Standard

Do buzz and evidence really matter in product preannouncements? An empirical test of two competing theories. / Mishra, Debi P.; Atav, Gizem; Dalman, M. Deniz.

In: Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 37, No. 7, 17.07.2020, p. 739-748.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Mishra, Debi P. ; Atav, Gizem ; Dalman, M. Deniz. / Do buzz and evidence really matter in product preannouncements? An empirical test of two competing theories. In: Journal of Consumer Marketing. 2020 ; Vol. 37, No. 7. pp. 739-748.

BibTeX

@article{93a67312b1e949d09e7e3f618d50113b,
title = "Do buzz and evidence really matter in product preannouncements? An empirical test of two competing theories",
abstract = "Purpose: This paper aims to investigate if product pre-announcement effects measured using stock market returns conform to the predictions of two competing consumer marketing theories. In particular, while buzz marketing theory indicates a direct positive effect, information asymmetry theory suggests an influence contingent upon evidence. The study also investigates whether a pecking order of performance effects exists across different signaling situations. Design/methodology/approach: The final sample consists of 219 product-preannouncements reported in the Wall Street Journal between 2005 and 2015. The standard event study methodology was used to test for performance effects. Findings: The results show that preannouncements with evidence alone significantly outperform those with buzz alone, and announcements containing buzz and evidence. Also, buzz acts as a salient moderator of the relationship between evidence and performance. In addition, company size also affects the evidence-performance relationship, with smaller firms benefiting more from evidence than larger firms. Research limitations/implications: The event study method assumes efficient markets and deals with publicly traded companies. Practical implications: Managers can allocate resources wisely by deciding whether to invest in evidence or buzz in their pre-announcements. Originality/value: In contrast to extant research that primarily investigates contingency effects, this study identifies how an important moderator, i.e. buzz affects performance.",
keywords = "Agency theory, Buzz marketing, Information asymmetry, Pre-announcements, Product pre-announcements, Signaling theory, Stock market return, SCOPUS, РИНЦ",
author = "Mishra, {Debi P.} and Gizem Atav and Dalman, {M. Deniz}",
note = "Mishra, D. P. Do buzz and evidence really matter in product preannouncements? An empirical test of two competing theories / D. P. Mishra, G. Atav, M. D. Dalman // Journal of Consumer Marketing. - 2020. - Volume 37, № 7. - P. 739-748. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2020, Emerald Publishing Limited. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",
year = "2020",
month = jul,
day = "17",
doi = "10.1108/JCM-06-2018-2740",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
pages = "739--748",
journal = "Journal of Consumer Marketing",
issn = "0736-3761",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.",
number = "7",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Do buzz and evidence really matter in product preannouncements? An empirical test of two competing theories

AU - Mishra, Debi P.

AU - Atav, Gizem

AU - Dalman, M. Deniz

N1 - Mishra, D. P. Do buzz and evidence really matter in product preannouncements? An empirical test of two competing theories / D. P. Mishra, G. Atav, M. D. Dalman // Journal of Consumer Marketing. - 2020. - Volume 37, № 7. - P. 739-748. Publisher Copyright: © 2020, Emerald Publishing Limited. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2020/7/17

Y1 - 2020/7/17

N2 - Purpose: This paper aims to investigate if product pre-announcement effects measured using stock market returns conform to the predictions of two competing consumer marketing theories. In particular, while buzz marketing theory indicates a direct positive effect, information asymmetry theory suggests an influence contingent upon evidence. The study also investigates whether a pecking order of performance effects exists across different signaling situations. Design/methodology/approach: The final sample consists of 219 product-preannouncements reported in the Wall Street Journal between 2005 and 2015. The standard event study methodology was used to test for performance effects. Findings: The results show that preannouncements with evidence alone significantly outperform those with buzz alone, and announcements containing buzz and evidence. Also, buzz acts as a salient moderator of the relationship between evidence and performance. In addition, company size also affects the evidence-performance relationship, with smaller firms benefiting more from evidence than larger firms. Research limitations/implications: The event study method assumes efficient markets and deals with publicly traded companies. Practical implications: Managers can allocate resources wisely by deciding whether to invest in evidence or buzz in their pre-announcements. Originality/value: In contrast to extant research that primarily investigates contingency effects, this study identifies how an important moderator, i.e. buzz affects performance.

AB - Purpose: This paper aims to investigate if product pre-announcement effects measured using stock market returns conform to the predictions of two competing consumer marketing theories. In particular, while buzz marketing theory indicates a direct positive effect, information asymmetry theory suggests an influence contingent upon evidence. The study also investigates whether a pecking order of performance effects exists across different signaling situations. Design/methodology/approach: The final sample consists of 219 product-preannouncements reported in the Wall Street Journal between 2005 and 2015. The standard event study methodology was used to test for performance effects. Findings: The results show that preannouncements with evidence alone significantly outperform those with buzz alone, and announcements containing buzz and evidence. Also, buzz acts as a salient moderator of the relationship between evidence and performance. In addition, company size also affects the evidence-performance relationship, with smaller firms benefiting more from evidence than larger firms. Research limitations/implications: The event study method assumes efficient markets and deals with publicly traded companies. Practical implications: Managers can allocate resources wisely by deciding whether to invest in evidence or buzz in their pre-announcements. Originality/value: In contrast to extant research that primarily investigates contingency effects, this study identifies how an important moderator, i.e. buzz affects performance.

KW - Agency theory

KW - Buzz marketing

KW - Information asymmetry

KW - Pre-announcements

KW - Product pre-announcements

KW - Signaling theory

KW - Stock market return

KW - SCOPUS

KW - РИНЦ

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85087936796&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1108/JCM-06-2018-2740

DO - 10.1108/JCM-06-2018-2740

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85087936796

VL - 37

SP - 739

EP - 748

JO - Journal of Consumer Marketing

JF - Journal of Consumer Marketing

SN - 0736-3761

IS - 7

ER -

ID: 75022827