Department of Social Systems and Management Discussion Paper Series

Department of Social Systems and Management Discussion Paper Series
No.1253 Exploration of e-Marketing Strategies for Cosmetic Products Based on Word-of-Mouth Information
by Ushio Sumita, A Hyoung Kim Feb 2010
UNIVERSITY OF TSUKUBA
Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8573 JAPAN
ABSTRACT A methodological approach is proposed to understand the potential importance of e-WOM in e-Marketing. Focusing on the cosmetic product market in Japan, a social network named @COSME is chosen for the study. More specifically, actual blogs concerning skin lotions are collected from @COSME in the period between November 1, 2007 and October 31, 2008. By identifying key words which are used by either manufactures for promoting skin lotions on the Internet or consumers in their blogs, it is examined how such key words would overlap each other, thereby providing a basis to establish effective e-marketing strategies in e-WOM communications. Keyword: Japanese Cosmetics Market, e-WOM (Word of Mouth), Blogs, Bloggers, e-Marketing 1. Introduction During the past decade, the Internet has impacted the way marketing is conducted substantially. Before the Internet, the emphasis was on the mass marketing through TV, radio, newspapers, journals and other media directed one way from the media to customers, whereas the one-to-one marketing was laborious, time-consuming and costly, and could be conducted only in a limited way through direct mail, hearings via telephone, interviews at exits of stores and the like. As the use of the Internet has spread rapidly, the importance of e-marketing has become clear, where the mass marketing and the one-to-one marketing can be combined simultaneously with speed and little cost through the Internet. Along this new trend, CRM (Customer Relationship Management) has become increasingly important, where corporations and customers engage themselves in two way communications and exchange information valuable to each other. In particular, in the midst of new era called WEB2.0, CGM (Consumer Generated Media) has been drawing much attention of practitioners and researchers, where information exchanged among consumers through social networks would affect each other significantly and play a vital role in e-marketing. Such exchange of information among indefinite consumers through the Internet is called e-WOM (Word of Mouth), and those consumers who are involved in e-WOM are referred to as bloggers. The study of WOM outside the Internet can be traced back to the middle of 1990`s, represented by a paper by Ellison and Fudenberg (1995) which proposed a WOM model and analyzed its implications. Bone (1995) discussed how WOM affected purchasing decisions of consumers, while Goldenberg, Libai and Muller (2001) found that the
effects of WOM would depend on the level of closeness of those involved in WOM. More recently, a new model was proposed in Banerjee and Fudenberg (2003) for measuring the effects of WOM. Along with this line of research on offline WOM outside the Internet, e-WOM began to attract more attention of researchers. An information filtering algorithm was proposed in Shardanand and Maes (1995) for identifying preferences of consumers from e-WOM so as to provide personalized recommendations. Stauss (1997, 2000) examined potential threats and opportunities resulting from online articulations by consumers. Balasubramanian and Mahajan (2001) developed a conceptual framework for describing three types of social interaction utilities within a virtual community. Exploiting this framework, Henning-Thurau, Gwinner, Walsh and Gremler (2004) studied online samples of some 2000 consumers, identifying key elements for consumers to participate in e-WOM. Dellarocas (2003) discussed potentials and difficulties of development of online feedback mechanisms for digitization of e-WOM. While the above papers shed light into the inside of e-WOM from various perspectives, to the best knowledge of the authors, no research exists in the literature focusing on how interactions of consumers through e-WOM could be utilized for enhancing the effects of e-marketing. The purpose of this paper is to establish a methodological approach for understanding the potential power of e-WOM based on real data. Focusing on the cosmetic product market in Japan, a social network named @COSME is chosen for the study. More specifically, actual blogs concerning skin lotions are collected from @COSME. By identifying key words which are used by either manufactures for promoting skin lotions on the Internet or consumers in their blogs, our analysis aims at examining how such key words would overlap each other, thereby providing a basis to establish effective e-marketing strategies in e-WOM communications. The structure of this paper is as follows. Section 2 describes the data set to be employed throughout the paper. The basic analysis of the data set is also provided. Key words used by either manufactures for promoting skin lotions on the Internet or consumers in their blogs are identified in Section 3. These key words are categorized in terms of development intention, the content of the key words, engineering difficulty and touch (sense of feel). In Section 4, the collected blog data would be examined through text-mining in order to see how the key words overlap between the product descriptions and the blog data. Some implications of the analysis would be also discussed. Finally, concluding remarks are given in Section 5.
