, and time: A new socialnetwork dataset using Facebook. com. Social Networks,2008,30(4):330-342
[108] Libai, B., Bolton, R., Bügel, M. S., et al. Customer-to-customer interactions:Broadening the scope of word of mouth research. Journal of Service Research,2010,13(3):267-282
[109] Licklider, J. C. R. Libraries of the Future. Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press,1965
[110] Li, H. Virtual community studies: A literature review, synthesis and researchagenda. Proceedings of the America’s Conference on Information Systems, NewYork,2004
[111] Liu, Y. Word of mouth for movies: Its dynamics and impact on box office revenue.Journal of Marketing,2006,70(3):74-89
[112] Lu, Y., Zhao, L., Wang, B. From virtual community members to C2C e-commercebuyers: Trust in virtual communities and its effect on consumers’ purchase intention.Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,2010,9:346-360
[113] Marsden, F. V., Campbell, K. E. Measuring tie strength. Social Forces,1984,63(2):482-501
[114] Massey, B., Levy, M. Interactivity in online journalism and English-language webnewspapers in Asia. Journalism&Mass Communication Quarterly,1999,76(l):138-151
[115] Martin, C. L., Clark, T. Networks of customer-to-customer relationships inmarketing. In D. Iacobucci (Ed.), Networks in Marketing, Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications,1996
[116] Martin, C. L., Pranter, C. A. Compatibility management: customer-to-customerrelationships in service environments. Journal of Services Marketing,1989,3(3):5-15
[117] Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D. An integrative model of organizationaltrust. Academy of Management Review,1995,20(3),709-734
[118] Mayfield, R. Social network dynamics and participatory politics. In J. Lebkowskyand M. Ratcliffe (Eds.), Extreme Democracy,2005:116-132
[119] McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., Kacmar, C. The impact of initial consumer truston intentions to transact with a web site: A trust building model. Journal ofStrategic Information System,2002,11(3-4):297-323
[120] McMillan, S. J. What is interactivity and what does it do? The Association forEducation in Journalism and Mass Media Communication. Phoenix: AZ,2000
[121] Meyer, A., Westerbarkey, P. Incentive and feedback system tools for improvingservice quality. QUIS3Quality in Services Conference Proceedings, InternationalService Quality Association, New York, NY,1994
[122] Milgram, S. The small world problem. Psychology Today,1967,2(1):60-67
[123] Moore, R., Moore, M. L., Capella, M. The impact of customer-to-customerinteractions in a high personal contact service setting. Journal of ServicesMarketing,2005,19(7):482-491
[124] Morgan, R. M., Hunt, S. D. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing.Journal of Marketing,1994,58(3):20-38
[125] Nicholls, R. New directions for customer-to-customer interaction research. Journalof Services Marketing,2010,24(1):87-97
[126] Nunnally, J. C. Psychometric Theory (1nd Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill,1967
[127] Nunnally, J. C. Psychometric Theory (2nd Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill,1978
[128] Okleshen, C., Grossbart, S. Usenet groups, virtual community and consumerbehaviors. Advances in Consumer Research,1998,25(2):276-282
[129] Oliver, R. L. A cognitive model for the antecedents and consequences ofsatisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research,1980,17(4):460-469
