See discussions, st ats, and author pr ofiles f or this public ation at : https:www .researchgate.ne tpublic ation267027758 [618782]

See discussions, st ats, and author pr ofiles f or this public ation at : https://www .researchgate.ne t/public ation/267027758
TheoreticalModelsofSocialMedia
Data · Oct ober 2014
CITATIONS
0READS
1,167
2 author s:
Some o f the author s of this public ation ar e also w orking on these r elat ed pr ojects:
Big Dat a and National P arks View pr oject
Big Dat a and Mark eting View pr oject
Bing P an
Pennsylv ania St ate Univ ersity
117 PUBLICA TIONS    6,214 CITATIONS    
SEE PROFILE
John C. Cr otts
Colle ge of Charlest on
129 PUBLICA TIONS    3,951 CITATIONS    
SEE PROFILE
All c ontent f ollo wing this p age was uplo aded b y Bing P an on 17 Oct ober 2014.
The user has r equest ed enhanc ement of the do wnlo aded file.

Theoretical Models of Social Media , Marketing Implications , and Future Research
Directions

(for Section 2)

Bing Pan, Ph.D.
Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management
School of Business
College of Charleston
66 George Street
Charleston, SC 29424
Telephone: 001- 843-953-2025
Fax: 001- 843-953-5697
Email: [anonimizat]

John C. Crotts, Ph.D.
Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management
School of Business
College of Charleston
66 George Street
Telephone: 001- 843-953-6916
Charleston, SC 29424
Email: [anonimizat]
1

Abstract
Social media is becoming more crucial to hospitality and tourism businesses, due to the
intangibility and experiential nature of tourism products and the lowered technological
barrier for average travelers to contribute information online . Different from the one -way
communication in most mass media channels , social media represent s two-way
communication between consumers. Social media revived more ancient type s of
decision- making prevalent before the emergence of mass media, when th e exchange of
opinions between one’s families, relatives, friends, and neighbors was the basis for
product purchase decisions . As the digital version of w ord-of-mouth, social media
represent s the materialization, storage, and retrieval of word -of-mouth content online .
However , the large -scale , anonymous, ephemeral nature of the Internet induces new ways
of capturing, analyzing, inter preting, and managing social media content . Some
traditional theories , such as social exchange theory, social penetration theo ry, and social
network theory, could be valid paradigm s for studying and e xplaining how people form
networks, express their opinions, and pass information to each other . For example,
Buckner ’s (1965) theory on rumor transmission indicate s the accuracy and speed of
rumor passing were affected by the structure of the network and the mental sets of
individual actors in the network. This chapter will focus on the review of relevant
theories , the construction of an integrated meta -framework, and, more importantly, the
implication on hospitality and tourism marketing research and the principles of marketing
hospitality and tourism businesses through social media .
2

Introduction
Social media is becoming more crucial to hosp itality and tourism enterprises. On
one hand, hospitality and tourism industries offer intangible and experiential products.
Visitors must rely on the information delivered to them , either online or offline, to
identify and evaluate the product alternatives . User reviews and comments are
experien tial in nature and highly trustable. On the other hand, the development of
Internet technologies has lowered the barrier for contributing information online . Almost
anyone with Internet access could easily blog, tweet, review, comment, and update his or
her Facebook status. These communication tools have led to an explosion of social
media content. In September, 2010 Facebook was ranked as the number one website
online which can reach 39.2% of the Internet population; Y ouTube was ranked number
two with 31.8% (Google 2010) . More importantly, the traffic of those websites continue s
to increase, dwarfing the most popular mass media site s, while consistently increasing
their amount of daily unique visitors (Figure 1).