2. Data Description and Basic Analysis For the study, we first select top ten skin lotions in the popularity ranking of @COSME in year 2008. Table 2.1 exhibits these ten products with Popularity Ranking, Product ID, Price, Volume (ml), Price per Volume, and Release Date.
Pric e per Volum e 43.8 1.4 1.3 64.9 2.8 4.4 4.1 43.8 2.6 2.2 48.5 43.8 175.0 Releas e Date 2007/1/27 unknown 2007/2/21 unknown unknown 2007/1/27 unknown 2007/10/21 2008/5/9 2003/11/1
Rank ing Produc t ID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 KAO103 KTKH001 SICR001 YHMK001 ESSA001 KEI001 JTW001 SRE002 KNRM001 PRBB001
Pric e() 5,250 420 1,176 11,025 1,100 1,011 4,095 5,250 609 1,029 6,300 2,625 21,000
Volum e(m l) 120 300 900 170 400 230 1000 120 237 473 130 60 120
Figure 2.1 Ten Products Selected for the Study All the blogs at @COSME mentioning at least one of the ten products in Table 2.1 during the period between November 1, 2007 and October 31, 2008 are collected. There are approximately 3100 such blogs. For each blog, a BPV (Blog Profile Vector) is defined as shown in Table 2.2. Here, Blog ID uniquely specifies each blog. The product discussed in the blog is indicated by Product ID. Date and Time is to state the time at which the blog is written. User Name describes the nickname of the blogger and Age is the age of the blogger. Skin Type of the blogger is indicated by the blogger. Attracted Factors is a nine dimensional binary vector, where 1 is entered if the blogger is attracted by the corresponding factor and 0 is entered otherwise. Elements Mentioned is a twelve dimensional binary vector, where 1 is entered if the corresponding element is mentioned in the blog and 0 is entered otherwise. Repeated Use is to indicate whether or not the blogger has repeatedly used the product mentioned in the blog, while Desire to repeat shows whether or not the blogger intends to use the product repeatedly. Overall Impression describes the general impression of the blogger for the product, and Score is graded by the blogger between 1 through 7. The collected blog profile vectors are summarized in Table 2.3 according to each element. One sees that the number of blogs increased by about 50% between the periods November- 07 through April -08 and May 08 to October-08. Concerning Age, the bloggers in 20`s account for about 50%, followed by those in 30`s about 35%. About 40% of the bloggers are concerned with Mixed Skin, meaning that they have both Dry Skin
and Oily Skin in different parts of their body. The bloggers with Dry Skin account for 26%, followed by those with Sensitive Skin about 16%. The bloggers are largely attracted to skin lotions because of Moist with 31%, Low Stimulus with 20% and Pore and Corneous Care with 12%. The most referenced element in the blogs is Feeling with 32.3%, followed by Product Quality and Price both with 15%. Only 25% of the bloggers have repeatedly used the product mentioned in their blogs and about the same portion of the bloggers would use the product repeatedly in the future. Those bloggers who favorably support their products amount to 73%, with only 10% of the bloggers writing negative comments in the blogs. This point is reflected in Score where about 50% of the bloggers grade the score of 5 or higher.
Blog ID Product ID Date Time User Name Age 1: Ordinary Skin 2: Sensitive Skin 3: Dry Skin 4: Mixed Skin 5: Oily Skin 6: Atopi skin 1: Moist 2: Pore & Corneous Care 3: Acne Care 4: Aging Care 5: Strain 6: Whitening 7: Low Stimulus 8: Unevenness Prevention 9: Sunblock
Skin Type
Attracted Factors
1: Recommended via Word of Mouth 2: Advertisement 3: Product Quality 4: Potential Effects 5: Feeling 6: Comparison Elements Mentioned 7: Favorite Manufacturer 8: Sample 9: Service 10: Smell 11: Design 12: Price Repeated Use 0: No ; 1: Yes Desire to Repeat 0: Not Mentioning ; 1: No ; 2: Yes P: Positive Overall Impression N: Negative M: Middle Score Grading between 1through 7
Figure 2.2 Blog Profile Vector
Date Nov-07 Dec-07 Jan-08 Feb-08 Mar-08 Apr-08 May-08 Jun-08 Jul-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 Oct-08 Total
of Blogs 190 179 174 198 238 240 325 308 313 298 396 315 3174
% 6.0 5.6 5.5 6.2 7.5 7.6 10.2 9.7 9.9 9.4 12.5 9.9 100.0
Age
of Blogs
10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44
31 207 698 905 801 332 153
1.0 6.5 22.0 28.5 25.2 10.5 4.8
45 and over 46 1.4 Total 3173 100.0

