Analyzing Knowledge Payment Behaviors with Information Adoption Model and Product Types
Qi Tuotuo1,Bai Ruyu2,Wang Tianmei1()
1School of Information, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 100081, China 2HSBC Business School, Peking University, Shenzhen 518055, China
[Objective] This paper explores the information quality of product description and the credibility of knowledge producers, aiming to investigate their impacts on users’ knowledge payment behaviors moderated by product types. [Methods] First, we retrieved data from Zhihu Live with the help of a Web crawler. Then, we studied the impacts with the robust regression and text analysis methods based on the information adoption model. We also divided knowledge payment products into the utilitarian and hedonic ones, and then compared their different action paths. [Results] The elaborateness, vividness, and relevance of product descriptions as well as the reputation, experience, and information completeness of knowledge producers positively affect knowledge payment behaviors. Compared with utilitarian products, the reputation and experience of knowledge producers in hedonic products have stronger impacts on knowledge payment behaviors. [Limitations] We did not compare the knowledge payment behaviors in different cultures, and only studied the single knowledge payment business model with cross-section data. [Conclusions] This paper summarizes the key factors affecting knowledge payment behaviors and the information adoption model. It provides practical guidelines for designing and marketing knowledge payment products.
齐托托, 白如玉, 王天梅. 基于信息采纳模型的知识付费行为研究*——产品类型的调节效应[J]. 数据分析与知识发现, 2021, 5(12): 60-73.
Qi Tuotuo, Bai Ruyu, Wang Tianmei. Analyzing Knowledge Payment Behaviors with Information Adoption Model and Product Types. Data Analysis and Knowledge Discovery, 2021, 5(12): 60-73.
(Xing Xiaoqiang, Zhou Pinglu. Research on E-Business Model of Paying for the Knowledge[J]. Management Review, 2019, 31(7): 75-85.)
[2]
Qi T T, Wang T M, Ma Y L, et al. Knowledge Payment Research: Status Quo and Key Issues[J]. International Journal of Crowd Science, 2019, 3(2): 117-137.
doi: 10.1108/IJCS-01-2019-0007
(iiMedia Research. 2020 Operation and Development of China’s Knowledge Payment Industry and User Behavior Report[R/OL]. (2020-02-14). [2021-06-10]. https://www.iimedia.cn/c400/69029.html.)
(Qi Tuotuo, Liu Qian, Wang Tianmei, et al. The Persuasive Effect of Linguistic Styles in the Description of Paying for Knowledge Product: The Moderating Effect of Knowledge Producer’s Reputation[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2020, 23(5): 159-170.)
(Zhao Zichen. Research on the Influencing Factors of “Post-90s” Users’ Continued Willingness to Use of Knowledge Payment Platform[D]. Harbin: Heilongjiang University, 2020.)
(Zhu Zuping, Zhang Liping. A Research on the Continuous Payment Willingness of Users of Online Paid Knowledge Products in the Context of Community Services: Empirical Analysis Based on PLS-SEM Model[J]. Southeast Academic Research, 2020(5): 158-166.)
(Jin Xiaopu, Xu Fang, Bi Xin. Investigation on the User Satisfaction of Knowledge Payment Platforms and Improvement Strategies[J]. Information Studies: Theory & Application, 2021, 44(5): 146-152.)
(Guo Yu, Guo Yong, Zhao Yuxiang. Content or Context: A Study on the Behavior Mechanism of Online Users’ Knowledge Payment: A Configuration Analysis Based on CCC-B Framework[J]. Library and Information Service, 2020, 64(1): 120-130.)
(Zhang Shuai, Wang Wentao, Li Jing. Research on the Influencing Factors of User’s Online Knowledge Payment Behavior[J]. Library and Information Service, 2017, 61(10): 94-100.)
(Li Gang, Lu Yanqiang, Teng Shuyuan. Analysis of Users’ Online Knowledge Payment Behavior: Based on Theory of Planned Behavior[J]. Research on Library Science, 2018(10): 49-60.)