[130] Oliver, R. L. Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response.Journal of Consumer Research,1993,20(3):418-430
[131] Patterson, P. G., Johnson, L. W., Spreng, R. A. Modeling the determinants ofcustomer satisfaction for business-to-business professional services. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science,1997,25(1):4-17
[132] Preece, J. Sociability and usability in online communities: Determining andmeasuring success. Behaviour&Information Technology,2001,20(5):347-356
[133] Raacke, J., Bonds-Raacke, J. MySpace and facebook: Applying the uses andgratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. Cyberpsychology&Behavior,2008,11(2):169-174
[134] Rafaeli, S. Interactivity: From new media to communication. In R. P. Hawkins, J.M. Wieman, S. Pingree (Eds.), Advancing Communication Science: Merging Massand Interpersonal Processes. Newbury, CA: Sage,1988,110-134
[135] Rafaeli, S., Sudweeks, F. Networked interactivity. Journal of Computer MediatedCommunication,1997,2(4). Available online at http://www. ascusc. org/jcmc/vol2/issue4/editorsintro. html
[136] Rau, P. L. P., Gao, Q., Ding, Y. Relationship between the level of intimacy andlurking in online social network services. Computers in Human Behavior,2008,24(6):2757-2770
[137] Reid, E. Virtual worlds: Culture and imagination. In S. G. Jones (Ed.), Cybersociety:Computer-Mediated Communication and Community. London: Sage,1995:164-183
[138] Rheingold, H. Virtual community: Homesteading on the electronic frontier, reading,mass. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley,1993
[139] Ridings, C. M., Gefen, D. Virtual community attraction: Why people hangoutonline. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,2004,10(1): article4
[140] Roblyer M. D., Michelle, M., Marsena, W., et al. Findings on Facebook in highereducation: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions ofsocial networking sites. Internet and Higher Education,2010,13(3):134-140
[141] Schubert, P., Ginsburg, M. Virtual communities of transaction: The role ofpersonalization in electronic commerce. Electronic Markets,2000,10(1):45-55
[142] Severin, B. On the efficiency of competitive markets for operating licenses.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1988,103(2):357-385
[143] Shang, R.A., Chen, Y.C., Liao, H.J. The value of participation in virtual consumercommunities on brand loyalty. Internet Research,2006,16(4):398-418
[144] Shannon, C. E. A mathematical theory of communication. Part I, Bell SystemsTechnical Journal,1948,27:379-423
[145] Shannon, C. E., Weaver, W. A mathematical model of communication. Urbana, IL:University of Illinois Press,1949
[146] Shankar, V., Balasubramanian, S. Mobile marketing: A synthesis and prognosis.Journal of Interactive Marketing,2009,23(2):118-129
[147] Sia, C. L., Lim, K. H., Leung, K., et al. Web strategies to promote internet shopping:Is cultural-customization needed?. MIS Quarterly,2009,33(3):491-512
[148] Smedberg, A. How to combine the online community with ask the expert system ina health care site. Proceedings of the first international conference on the digitalsociety,2007
[149] Smith, T. Asynchronous discussions: Importance, design, facilitation, andevaluation.2001, http://www. ion. illinois. edu/pointers/2002_11/pagel. html
[150] Stefan, W. H. K., Dekimpe, M. G., Gijsbrechts, E., et al. The connected customer:The changing nature of consumer and business markets. New York: Routledge,2010