Attrac ted Points o f B l o g s% 1: Moist 2099 814 370 519 648 563 1372 30.9 12.0 5.4 7.6 9.5 8.3 20.2
Elements Mentioned 1: Recommended via Word of Mouth 2: Advertisement 3: Product Quality 4: Potential Effects 5: Feeling 6: Comparison 7: Favorite Manufacturer 8: Sample 9: Service 10: Smell 11: Design 12: Price Total of Blogs 848 15 1333 488 2886 378 72 388 138 934 121 1331 8932 % 9.5 0.2 14.9 5.5 32.3 4.2 0.8 4.3 1.5 10.5 1.4 14.9 100.0
Skin Type of Blogs % 1: Ordinary Skin 2: Sensitive Skin 3: Dry Skin 4: Mixed Skin 5: Oily Skin 6: Atopi skin Total 294 9.3 502 15.8 833 26.3 1250 39.4 217 77 6.8 2.4
2: Pore & Corneous Care 3: Acne Care 4: Aging Care 5: Strain 6: Whitening 7: Low Stimulus
8 : U n e v e n n e s s P r e v 406 e n t i o n 6.0 9: Sunblock Total 5 6796 0.1 100.0
3173 100.0
Repeated Use of Blogs % Yes No Total

Score 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 N Total
Des i re f or Re p eoaf t B l o g s% 0 : N o t M e n t i o n i2208 ng 1: No 2: Yes Total

% 0.6 3.2 4.3 9.8 18.7 27.0 20.9 10.5 4.9 100.0 19 102 137 311 594 858 664 333 155 3173
Overall Impression of Blogs M N P Total 524 330 2319 3173
% 16.5 10.4 73.1 100.0
795 2378 3173
25.1 74.9 100.0
69.6 5.8 24.6 100.0
184 781 3173
of Blogs
Figure 2.3 Summary of Blog Profile Vectors
3. Classification of Key Words During the period November 1, 2007 through October 31, 2008, the descriptions of all skin lotions (not limited to the ten products selected) and the blogs concerning the skin lotions are data-mined so as to identify key words. Table 3.1 provides a list of 28 key words chosen based on the frequency of appearances. Through an extensive interview with development engineers at Kao Corporation (2008), these key words are classified along two axes. The first axis is concerned with the five important factors that development engineers always keep in their mind for the development of skin lotions. I. Feeling for the first touch II. Feeling after several seconds of use III. Feeling after several minutes of use IV. Overall feeling after use V. Special Function The second axis is related to the meaning of the key words. A. Key words describing the state of the skin B. Key words describing the state of the product C. Key words describing the function of the product In Table 3.2, the key words are rearranged to exhibit the classification along the two axes.
Figure 3.1 List of Key Words
Figure 3.2 Classification of Key Words Through the interview (2008), these key words are also ranked along two separate axes: touch vs. technological difficulty as shown in Table 3.3. It can be seen that the following key words [wet freshness (A, ), wet softness (A, ), glow (A, ) and elastic softness (A,)] seem to be technologically more difficult to achieve than other key words.
Technological Difficulty (high)
( A,) (25) wet freshness ( A,) (16) glow
( A,) (10) wet softness ( A,) (9) elastic softness ( A,) (8) glossiness
Touchrough
Touchsmooth
( B,) (1) thickness ( A,) (13) coolness ( C,) (22) conditioning ( A,) (23) texture
( A,) (15) smart ( B,) (6) stickiness ( A,) (17) driness ( B,) (2) clamminess
(A,5) (28) sensitiveness ( C,) (5) additive free
( C,) ( A,) (3) effectiveness for sebaceous (20) freshness trouble