Source: http://trends.google.com/websites as of November 5, 2010

Figure 1. Traffic Volumes of Top Mass Media Sites versus Top Social Media Sites
3

Faced with the explosive volume of social media and its increasing influence ,
hospitality and tourism enterprises are s earching for ways to make sense of this media
and manage it to their advantage. P lace the phenomena into an appropriate theoretical
context that better describes the complex and dynamic relationships inherent in social
media will help enhance our understanding of it .
Social media has revived more ancient types of decision- making prevalent before
the emergence of mass media, when the exchange of opinions between one’s families,
relatives, friends, and neighbors was the basis for product purchase (Dellarocas 2003) .
Different from the one -way model of communication in most mass media, social media
represents two -way communication between consumers and the materialization of the
communication content . As the digital version of word- of-mouth, social media represents
the solidification , storage , and retrieval of the word- of-mouth content online. However,
the large -scale, anonymous, ephemeral nature of the Internet induces new ways of
capturing, analyzing, interpreting, and managing social m edia content (Dellarocas 2003) .
In-depth theoretical and behavioral understanding of this content might be crucial for
making sense of this media .
However, do theories really matter for social media? Facebook was created
because a Harvard undergraduate student wanted to connect with his fellow students
(Mezrich et al. 2009) ; Twitter came from a brainstorming session of Twitter founder
Evan Williams (Johnson 2009) ; neither was creat ed due to a deep understanding of social
network theories. More importantly, in today's online world, the large amount of behavioral data can be captured and analyzed instantaneously, and new ideas can be tested out easily through various social media plat forms. Some ideas will fly and become
popular; some others will just die off due to a lack of participation. Businesses could test out new marketing methods and ideas easily online and get instant feedback from their
customers. For example, Amazon has been the largest social science laboratory by testing
many models of consumer purchase behavior (Contractor 2009) . As Chris Anderson
announced, online data deluge will make theories obsolete (Anderson 2008) .
However, theories are still crucial for researchers and businesses to understand
and take advantage of this media . First, relevant theor ies could help in terpret and make
sense of data. One can easily capture many types of behavioral data about our customers,
4

such as clicks, impressions, search volumes, comments, reviews, etc., but what do they
represent? Appropriate theoretical models coul d help make sense of this data .
Secondly, theoretical frameworks could help discover new opportunities in the
field. After all, the core technology of Google was invented by adopting the aged theories of biliometrics in order to solve the problems of fin ding quality web pages online (Vise
and Malseed 2006) . Potential opportunities may exist when we survey relevant theories
in communications, sociology, and computer and information science s. For example,
complex interaction s exist between informational artifacts and actors in social networks;
you can share and recommend a piece of text, picture, or video to friends , and other
people may discover you through shared information artifacts and add you as a friend. Understanding this complex and dynamic relationship is important for harnessing the power of social networks for marketing purchase s, for example, discovering opinion
leaders. Some traditional theories, such as social exchange theory, social penetration theory, and social network theory, could be valid paradigms in studying and explaining how people form networks, how they express their opinions, and how they pass information to each other. For example, Buckner’s (1965) theory on rumor transmission
indicates the accuracy and speed of rumor passing will be based on the structure of the
network and the mental sets of individual actors in the network.
Thirdly, theoretical frameworks could help avoid technological dominance over
our lives and society . Fast development of technologies could easily overwhelm users,
both as business managers and consumers. Understanding their implications through a
global and abstract view could help them deal with the inundation of in formation
technologies.
This chapter will focus on the review of aforementioned relevant theories, the
construction of an integrated theoretical meta -framework, and, more importantly, the
implication on the principles of marketing hospitality and touris m businesses through
social media.

