Social media present prime opportunities for commercial brands to promote their products. Some user-generated comments, however, hamper brands’ promotion efforts with fake claims. The literature on warranting theory suggests that if a company controls the dissemination of user-generated comments of its products, it may backfire against the company by reducing the warranting value of favorable comments. The current study proposes that a company’s justification for their information control behavior can restore the warranting value of user-generated comments. Drawing upon the literature on fairness theory and mindlessness, the study investigated the effectiveness of two types of justifications varying in their legitimacy. Results from a web-based experiment (N = 221) with four conditions (no evidence of dissemination control vs. no justification vs. placebic justification vs. real justification) confirm that when a company offers a legitimate justification for deleting users’ comments, it mitigates negative evaluations that may result from the company’s information control behavior.
AbelsonR. P. (1976). Script processing in attitude formation and decision making. In CarrollJ. S.PayneJ. W. (Eds.), Cognition and social behavior (pp. 33-45). Oxford, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2.
BurgessS.SellittoC.CoxC.BuultjensJ. (2011). Trust perceptions of online travel information by different content creators: Some social and legal implications. Information Systems Frontiers, 13, 221-235. doi:10.1007/s10796-009-9192-x
3.
ChaikenS. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.752
4.
ChampouxV.DurgeeJ.McGlynnL. (2012). Corporate Facebook pages: When “fans” attack. Journal of Business Strategy, 33, 22-30. doi:10.1108/02756661211206717
5.
CheungC. M. K.ThadaniD. R. (2012). The impact of electronic word-of-mouth communication: A literature analysis and integrative model. Decision Support Systems, 54, 461-470. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.06.008
6.
ChoH.BosterF. J. (2005). Development and validation of value-, outcome-, and impression-relevant involvement scales. Communication Research, 32, 235-264. doi:10.1177/0093650204273764
7.
ChuS.-C. (2011). Viral advertising in social media: Participation in Facebook groups and responses among college-aged users. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 12, 30-43. doi:10.1080/15252019.2011.10722189
8.
ConlonD. E.RossW. H. (1997). Appearances do count: The effects of outcomes and explanations on disputant fairness judgments and supervisory evaluations. International Journal of Conflict Management, 8, 5-31. doi:10.1108/eb022788
9.
CrantJ. M.BatemanT. S. (1993). Assignment of credit and blame for performance outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 7-27. doi:10.2307/256510
10.
DeAndreaD. C. (2014). Advancing warranting theory. Communication Theory, 24, 186-204. doi:10.1111/comt.12033
11.
DeAndreaD. C.CarpenterC. J. (2016). Measuring the construct of warranting value and testing warranting theory. Communication Research, 45, 1193-1215. doi:10.1177/0093650216644022
12.
DeAndreaD. C.Van Der HeideB.VendemiaM. A.VangM. H. (2018). How people evaluate online reviews. Communication Research, 45, 719-736. doi:10.1177/0093650215573862
13.
DeAndreaD. C.VendemiaM. A. (2016). How affiliation disclosure and control over user-generated comments affects consumer health knowledge and behavior: A randomized controlled experiment of pharmaceutical direct-to-consumer advertising on social media. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18, e189. doi:10.2196/jmir.5972
14.
DiStasoM. W.McCorkindaleT.WrightD. K. (2011). How public relations executives perceive and measure the impact of social media in their organizations. Public Relations Review, 37, 325-328. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.06.005
15.
FiskeS. T.TaylorS. E. (1984). Social cognition. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
16.
FolgerR.CropanzanoR. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
17.
FolgerR.CropanzanoR. (2001). Fairness theory: Justice as accountability. In GreenbergJ.CropanzanoR. (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 1-55). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
18.
FriestadM.WrightP. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 1-31. doi:10.1086/209380
19.
GillilandS. W.GrothM.BakerR. C.DewA. E.PollyL. M.LangdonJ. C. (2001). Improving applicants’ reactions to rejection letters: An application of fairness theory. Personnel Psychology, 54, 669-703. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00227.x
20.
HancockJ. T. (2007). Digital deception: When, where and how people lie online. In McKennaK.PostmesT.ReipsU.JoinsonA. N. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of Internet psychology (pp. 287-301). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
21.