( A,) (14) pleasantness ( A,) (11) dry softness
( A,) (24) wrinkle
( A,) (12) smoothness ( A,) (18) youthfulness ( A,) (19) moistness ( C,) (27) quasi drug
( C,) (21) warming

( C,) (4) weak acidness ( A,) (26) whitening ( C,) (7) penetration
Technological Difficulty (low)
Figure 3.3
Touch vs. Technological Difficulty
4. Product Intent and Consumer Perception In this section, we examine the blog data through text-mining to see how the key words introduced in Section 3 appear in the blog data and overlap with those used in the product descriptions. Through this analysis, we investigate to what extent the intent of a manufacturer is communicated to consumers. We begin our study by categorizing the ten products according to their price range as follows, where the number in the parenthesis indicates the popularity ranking. Low Price Products: High Price Products: KTH001(2), JTW001(7), ESSA001(5), YHMK001(4) SICR001(3), PRBB001(10)
Middle Price Products: KNRM001(9), KAO103(1), KEI001(6),SRE002(8)
In Figures 4.1 through 4.3, the results of data-mining for the blog data are summarized. Here the number of blogs with reference to each key word is depicted following the format of Figure 3.3 for each product, where the circles below represent the volume. Similarly, Tables 4.1 through 4.3 describe the same results in a table form along with the summary of the blog profile vectors involved. The shaded boxes indicated that the corresponding key word is used in the description of the product, which may represent the intent of the development engineers.
180 ~
180 and over
80
from 80 to 99 from 60 to 79 from 40 to 59 from 20 to 39 from 0 to 20
60
160
from 160 to 179

40
140
from 140 to 159

20
120
from 120 to 139 from 100 to 119
100
key words describing the state of the skin key words describing the state of the product key words describing the function of the product
I. Feeling for the first touch II. Feeling after several seconds of use III. Feeling after several minutes of use IV. Overall feeling after use
Ranking 2 KTKH001
15
T e c h n o l o g i c a l(D hig f fhi ) culty
Rankin g JTW001
( A,) (10) wet softness ( A,) (9) elastic softness
20
10
( B,) 2 (1) thickness
100
( A,) (15) smart
(A,5) (28) sensitiveness
( A,) 1 (13) coolness 0
40
( C,) (22) conditioning
( A,) 20 (8) glossiness
( B ,) ( 1 ) t h i2 c k n e s s
(A , ) 2 ( 2 5 ) w e t f r e s h n( eAs, s ) ( 1 0 ) w 3e t s o f t n e s s (A , ) ( 1 6 ) g l o w (A , ) ( 9 ) e l a s t i c s o f t n e s s (A , ) 7 ( 8 ) g l o s s i n e s s (C , ) 1 ( 2 2 ) c o n d i t i o n i n g
Touchrough
Touchrough
Touchsmooth
T ouc roug h h
T ouc s m o o h th
60 6
(A , ) ( 1 5 ) s m a r t ( A , 5 ) ( 2 8 ) s e n s i t i v e n e s s (A , ) ( 1 3 ) c o o l n e s s
20
( C,) ( B,) (5) additive free 12 (6) stickiness
6 ( C,) ( A,) (3) effectiveness 0 for sebaceous (20) freshness trouble

( A,) (14) pleasantness 1
( A,) (23) texture
( A,) 4 (24) wrinkle
13
11
( C,) (21) warming
6 ( A,) (17) driness