5

Relevant Theories Related to Social Media
This section reviews major theoretical frameworks which may be applicable to
the study and understanding of social media. One can separate these theories into three
schools: mic ro-theories deal with those frameworks study ing the dynamics of
contribution of information online and communication of individual social actors; macro –
theories are those theories looking at the structure and dynamics of social actors and
social media cont ent through global or abstract view s; pseudo -theories include the recent
conceptual frameworks in marketing and social media proposed mostly by non-academics. Pseudo- theories may make sense intuitively , but have yet to be tested
empirically and rigorously with scientific methods. All schools of theories and
frameworks might contribute to our understanding of the nature of social media, why people contribute, how they form relationships, and how one can discover the opinion
leaders and valuable social media content.
I. Micro -Theories
a. Word of Mouth/Psychological Ownership Theory and Perceived Control
Historically , tourism researchers have found that advice from friends and relatives
is the most frequently obtained and influential source of information use d by consumers
in their travel decision making (Crotts 1999; Perdue 1993) . The information
communicated by friends and relatives is cons trued to be more credible , honest, and
trustworthy than that generated from ma rketers, since the communicators are not
compensated for the referral. Advancements in the I nternet and Web 2.0 technologies
now allow consumers to access personally meaningful critiques not only from friends and relatives but from strangers (e.g. travel blogs, which c ontinue to grow in popularity) . As
an illustration, TripAdvisor, currently purports over 40 million reviews attracting over 50
million unique users each month (Dépêches 2010) .
Asatryan and Oh (2008) applied Psychological Ownership Theory in explaining
why former guests are motivated to offer WOM feedback s. On one level, some
customers develop feelings of connections with firms they are loyal to that manifest into
6

a sense of ownership, as evidenced by the ‘mine’, ‘my’, ‘our’ language they use in their
reviews. In such circumstances, one would assume that a loyal guest would provide positive feedback to others, directing their negative feedback to management (Matt ila
2001) . However, where no such loyalty exists, the motive to write either a negative or
positive review may be a desire to control or influence the business indirectly by communicating with its future potential customers. Loyal consumers' motives in posting positive reviews on travel blogs are attempts to reward firms ; the motives of non- loyal
customers are based on the satisfaction of being helpful to other consumers. Accordin g to
Pierce, Kostova , and Dirks (2003) , the desire by the consumer to control through such
communications may result in feelings of efficacy, intrinsic pleasure, and extrinsic satisfaction in providing such advice to others. These propositions point to strategies in which a firm can leverage customer
feedback and social media for a firm’s strategic benefit. On one hand, f irms should
enhance the perception of psychological ownership and control among their customer base through loyalty and guest feed back and s ervice recov ery programs; they should keep
more negative evaluations internal and positive feedback external. On the other hand,
firms that do not emphasize customer loyalty or guest feedback should expect customers
to both reward and punish their pe rformance through social media.

b. Social Exchange Theory
Given that all social media are dependent on users providing content, an
understanding of the motives of why individuals participate appears fundamental. Social
exchange theory was originated from sociology studies exploring exchange between
individuals or small groups (Emerson 1976) . The theory mainly uses cost -benefit
framework and comparison of alternatives to explain how human beings communicate with each other, how they form relationships and bonds, and how communities are formed through communication exchanges (Homans 1958) . The theory states that
individual s engage in behaviors they find rewarding and avoid behaviors that have too
high a cost. In other words, all social behavior is based on each actor’s subjective
assessment of the cost -benefit of contributing to a social exchange. They communicate or
7

exchange with each other contingent on reciprocal actions from the other comm unicating
party (Emerson 1976) . The mutual reinforcement could be analyzed through a
microeconomic framework, though many times the reward s are not monetary but social ,
such as opportunity, prestige, conformity, or acceptance (Emerson 1976) . The theory was
arguably best summarized by Homans (1958, p. 606) when he wrote:

Social behavior is an exchange of goods, material goods but also non- material
ones, such as the symbols of approval or prestige. Persons that give much t o
others try to get much from them, and persons that get much from others are
under pressure to give much to them. This process of influence tends to work out at equilibrium to a balance in the exchanges. For a person in an exchange, what he gives may be a cost to him, just as what he gets may be a reward, and his
behavior changes less as the difference of the two, profit, tends to a maximum.
Hence, the reasons why people engage in a social exchange have been posited as
a) an expected gain in reputation a nd influence on others; b) an anticipated reciprocity on
the part of others; c) altruism; and d) direct reward. Given that participation in the social
media is not compensated, the first three reasons appear to have particular relevance to
why people part icipate in social media.
Travel blog s and social media sites have long recognized that there are far more
people consuming information than generating. On YouTube, for example, t hough
subscribers have uploaded over 2 billion videos and audio tracks to th e social media site
since its founding in 2005, the same site is accessed by more than 10 million unique daily visitors indicating there are far more viewers than contributors. The Global Web Index (2009) (TrendsStream Limited 2010; Li 2010) , which tracks this phenomena, suggests
that users of social media can be segmented into four main groups. They are: (1) watchers (79.8% of the US social media users) , who consume content only to help with
their decision making; (2) s harers (61.2%) , who upload and forward information to others
in order to help others and demonstrate knowledge; (3) commenters (36.2%) , who both
review and rate p roducts and comment on those who do in an effort to participate and
contribute; and (4) producers (24.2%) , who create their own content in an effort to
8

express their identity and recognition. Framed in a social exchange theory, watchers take
but do not re ciprocate from the exchange suggesting they consider the cost of posting or
comment ing too high, or fear of offering their opinion or raising their profile.
Though obviously far more research is needed to test the validity of such
groupings, segmenting users as to their exchange behaviors has a certain level of face validity. Given such a hierarchy of users based on their active exchanges, firms attempting to leverage social media to their advantage should attempt to engage consumers of all four segment ation levels. For watchers, the task is to first identify the
specific social media they use, what information they seek, and what makes it engaging, in an effort to develop and position content that is relevant. The same strategy and
content should be useful as well for sharers. However, the tendency of sharers should be facilitated by marketers by simplifying the process of forwarding content (e.g., Retweet
and Facebook forward links) as well as recognizing and rewarding the desired behavior. Facebook's OpenGraph has allowed a user to "like" or "comment" on any content on the web (Zukerberg 2010) . Firms may find advantage s in getting ahead of this trend by
proactively adding a commenting feature to each of their webpages. By doing so, they
can directly manage the content of such comments which in effect will discourage
spammers and trolls. Lastly, in regards to producers, attempts by firms t o engage with
their customers who create unique platforms for their customers may produce dividends
at the brand or chain level. Publically recognizing such sites that are helpful to the firm
and increasing their visibility through search engine marketing are options.

c. Social penetration theory
Similar to social exchange theory, social penetration theory explains how human
exchange forms relationships (Altman and Taylor 1973) . However, the latter focuses
more on the individual and dyadic level s while the former could explain behavior at
aggregated and organizational levels. Social exchange theory states that human beings
form close relationships through self -disclosure. Using an analogy of peeling of the
layers in an onion, one must disclose him or herself through the continuing process of
expose one's inner self and identity. It starts with public, visible, and superficial
9

infor mation, such as gender , clothing preferences , and ethnicity; slowly, as the
relationship progresses, one starts to share his or her feelings; in the deepest level, one
will expose his or her goals, ambition, and beliefs (Altman e t al. 1981) .
In the social world online, we may be able to design social networks in a way to
separ ate these different layers of information. By default, certain information will be
disclosed to the public, while private and semi -private inf ormation could be confidential;
There might be ways to determine the levels of relationships from the mode and frequencies of communication, which could be all tracked online easily through online
social media sites. A r ecent privacy lawsuit against Facebook highlight ed the importance
following the layered rules of social penetration in order (Gaudin 2010) .