[12]
Horng S M, Lee Y Y, Wu C L. A Study of the Paying Behavior for Subscribing Social Network Sites[J]. Computer Communications, 2016, 73: 282-290.
doi: 10.1016/j.comcom.2015.08.014
[13]
Shi X, Zheng X, Yang F. Exploring Payment Behavior for Live Courses in Social Q&A Communities: An Information Foraging Perspective[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2020, 57(4): 102241.
doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102241
(Deng Shengli, Jiang Yuting. Research on the Contribution of User Interaction Characteristics to the Prediction of Knowledge Payment Behavior[J]. Library and Information Service, 2020, 64(8): 93-102.)
(Liu Qiping, Wang Weijun, He Guoqing. Research on User Choice Behavior of Offline Knowledge Payment Platform Based on Social Capital Theory[J]. Research on Library Science, 2019(22): 34-41.)
(Zhao Yang, Yuan Xini, Li Luqi, et al. The Impact Factors of Users’ Paying Behavior for Knowledge on Social Q&A Platform Based on Social Capital Theory[J]. Documentation, Information & Knowledge, 2018(4): 15-23.)
(Li Wu, Ai Pengya, Bin Feng. The Power of Fans and Knowledge Economy: Understanding Users’ Paying Behavior for Existing Answers on Q&A Platforms[J]. Library Journal, 2019, 38(4): 74-81.)
(Yang Donghong, He Hongmei, Xu Chang. Consumer Purchase Behavior of Online Mobile Audio Platform[J]. Information Science, 2020, 38(7): 105-111.)
[19]
Sussman S W, Siegal W S. Informational Influence in Organizations: An Integrated Approach to Knowledge Adoption[J]. Information Systems Research, 2003, 14(1): 47-65.
doi: 10.1287/isre.14.1.47.14767
[20]
Tseng S Y, Wang C N. Perceived Risk Influence on Dual-Route Information Adoption Processes on Travel Websites[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2016, 69(6): 2289-2296.
doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.044
[21]
Peng L F, Liao Q Y, Wang X R, et al. Factors Affecting Female User Information Adoption: An Empirical Investigation on Fashion Shopping Guide Websites[J]. Electronic Commerce Research, 2016, 16(2): 145-169.
doi: 10.1007/s10660-016-9213-z
[22]
Rabjohn N, Cheung C M K, Lee M K O. Examining the Perceived Credibility of Online Opinions: Information Adoption in the Online Environment [C]//Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Waikoloa, HI, USA. IEEE, 2008: 286.
[23]
Jin J H, Yan X B, Li Y J, et al. How Users Adopt Healthcare Information: An Empirical Study of an Online Q&A Community[J]. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 2016, 86: 91-103.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2015.11.002
[24]
Hendijani F M, Marvi R. Viral Marketing and Purchase Intentions of Mobile Applications Users[J]. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 2019, 15(2): 287-301.
doi: 10.1108/IJOEM-06-2018-0291
[25]
Chong A Y L, Khong K W, Ma T, et al. Analyzing Key Influences of Tourists’ Acceptance of Online Reviews in Travel Decisions[J]. Internet Research, 2018, 28(3): 564-586.
doi: 10.1108/IntR-05-2017-0212
[26]
Erkan I, Evans C. The Influence of eWOM in Social Media on Consumers’ Purchase Intentions: An Extended Approach to Information Adoption[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2016, 61(C): 47-55.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.003
[27]
Mudambi S M, Schuff D. What Makes a Helpful Review? A Study of Customer Reviews on Amazon. com[J]. MIS Quarterly, 2010, 34(1): 185-200.
doi: 10.2307/20721420
[28]
Adamic L A, Zhang J, Bakshy E, et al. Knowledge Sharing and Yahoo! Answers: Everyone Knows Something [C]//Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on World Wide Web. 2008: 665-674.
[29]
Agichtein E, Castillo C, Donato D, et al. Finding High-Quality Content in Social Media [C]//Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining. 2008: 183-194.
(Li Zhongmei, Zhang Xiangxian, Guo Shunli. A Study of the Factors’ Analysis of O2O Users’ Online Useful Reviews in the Mobile Business Environment[J]. Information Science, 2017, 35(2): 130-137.)