HarknessA. R.DeBonoK. G.BorgidaE. (1985). Personal involvement and strategies for making contingency judgments: A stake in the dating game makes a difference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 22-32. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.49.1.22
LangerE. J. (1989). Minding matters: The consequences of mindlessness–mindfulness. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 137-173. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60307-X
24.
LangerE. J.AbelsonR. P. (1972). The semantics of asking a favor: How to succeed in getting help without really dying. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 26-32. doi:10.1037/h0033379
25.
LangerE. J.BlankA.ChanowitzB. (1978). The mindlessness of ostensibly thoughtful action: The role of “placebic” information in interpersonal interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 635-642. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.6.635
26.
LauR. R.RedlawskD. P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 951-971. doi:10.2307/2669334
27.
LeeE.-J.ShinS. Y. (2014). When do consumers buy online product reviews? Effects of review quality, product type, and reviewer’s photo. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 356-366. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.050
28.
LeeJ.ParkD.-H.HanI. (2008). The effect of negative online consumer reviews on product attitude: An information processing view. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 7, 341-352. doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2007.05.004
29.
LillqvistE.Louhiala-SalminenL. (2014). Facing Facebook: Impression management strategies in company–consumer interactions. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 28, 3-30. doi:10.1177/1050651913502359
30.
McAllisterD. W.MitchellT. R.BeachL. R. (1979). The contingency model for the selection of decision strategies: An empirical test of the effects of significance, accountability, and reversibility. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 24, 228-244. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(79)90027-8
31.
MitchellA. A.OlsonJ. C. (1981). Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude?Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 318-332. doi:10.2307/3150973
32.
O’KeefeP. (2008). Managing online forums: Everything you need to know to create and run successful community discussion boards. New York, NY: AMACOM.
33.
OzturkP.LiH.SakamotoY. (2015). Combating rumor spread on social media: The effectiveness of refutation and warning. In Proceedings of the 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 2406-2414). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2015.288
34.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T. (1981). Issue involvement as a moderator of the effects on attitude of advertising content and context. In MonroeK. B. (Ed.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 8, pp. 20-24). Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research. Retrieved from http://acrwebsite.org/volumes/9252/volumes/v08/NA-08
35.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 123-205). New York, NY: Academic Press. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1_1
36.
PontariB. A.SchlenkerB. R.ChristopherA. N. (2002). Excuses and character: Identifying the problematic aspects of excuses. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 21, 497-516. doi:10.1521/jscp.21.5.497.22621
RamonaD.FarrellA. C. (1996). Sex-based promotion decisions and interactional fairness: Investigating the influence of managerial accounts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 22-35. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.1.22
39.
RichterM. (2016). Residual tests in the analysis of planned contrasts: Problems and solutions. Psychological Methods, 21, 112-120.
40.
ScottM. B.LymanS. M. (1968). Accounts. American Sociological Review, 33, 46-62. doi:10.2307/2092239
41.
ShawJ. C.WildE.ColquittJ. A. (2003). To justify or excuse? A meta-analytic review of the effects of explanations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 444-458. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.444
42.
SundarS. S. (2008). The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In MetzgerM. J.FlanaginA. J. (Eds.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 72-100). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
43.
TverskyA.KahnemanD. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
44.
UtzS. (2010). Show me your friends and I will tell you what type of person you are: How one’s profile, number of friends, and type of friends influence impression formation on social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15, 314-335. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2010.01522.x
45.
WaltherJ. B.ParksM. R. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships. In KnappM. L.DalyJ. A. (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 529-563). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
46.
WaltherJ. B.Van Der HeideB.HamelL. M.ShulmanH. C. (2009). Self-generated versus other-generated statements and impressions in computer-mediated communication: A test of warranting theory using Facebook. Communication Research, 36, 229-253. doi:10.1177/0093650208330251
47.
WeinerB.AmirkhanJ.FolkesV. S.VeretteJ. A. (1987). An attributional analysis of excuse giving: Studies of a naive theory of emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 316-324. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.2.316
48.
ZaichkowskyJ. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 341-352.