[151] Steinfield, C., Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C. Social capital, self-esteem, and use ofonline social network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of AppliedDevelopmental Psychology,2008,29(6):434-445
[152] Subrahmanyam, K., Reich, S. M., Waechter, N. Online and offline social networks:Use of social networking sites by emerging adults. Journal of AppliedDevelopmental Psychology,2008,29(6):420-433
[153] Sussman, S. W., Siegal, W. S. Informational influence in organizations: Anintegrated approach to knowledge adoption. Information Systems Research,2003,14(1):47-65
[154] Sweeney, J. C., Soutar, G. N., Mazzarol, T. Factors influencing word of moutheffectiveness: Receiver perspectives. European Journal of Marketing,2008,42(3-4):344-364
[155] Szuprowicz, B. O. Multimedia Networking. New York: McGraw-Hill,1995
[156] Thelwall, M. Social network sites: Users and uses. Advances in Computers,2009,76(9):19-73
[157] Thomas, J. B., Peters, C. O., Tolson, H. An exploratory investigation of the virtualcommunity MySpace. com: What are consumers saying about fashion?. Journal ofFashion Marketing and Management,2007,11(4):587-603
[158] Triandis, H. C. Interpersonal Behavior. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole,1977
[159] Trusov, M., Bucklin, R. E., Pauwels, K. Effects of word-of-mouth versus traditionalmarketing: Findings from an Internet social networking site. Journal of Marketing,2009,73(5):90-102
[160] Tse, D. K., Wilton, P. C. Models of consumer satisfaction: An extension. Journal ofMarketing Research,1988,25(2):204-212
[161] Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., Schouten, A. P. Friend networking sites and theirrelationship to adolescents’ well being and social self-esteem. CyberPsychologyand Behavior,2006,9(5):584590
[162] Vara, V. Researchers Mine Web for Focus Groups. The Wall Street Journal Online,2004, November17
[163] Venkatesh, V., Davis, F. D. A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use:Development and test. Decision Sciences,1996,27(3):451-481
[164] Venkatesh, V., Davis, F. D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptancemodel: F our longitudinal field studies. Management Science,2000,46(2):186-204
[165] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G.. Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions?Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usagebehavior. MIS Quarterly,2000,24(1):115-139
[166] Walther, J. B., Pingree, S., Hawkins, R., Buller, D. Attributes of interactive onlinehealth information systems. Journal of Medical Internet Research,2005,7(3):1-10
[167] Wang, C. C., Lai, C. Y. Knowledge contribution in the online virtual community:Capability and motivation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,2006,4092:442-453
[168] Wang, H. C., Doong, H. S. Argument form and spokesperson type: Therecommendation strategy of virtual salespersons. International Journal ofInformation Management,2010,30(6):493-501
[169] Wang, Y., Fesenmaier, D. R. Towards understanding members’ general participationin and active contribution to an online travel community. Tourism Management,2004,25(6):709-722
[170] Wang, Y., Yu, Q., Fesenmaier, D. R. Defining the virtual tourist community:implications for tourism marketing. Tourism Management,2002,23(4):407-417
[171] Wasko, M. M., Faraj, S. Why should I share? Examining social capital andknowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly,2005,29(1):35-57
[172] Weaver, R. L. Understanding interpersonal communication. Scott: Foresman,1984