[31]
Oh S, Worrall A, Yi Y J. Quality Evaluation of Health Answers in Yahoo! Answers: A Comparison Between Experts and Users[J]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2011, 48(1): 1-3.
[32]
Zhang Y L, Li X M, Fan W G. User Adoption of Physician’s Replies in an Online Health Community: An Empirical Study[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2020, 71(10): 1179-1191.
doi: 10.1002/asi.v71.10
[33]
Cai S, Luo Q F, Fu X, et al. What Drives the Sales of Paid Knowledge Products? A Two-Phase Approach[J]. Information & Management, 2020, 57(5): 103264.
doi: 10.1016/j.im.2019.103264
[34]
Zhao Y, Zhao Y, Yuan X N, et al. How Knowledge Contributor Characteristics and Reputation Affect User Payment Decision in Paid Q&A? An Empirical Analysis from the Perspective of Trust Theory[J]. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 2018, 31: 1-11.
doi: 10.1016/j.elerap.2018.07.001
[35]
Hillen M A, de Haes H C J M, Stalpers L J A, et al. How Can Communication by Oncologists Enhance Patients’ Trust? An Experimental Study[J]. Annals of Oncology, 2014, 25(4): 896-901.
doi: S0923-7534(19)36509-3
pmid: 32018923
[36]
Wu J, Ma P H, Xie K L. In Sharing Economy We Trust: The Effects of Host Attributes on Short-Term Rental Purchases[J]. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 2017, 29(11): 2962-2976.
doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-08-2016-0480
[37]
Dhar R, Wertenbroch K. Consumer Choice Between Hedonic and Utilitarian Goods[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2000, 37(1): 60-71.
doi: 10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.18718
[38]
Rocklage M D, Fazio R H. The Enhancing Versus Backfiring Effects of Positive Emotion in Consumer Reviews[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2020, 57(2): 332-352.
doi: 10.1177/0022243719892594
[39]
O’Donnell M, Evers E R K. Preference Reversals in Willingness to Pay and Choice[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2019, 45(6): 1315-1330.
doi: 10.1093/jcr/ucy052
[40]
Voss K E, Spangenberg E R, Grohmann B. Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Consumer Attitude[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2003, 40(3): 310-320.
doi: 10.1509/jmkr.40.3.310.19238
[41]
Blut M, Teller C, Floh A. Testing Retail Marketing-Mix Effects on Patronage: A Meta-Analysis[J]. Journal of Retailing, 2018, 94(2): 113-135.
doi: 10.1016/j.jretai.2018.03.001
[42]
Moore S G. Attitude Predictability and Helpfulness in Online Reviews: The Role of Explained Actions and Reactions[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2015, 42(1): 30-44.
doi: 10.1093/jcr/ucv003
[43]
Ren J, Nickerson J V. Arousal, Valence, and Volume: How the Influence of Online Review Characteristics Differs with Respect to Utilitarian and Hedonic Products[J]. European Journal of Information Systems, 2019, 28(3): 272-290.
doi: 10.1080/0960085X.2018.1524419
(Yang Donghong, Wu Bangan, Chen Tianpeng, et al. A Comparative Study on Positive, Neutral and Negative Reviews of Online Products Based on Jingdong Mall Data[J]. Information Science, 2019, 37(2): 125-132.)
(He Youshi, Li Na. Research on the Impact Factors of the Helpfulness of the Search Product Reviews[J]. Journal of Intelligence, 2016, 35(12): 202-206.)
(Li Zongwei, Zhang Yanhui, Xia Weiwei. Can Seller Feedback Trigger High Quality Online Reviews?: Based on the Empirical Analysis of Taobao[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2021, 29(5): 221-230.)
(Wang Junjun, Yan Qiang. An Empirical Study on the Impact of Online Reviews of Different Product Popularity on Product Sales[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2013, 21(S2): 406-411.)