( B,) (2) clamminess
7
( A,) (11) dry softness
( A,) (26) whitening
180 ~
( C,) (4) weak acidness ( C,) 20 (7) penetration
40
(A , ) (A , ) (A , ) ( C ,) ( k 1 l2e) s m o o t h n e s s ( 2 3 ) t e x( t2u4r )e w r i n An , ) 60 ( C ,) ( 3 ) e f f e c t i v (e e s s ( 2 ( B , ) ( 5 ) a d d i t i v e f o rs e eb a c e o re u0 s ) f r e s h n e s s ( 6 ) s t i c k i n e s s (A , ) t r o u b l e 1 (C , ) ( 1 8 ) ( 2 1 ) w a r m i n g (A , ) 14 y o u t h f u l n e s s 1 (A , ) ( 1 4 ) p l e a s a n t n e s s ( 1 7 d )r i n e s s ( C ,) (A , ) ( 4 ) w e a k ( 1 9 )4 a c i d n e s sm o i s t n e s s 1 (B ,) 20 (A , ) 20 ( 1 1 ) ( 2 ) c l a m m i n e s s ( C , ) ( C , ) 13 ) d r y s o f t n e s s (A , ( 7 ) ( 2 7 ) ( 2 6 ) w h i t e n i n g p e n e t r a t iqo un a s i d r u g
Ranking ESSA001
2
T e c h n o l o g i c a l(D hig f fhi )c u l t y
Rankin g YHMK001
20
( A,) (10) wet softness ( A,) (9) elastic softness ( A,) 2 (8) glossiness
120
120
15
( A , ) ( 1 5 ) s m a r t ( C ,)
( B,) (1) thickness
( B ,) ( 1 ) t h ic kn e ss
(A , ) ( 2 5 ) w e t f r e s h n( eAs, s ) 80 ( 1 0 ) w e t s o f t ne ss ( A , ) ( 1 6 ) g l o w ( A , ) ( 9 ) e l a s t ic s o f t n 13 e ss ( A , ) ( 8 ) g l o s8 si n e ss (C , ) ( 2 2 ) c o n d it io n i n g
T o u c r oug h h
T o u c sm oo h th
Touchsmooth
( A, ) 10 (15) smart
20
( A,) 2 (13) coolness
( C,) (22) conditioning ( A,) (23) texture
( A , ) ( A , 5 ) ( 1 3 ) c o o ln e s s ( 2 8 ) s e n si t iv e ne ss
11
( C,) ( B,) (5) additive free (6) stickiness ( A, 2) (17) driness ( B,) (2) clamminess
( C,) ( A,) 20 (3) effectiveness for sebaceous (20) freshness trouble

( A,) 16 (14) pleasantness ( A,) (11) dry softness
( A,) (24) wrinkle
1 ( A,) (12) smoothness

( A,) (18) youthfulness ( A,) (19) moistness ( C,) (27) quasi drug
( C,) (21) warming

( C,) (4) weak acidness ( A,) (26) whitening
) a d d it iv e 160 ( 6 ()B ,s)t i c k( 5 in e ss 3 ( A , ) 14 ( 1 7 d )r i n e s s
13
( C,) (7) penetration
( 2 )
6 ( B ,)
c la m mi n es s
11 ( A , ( A , ) 2 ) (A , ) ( C ,) (k 1 l2e) s m o o t h n e s s ( 2 3 ) t e x( t2u4r )e w r i n An , ) ( 3 ) e f f e c t i v (e e ss 40 ( 2 rs e eb a c e o f o re u0 s) f r e sh n es s (A , ) t r o u b le 5 (C , ) ( 1 8 ) ( 2 1 ) w a r m in g ( A , ) y o u t hf u ln e ss ( 1 4 )1 p l e a sa n tn e ss ( C ,) (A , ) 2 (4) weak (19) 180 16 a c i d n e s sm o i s t n e s s ~ ( A , ) ( 1 1 ) 20 ( C , ) ( C , ) ) d r y s o f t n e s s (A , ( 7 ) ( 2 7 ) ( 2 6 ) w h it e n in g p e n e t r a t iqo un a s i d r u g
180
Technological Difficulty ~ (low)
Figure 4.1 Low Price Products