II. Macro -Theories
a. Social Network Analysis
Social network theory views the community of individuals as connected actors,
and use s mathematical models to study its structure, development, and evolution
(Wasserman and Faust 1994) . Social network analysis treats individual actors in a
community as nodes ; the communications between those actors are deemed as ties, edges,
links, or connections. Social networks can form in many l evels, from individual people,
to families, communities, and nations. Those ties could be communication frequency, friendship, kinship, financial exchange, sexual relationships, or common interests or beliefs. Together they form a complex graph structure.
Mathematical calculation on many indices could be performed on this complex
graph, including the following:
Betweenness: the extent of a node lying between other nodes;
Centrality: how connected is a node to the network;
Closeness: how one node is near all other nodes in the network;
Density: all the ties in a network in proportion to all the possible ties;
Structural hole: the node which connects other nodes. Those nodes are disconnected without the first node.
10

These measurements determine the importan ce and structural positions of
individual actors , and the characteristics of the part ial or whole networks. The
measurements could be used to study the social network, improve the network structure ,
and help increase the efficiency of information flows in the network. Network analysis
software such as UCINET could be used to measure those indices (Borgatti et al. 1992).
Traditional social network analysis views individuals or organizations as nodes in
the network, and the communication between them as edges. However, social media
content is exactly the materialization and solidification of the chatter, comments, or
reviews. The recent emergence of multi -dimensional social network framework is crucial
in studying the interaction between social actors and information artifacts (Contractor
2009) . By treating social media content as nodes, one can perform mathematical
calculation on those information artifact s, such as what are the important pieces shared by
many people, how one can connect users through artifacts, where are the structure holes
of social media by connecting which the network could be more tightly integrated.
Buckner’s (1965) theory on rumor transmission indicates the accuracy and speed
of rumor passing were affected by the structure of the network and the mental sets of individual actors in the network. Connecting this line of research with social network
analysis of those online social netw ork sites could inform businesses of the methods on
promoting themselves through organic word- of-mouth. Recent applications of
multidimensional social network analysis to web 2.0 has generated some fruitful results
(Kajdanowicz et al. In Press; Kazienko et al. 2010) .

B. McLuhan’s Media Theory
McLuhan is a Canadian philosopher and educator, the author of the famous quote
"the media is the message" (McLuhan 1995) . He argued that the media itself, rather the
actual content of the media, will transform people and society. The actual messages
people are communicating won't be any different on the new media; the int eractivity and
frequency of new communication pattern will change our behavior forever. Thus, t he
media's effect s on society are much greater than the content of the media. He separates
media into "cool" media and "hot" media. The former one requires a vi ewer to exert
11

much effort and participation in understanding the content, such as television, seminars,
or cartoons; the latter refers to those media that enhance one sense, so the viewers do not need to exert much effort, such as films, radio, and photogr aphy (McLuhan 1995) .
If we use McLuhan's arguments, social media will transform the users not due to
the content it contains, but due to the mode of communication it entails. For example, Twitter is only a micro -blogging service with a limitation of 140 characters. Theoretically
one can perform all the functions of Twitter through a blog service. However, it is exactly its limiting factor which made Twitter more nimble and real -time. Many break ing news
stories were spread out on Twitter, such as China's Sichuan earthquake and Mumbai's
terrorist attack in 2008 (Parr 2009) . As business managers and consumers, one needs to
realize the changing behavior due to the usage of new social media services and adopt an attitude of acceptance toward those technologies and behavior .
III. Pseudo- theories
Social media landscape is fast changing due to the low cost of innovation in the
era of open- source movement . The disconnect of academia from the industry and the
slow process of formal publishing cycle pos es a challenge for researchers in academic
institutions . Many social media and online marketing agencies actually ar e more
innovative and ahead of the curve of social media for marketing purpose s. This section
views two frameworks trying to make sense of social media landscape .
Carlene Li and Jeremiah Owyang from Altimeter Group are the major
contributors to the socialgraphics framework (JOwyang 2010) . They argued that instead
of studying the demographic, geographic, or psychographic profiles of your customers, businesses also need to develop social strategy termed socialgraphics. Marketers and
managers needs to ask the following questions: which websites are my customers o n?
What are my customers' soci al behavior s online? What social information or people do
my customer s rely on? What is my customers' social influence? The answers to these
questions could separate your customers into layers of engagements: from curating,
producing, commenting, sharing, to watching. The businesses then need to separate their
customers into these layers and provide tools and platforms to facilitate their social interaction.
12