(Peng Lihui, Li He, Zhang Yanfeng, et al. An Empirical Study on the Factors Influencing the Usefulness of Online Reviews Based on Perceived Brand Reputation[J]. Information Science, 2017, 35(9): 159-164.)
(Wang Cuicui, Chen Xue, Zhu Wanli, et al. Eye-tracking Study on the Impact of Photographic Reviews and Verbal Reviews on Consumers’ Perceived Usefulness[J]. Information Studies:Theory & Application, 2020, 43(6): 135-141.)
[51]
Zajonc R B. Attitudinal Effects of Mere Exposure[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1968, 9(2): 1-27.
[52]
Bornstein R F, D’Agostino P R. Stimulus Recognition and the Mere Exposure Effect[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1992, 63(4): 545-552.
pmid: 1447685
[53]
Montoya R M, Horton R S, Vevea J L, et al. A Re-Examination of the Mere Exposure Effect: The Influence of Repeated Exposure on Recognition, Familiarity, and Liking[J]. Psychological Bulletin, 2017, 143(5): 459-498.
doi: 10.1037/bul0000085
[54]
Zhou Y S, Yang S Q, Li Y X, et al. Does the Review Deserve More Helpfulness When Its Title Resembles the Content? Locating Helpful Reviews by Text Mining[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2020, 57(2): 102179.
doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102179
(Ji Shuxian, Hu Pei. Analysis of the Validity of Online Reputation Feedback Systems Based on the Lemon Theory[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2010, 18(5): 145-151.)
(Yang Hua, Sun Baofeng, Lin Tianxue, et al. The Effect of Electronic Word-of-Mouth on Consumer’s Book Purchase Intention[J]. Library and Information Service, 2018, 62(2): 117-126.)
[57]
Allison T H, Davis B C, Webb J W, et al. Persuasion in Crowdfunding: An Elaboration Likelihood Model of Crowdfunding Performance[J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2017, 32(6): 707-725.
doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2017.09.002
[58]
Jabr W, Calgary U O, Mookerjee R, et al. Leveraging Philanthropic Behavior for Customer Support: The Case of User Support Forums[J]. MIS Quarterly, 2014, 38(1): 187-208.
[59]
Flynn L R, Goldsmith R E. Application of the Personal Involvement Inventory in Marketing[J]. Psychology & Marketing, 1993, 10(4): 357-366.
doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6793
[60]
Kakar A K. Why Do Users Speak More Positively About Mac Os X but are More Loyal to Windows 7?[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2015, 44(C): 166-173.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.033
[61]
Carroll B A, Ahuvia A C. Some Antecedents and Outcomes of Brand Love[J]. Marketing Letters, 2006, 17(2): 79-89.
doi: 10.1007/s11002-006-4219-2
[62]
Park D H, Lee J, Han I. The Effect of On-Line Consumer Reviews on Consumer Purchasing Intention: The Moderating Role of Involvement[J]. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2007, 11(4): 125-148.
(Zhu Liye, Yuan Denghua, Zhang Jingyi. The Impact of Online User Reviews Quality and Commentators Rank on Consumer Purchasing Intention: The Moderating Role of Product Involvement[J]. Management Review, 2017, 29(2): 87-96.)
[64]
Chang K T T, Chen W, Tan B C Y. Advertising Effectiveness in Social Networking Sites: Social Ties, Expertise, and Product Type[J]. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 2012, 59(4): 634-643.
doi: 10.1109/TEM.2011.2177665
[65]
Kuang L N, Huang N, Hong Y L, et al. Spillover Effects of Financial Incentives on Non-Incentivized User Engagement: Evidence from an Online Knowledge Exchange Platform[J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2019, 36(1): 289-320.
doi: 10.1080/07421222.2018.1550564
[66]
Kim S, Oh S. Users’ Relevance Criteria for Evaluating Answers in a Social Q&A Site[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2009, 60(4): 716-727.
doi: 10.1002/asi.v60:4
[67]
Jin Y, Huang J H, Wang X Y. What Influences Content Popularity? An Empirical Investigation of Voting in Social Q&A Communities [C]//Proceedings of the 21st Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS). 2017: 161.