[173] Weiner, B. Attribution, emotion, and action. In R. M. Sorrentino and E. T. Higgins(Eds.), Handbook of Motivation and Cognition, Guilford, New York, NY,1986
[174] Weitz, B. A. Relationship between salesperson performance and understanding ofcustomer decision making. Journal of Marketing Research,1978,15(4):501-516
[175] Wellman, B., Salaff, J., Dimitrova, D., et al. Computer networks as social networks:Collaborative work, telework, and virtual community. Annual Review of Sociology,1996,22(4):213-238
[176] Westbrook, R. A., Reilly, M. D. Value-percept disparity: An alternative to thedisconfirmation of expectation theory of consumer satisfaction. Advances inConsumer Research,1983,10:256-261
[177] Wiener, D. N. Subtle and obvious keys for the MMPI. Journal of ConsultingPsychology,1948,12:164-170
[178] Williams, F., Ronald, R., Everett R. Research Methods and the New Media. NewYork, NY: The Free Press,1988
[179] Wind, Y. Preference of relevant others and individual choice models. Journal ofConsumer Research,1976,3(1):50-57
[180] Wu, W. V. EFL optimal learning environment: Perspectives of faculty and studentsin a Taiwanese technical university. USA, Vermillion: The University of SouthDakota,2006
[181] Wu, C. H. The impact of customer-to-customer interaction and customerhomogeneity on customer satisfaction in tourism service-The service encounterprospective. Tourism Management,2007,28(6):1518-1528
[182] Wu, C. H. The influence of customer-to-customer interactions and role typology oncustomer reaction. Service Industries Journal,2008,28(10):1501-1513
[183] Wu, S. C., Fang, W. C. The effect of consumer-to-consumer interactions on ideageneration in virtual brand community relationships. Technovation,2010,30(11-12):570-581
[184] Yousafzai, S. Y., Foxall, G. R., Pallister, J. G. Technology acceptance: ameta-analysis of the TAM. Journal of Modelling in Management,2007,2(3):251-280
[185] CNNIC.第29次中国互联网络发展状况统计报告.2012-01-16http://www. cnnic. cn/research/bgxz/tjbg/201201/t20120116_23668. html
[186] iResearch.2009年中国网络社区研究简版报告.2009-11-6http://report. iresearch. cn/Reports/Charge/1323. html
[187]曹再辉,余东先.知识管理理论对构建虚拟学习社区的启示.现代远程教育研究,2007,6:28-31
[188]常亚平,刘兴菊,阎俊等.虚拟社区知识共享之于消费者购买意向的研究.管理科学学报,2011(b),14(4):86-96
[189]常亚平,邱媛媛,阎俊等.虚拟社区知识共享主体对首购意愿的作用机理研究.管理科学,2011(a),42(2):74-84
[190]常亚平,朱东红.社交网站用户参与动机的测量.图书情报工作,2011,55(14):32-35
[191]常亚平,朱东红,张金隆.虚拟社区知识共享与消费者品牌转换的关系研究.管理学报,2009,6(11):1536-1540
[192]丁欣,李尧,李烨.决胜SNS.北京:人民邮电出版社,2009
[193]范晓屏,杨艳,卢艳峰.基于知识交流的虚拟社区管理方式研究.经济论坛,2005,19:53-56
[194]高功敬. BBS虚拟社区的人际互动[硕士学位论文].山东:山东大学,2005
[195]胡雷芳.虚拟社区C2C知识交换对客户价值及忠诚度影响的实证研究.成组技术与生产现代化,2006,23(3):17-21
[196]黄海,罗友丰,陈志英. SPSS10.0for Windows统计分析.北京:人民邮电出版社,2001
[197]刘龙.关于网络经济中虚拟社区与品牌塑造的研究.经济问题探索,2002,9:118-120
[198]刘丽群,宋咏梅.虚拟社区中知识交流的行为动机与影响因素研究.新闻与传播研究,2007,14(1):43-52
[199]刘兴菊. SNS环境中消费者交互行为对购买意向的影响机制研究[硕士学位论文].武汉:华中科技大学,2010.
[200]卢冰泉.面向知识共享的高校网络教学虚拟社区的研究.皁阳师范学院学报（社会科学版）,2007,4:112-113
[201]尼尔森.网络时代人们最信任哪种广告?2007-10-9http://www.20ju. com/content/V12042. htm
[202]邵兵家,高志欣,师蕾.消费者社交网站购物态度影响因素的实证研.情报杂志,2010,29(8):203-206
[203]苏秦,李钊,徐翼.基于交互模型的客户服务质量与关系质量的实证研究.南开管理评论,2007,1(1):44-49
[204]王飞绒,柴晋颖,池仁勇.基于SECI模型的虚拟社区的知识共享与知识创新研究.中国青年科技,2007,154(4):16-22
[205]汪涛,李燕萍.虚拟社区中推荐者特征对推荐效果的影响.商业经济与管理,2007,193(11):50-56
[206]温忠麟,张雷,侯杰泰等.中介效应检验程序及其应用.心理学报,2004,36(5):614-620
[207]向海华.电子商务环境中虚拟社区的知识共享活动.情报杂志.2004,23(7):75-76
[208]徐小龙,王方华.虚拟社区的知识共享机制研究.自然辩证法研究,2007b,23(8):83-86
[209]徐小龙,王方华.虚拟社区研究前沿探析.外国经济与管理,2007a,29(9):10-16
[210]杨堤雅.因特网虚拟社区成员之角色与沟通互动之探讨[硕士学位论文].台湾:中正大学企业管理所,1999
[211]袁海波,袁海燕.网络虚拟社区的营销价值.江苏商论,2003,11(6):82-83