Another line of framework , Social Feedback Loop, links consumer purchase
funnel with social media. Dave Evans (2008) has argued that traditional purchase funnel
has three stages ( awareness, consideration, and purchases ) during which a marketer could
influence a consumer's decision making. However, the purchase funnel concept treats
customers like living in a vacuum. A customer, a fter purchase , will use the product, form
opinions, and talk about it later in the stage. Some of the experience after purchase will be materialized and posted online, which will loop back to other customers' purchase
decision making process . This social feedback cycle is driven mostly by word -of-mouth;
the word- of-mouth is further driven by actual use, trial, or sampling experience.
Harnessing this feedback loop might be even more important than marketing on the mass media through the first three stages of consumer decision making. These two frameworks make intuitive sense: marketers should switch focus from
effects of mass media on pre- purchase decision making to post -purchase word- of-mouth;
one ne eds to study the di fferent levels of engagement your customers have in order to
adopt different strategies for encouraging the spread of social media and influence the direction of consumer conversation. However, the frameworks don’t specify the exact meth ods in segmenting engagement groups and the ways to adopt in order to differentiate
stages of pre -purchase decision making and post -consumption and the ways to influence
them.
An Integrated Meta -Framework
The a forementioned theories look at social media and social actors through either
individual, global, or marketing and business perspectives. An i ntegrated framework
needs to be reductionistic, quantifiable, and applicable to business and marketing settings .
Social network analysis, especially the multi -dimensional social network analysis, with
rigorous methodology and measurements, seems to be an overall framework for studying
the interaction between information artifacts, human actors, and the interaction and evolution of the two. Thus, multi dimensional network is at the center of the framework.
On one hand, t he macro and micro theories, such as McLuhan's media theory, social
exchange and social penetration theory, could inform the analysis and modeling of social
network analysis. On the other hand, s ocial network analysis can actually quantify
13

socialgraphics and link social media content with purchase funnels through quantitative
analysis. Social network analysis could be adopted to explore various aspects of those
behavioral theories online. For example , on one hand, one needs to look at social
penetration theory and start linking different layers of private information with different levels of relationships; on the other hand, the frequencies of posting and commenting and number of friends on social net works, could be the basis to differentiate levels of
participation in socialgraphic profile of a business' customer base . Figure 2 dis plays a
meta -framework which connects the theories and frameworks discussed in this chapter,
with the questions they could address in the social media world.

Figure 2. The Connections between Theoretical Models and Applicable Questions
Conclusions and Future Research
A few major theoretical and behavioral frameworks are reviewed in this chapter,
including word- of-mouth research , social exchange theory, social network analysis,
McLuhan's media theory, socialgraphics, and purchase funnel and social media. Social network analysis, especially the multi -dimensional social network analysis, could be the

McLuhan's Media Theory Multidimensional
Network Analysis Social Exchange
Theory
Social Penetration
Theory Socialgraphics
Purchase Funnel
and Social Media Why actors contribute?
How relationships form on social networks ? How to segment customers by socialgraphics?
How to link s ocial feedbacks with stages of purchase?
How social media change the structure of the
social network and media network?
14

general framework to investigate social network , information artifact networks, and the
dynamic evolution between the two. On one hand, the behavioral frameworks could
inform the development and directions of multidimensional networks; on the other hand, the methodologies of multidimensi onal social network could be used to inform and
validate other general theories and frameworks; more importantly, the quantifiable nature
of the methodology and the eas e of capturing behavioral data online could finally validate
the socialgraphic framework and quantify different stages of the decision making process
and inform the marketers of the ways to influence their customers from social feedback loop. For future research efforts, m ore specifically , we need more studies combining
data mining and data modeling on the web with behavioral frameworks. For example, we
need to capture the social g enerated media and metadata existing on current social media
websites, such as Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter . Adopting multidimensional social
network analysis i n studying online social networks and knowledge networks could result
in more in -depth understanding of the phenomena and inform social media marketing
practices for hospitality and tourism businesses (Contractor 2009) .

