Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Internal or External Word-of-Mouth Single Platform in China?
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Internal or External Word-of-Mouth Single Platform in China?
Do you wish to request the book?
Internal or External Word-of-Mouth Single Platform in China?
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Internal or External Word-of-Mouth Single Platform in China?
2022
Overview
(1) Background: Word-of-mouth (WOM) can influence patients’ choice of doctors in online medical services (OMSs). Previous studies have explored the relationship between internal WOM in online healthcare communities (OHCs) and patients’ choice of doctors. There is a lack of research on external WOM and position ranking in OMSs. (2) Methods: We develop an empirical model based on the data of 4435 doctors from a leading online healthcare community in China. We discuss the influence of internal and external WOM on patients’ choice of doctors in OMSs, exploring the interaction between internal and external WOM and the moderation of doctor position ranking. (3) Results: Both internal and external WOM had a positive impact on patients’ choice of doctors; there was a significant positive interaction between internal and third-party generated WOM, but the interaction between internal and relative-generated WOM, and the interaction between internal and doctor-generated WOM were both nonsignificant. The position ranking of doctors significantly enhanced the impact of internal WOM, whereas it weakened the impact of doctor recommendations on patients’ choice of doctors. (4) The results emphasize the importance of the research on external WOM in OMSs, and suggest that the moderation of internal WOM may be related to the credibility and accessibility of external WOM, and the impact of doctor position ranking can be explained by information search costs.
Publisher
MDPI AG
Subject
