Do Bandwagon Cues Affect Credibility Perceptions? A Meta-Analysis of the Experimental Evidence

IF 4.9 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Communication Research Pub Date : 2023-01-19 DOI:10.1177/00936502221124395
Sai Wang, T. Chu, Guanxiong Huang
{"title":"Do Bandwagon Cues Affect Credibility Perceptions? A Meta-Analysis of the Experimental Evidence","authors":"Sai Wang, T. Chu, Guanxiong Huang","doi":"10.1177/00936502221124395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Bandwagon cues are system-aggregated information about crowd behavior or peer endorsement displayed on a web interface (e.g., the number of likes on a Facebook post). Despite the recent proliferation of research on the effect of bandwagon cues on credibility perceptions, a comprehensive meta-analytic review of this effect has not yet been performed and published. Based on 161 effect sizes from 41 studies, the current meta-analysis revealed that bandwagon cues had a positive, albeit small, effect on credibility perceptions. Moderator analyses indicated that this effect was stronger (a) when the message was related to the marketing topic, (b) when the source was a non-expert (vs. an expert), and (c) when participants were from collectivistic (vs. individualistic) cultures. However, the bandwagon effect did not vary by cue feature (e.g., deliberateness). These findings are discussed in light of theoretical implications, practical guidelines, and directions for future research.","PeriodicalId":48323,"journal":{"name":"Communication Research","volume":"50 1","pages":"720 - 744"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Research","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502221124395","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Bandwagon cues are system-aggregated information about crowd behavior or peer endorsement displayed on a web interface (e.g., the number of likes on a Facebook post). Despite the recent proliferation of research on the effect of bandwagon cues on credibility perceptions, a comprehensive meta-analytic review of this effect has not yet been performed and published. Based on 161 effect sizes from 41 studies, the current meta-analysis revealed that bandwagon cues had a positive, albeit small, effect on credibility perceptions. Moderator analyses indicated that this effect was stronger (a) when the message was related to the marketing topic, (b) when the source was a non-expert (vs. an expert), and (c) when participants were from collectivistic (vs. individualistic) cultures. However, the bandwagon effect did not vary by cue feature (e.g., deliberateness). These findings are discussed in light of theoretical implications, practical guidelines, and directions for future research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从众线索会影响可信度认知吗?实验证据的元分析
潮流线索是系统汇总的关于人群行为的信息,或者显示在网络界面上的同伴认可(例如,Facebook帖子上的喜欢数量)。尽管最近关于从众线索对可信度感知的影响的研究激增,但尚未对这种影响进行全面的元分析回顾和发表。基于41项研究的161个效应量,目前的荟萃分析显示,从众线索对可信度感知有积极的影响,尽管影响很小。调节分析表明,当信息与营销主题相关时,当信息来源是非专家(vs.专家)时,当参与者来自集体主义(vs.个人主义)文化时,这种影响更强。然而,从众效应并不因线索特征(如故意性)而变化。本文就这些发现的理论意义、实践指导和未来研究方向进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Communication Research
Communication Research COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
17.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Empirical research in communication began in the 20th century, and there are more researchers pursuing answers to communication questions today than at any other time. The editorial goal of Communication Research is to offer a special opportunity for reflection and change in the new millennium. To qualify for publication, research should, first, be explicitly tied to some form of communication; second, be theoretically driven with results that inform theory; third, use the most rigorous empirical methods; and fourth, be directly linked to the most important problems and issues facing humankind. Critieria do not privilege any particular context; indeed, we believe that the key problems facing humankind occur in close relationships, groups, organiations, and cultures.
期刊最新文献
Personality, Attachment, and Pornography: A Meta-Analysis Expansion and Exploration of the Superdiffuser Model With Agent-Based Modeling “I’ll Change My Beliefs When I See It”: Video Fact Checks Outperform Text Fact Checks in Correcting Misperceptions Among Those Holding False or Uncertain Pre-Existing Beliefs “None of Us Wanted to be at This Party, But What a Guest List”: How Technology Workers Position Themselves on LinkedIn Following Layoffs Caught Within the Family System: An Examination of Emerging Adults’ Dilemmas in Navigating Sibling Depression
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1