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank K evin Smith in the Office of Tourism Analysis in the
College of Charleston for his meticulous copyediting support .
15

References
Altman, I, and DA Taylor. 1973. Social penetration: The development of interpersonal
relationships : Holt, Rin ehart and Winston New York.
Altman, I, A Vinsel, and BB Brown. 1981. "Dialectic conceptions in social psychology:
An application to social penetration and privacy regulation." Advances in
experimental social psychology 14:107- 160.
Anderson, C. 2008. "The e nd of theory: The data deluge makes the scientific method
obsolete." Wired Magazine 16:16- 07.
Asatryan, VS, and H Oh. 2008. "Psychological Ownership Theory: An Exploratory
Application in the Restaurant Industry." Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research 32:363.
Borgatti, S., M. Everett, and L. Freeman. 1992. "UCINET X: Network analysis
software." Pp. Columbia, SC: Analytic Technologies.
Contractor, N. 2009. "The emergence of multidimensional networks." Journal of
Computer Mediated Communication 14:743- 747.
Crotts, J. C. 1999. "Consumer decision making and prepurchase information search." Pp.
149-168 in Abraham Pizam and Yoel Masfeld eds., Consumer Behavior in Travel
and Tourism Binghamton, New York: The Haworth Hospitality Press.
Dellarocas, Chrysanthos. 2003. "The digitization of word of mouth: Promise and
challenges of online feedback mechanisms." Management Science 49:1407- 1424.
Dépêches. 2010. "TripAdvisor Becomes the First Travel Brand to Break the 40 Million
Unique Monthly Visitors Barrier." Pp.
Emers on, RM. 1976. "Social exchange theory." Annual review of sociology :335- 362.
Evans, D. 2008. Social media marketing: an hour a day : Sybex.
Gaudin, Sharon. 2010. "Facebook slapped with class -action privacy lawsuit." Pp.
Google. 2010. "The 1000 most -visited s ites on the web." Pp.
Homans, GC. 1958. "Social behavior as exchange." American journal of sociology
63:597- 606.
Johnson, S. 2009. "How twitter will change the way we live." Time, http://www. time.
com/time/printout/0 8816:00.
JOwyang, J. 2010. "Socialgraphics Help You To Understand Your Customers: Slides and
Webinar Recording." Pp.
Kajdanowicz, T, P Kazienko, K Musia , and W Wyspia skiego. In Press. "Discovering
Multidimensional Social Communities in Web 2.0."
Kazienko, P, K Musial, and T Kajdanowicz. 2010. "Multidimensional Social Network
and Its Application to the Social Recommender System." IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics -Part A: Systems and Humans .
Li, Charlene. 2010. Open Leadership: How Social Technology Can Transform the Way
You Lea d. San Francisco, CA: Jossey -Bass.
Mattila, AS. 2001. "Emotional bonding and restaurant loyalty." The Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly 42:73- 79.
McLuhan, M. 1995. Understanding media: The extensions of man: Cambridge, Mass. Mezrich, B, M Chamberlain, and Random House Audio Publishing. 2009. The accidental
billionaires : Books on Tape.
Parr, Ben. 2009. "10 Most Extraordinary Twitter Updates." Pp.
16

Perdue, R. R. 1993. "External Information Search in Marine Recreational Fishing."
Leisure Sci ences 15:169 -187.
Pierce, JL, T Kostova, and KT Dirks. 2003. "The state of psychological ownership:
Integrating and extending a century of research." Review of General Psychology
7:84- 107.
TrendsStream Limited. 2010. "Global Web Index." Pp. Vise, D, and M Malseed. 2006. The google story: Inside the hottest business, media, and
technology success of our time: Delta.
Wasserman, S., and K. Faust. 1994. Social Network Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Zukerberg, M. 2010. "Building the Social Web Together." Pp.
17

View publication statsView publication stats