Ranking/Product ID NO Price Type 2/KTKH001 420 Number of Blog 1 thickness 2 clamminess 3 effectiveness for sebaceous trouble B B C C C B C A A A A A A A A A A A A A C C A A A A C A 2 0 0 1 12 15 22 36 58 38 2 28 17 13 10 7 9 10 6 140 0 45 71 0 3 40 4 15 218 396 0 115 115 724 524 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.7 2.1 3.0 5.0 8.0 5.2 0.3 3.9 2.3 1.8 1.4 1.0 1.2 1.4 0.8 19.3 0.0 6.2 9.8 0.0 0.4 5.5 0.6 2.1 30.1 54.7 0.0 15.9 15.9 100.0 7/JTW001 609 Number of Blog 2 1 0 0 0 3 11 13 24 7 0 3 24 0 0 14 6 0 1 55 1 4 73 0 1 1 1 2 26 109 0 60 60 251 279 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 4.4 5.2 9.6 2.8 0.0 1.2 9.6 0.0 0.0 5.6 2.4 0.0 0.4 21.9 0.4 1.6 29.1 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.8 10.4 43.4 0.0 23.9 23.9 100.0 5/ESSA001 1000 Number of Blog 0 0 0 0 1 1 11 4 15 2 0 0 13 1 2 16 10 0 2 46 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 2 1 40 0 30 30 132 216 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.8 8.3 3.0 11.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 9.8 0.8 1.5 12.1 7.6 0.0 1.5 34.8 0.0 0.0 28.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.8 30.3 0.0 22.7 22.7 100.0 4/YHMK001 1100 Number of Blog 134 6 0 2 3 145 168 228 396 8 13 80 16 2 0 1 15 7 14 156 5 548 44 0 0 11 3 39 34 684 0 135 135 1516 821 8.8 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.2 9.6 11.1 15.0 26.1 0.5 0.9 5.3 1.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 1.0 0.5 0.9 10.3 0.3 36.1 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.2 2.6 2.2 45.1 0.0 8.9 8.9 100.0 Average Number of Blog 34.5 1.8 0.0 0.8 4.0 41.0 53.0 70.3 123.3 13.8 3.8 27.8 17.5 4.0 3.0 9.5 10.0 4.3 5.8 99.3 1.5 149.3 56.3 0.0 1.0 13.0 2.0 14.5 69.8 307.3 0.0 85.0 85.0 655.8 460 5.3 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.6 6.3 8.1 10.7 18.8 2.1 0.6 4.2 2.7 0.6 0.5 1.4 1.5 0.6 0.9 15.1 0.2 22.8 8.6 0.0 0.2 2.0 0.3 2.2 10.6 46.9 0.0 13.0 13.0 100.0
Score Repeated Use Elements Mentioned Attracted Factors Age Skin Type Ranking/Product ID Price 2/KTKH001 420 Number of Blog 1: Ordinary Skin 2: Sensitive Skin 3: Dry Skin 4: Mixed Skin 5: Oily Skin 6: Atopi skin Total 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45 and over Total 1: Moist 2: Pore & Corneous Care 3: Acne Care 4: Aging Care 5: Strain 6: Whitening 7: Low Stimulus 8: Unevenness Prevention 9: Sunblock Total 1: Recommended via Word of Mouth 2: Advertisement 3: Product Quality 4: Potential Effects 5: Feeling 6: Comparison 7: Favorite Manufacturer 8: Sample 9: Service 10: Smell 11: Design 12: Price Total Yes No Total 0: Not Mentioning Desire to Repeat 1: No 2: Yes Total M Overall Impression N P Total 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 N Total 47 95 81 240 50 11 524 4 40 165 138 111 48 17 1 524 188 220 105 22 169 277 193 59 4 1237 201 0 258 187 428 14 2 7 1 275 25 207 1605 168 356 524 396 13 115 524 95 47 382 524 3 24 31 54 88 136 118 62 8 524 9.0 18.1 15.5 45.8 9.5 2.1 100.0 0.8 7.6 31.5 26.3 21.2 9.2 3.2 0.2 100.0 15.2 17.8 8.5 1.8 13.7 22.4 15.6 4.8 0.3 100.0 12.5 0.0 16.1 11.7 26.7 0.9 0.1 0.4 0.1 17.1 1.6 12.9 100.0 32.1 67.9 100.0 75.6 2.5 21.9 100.0 18.1 9.0 72.9 100.0 0.6 4.6 5.9 10.3 16.8 26.0 22.5 11.8 1.5 100.0 7/JTW001 609 Number of Blog 20 46 34 124 53 2 279 2 35 91 83 52 10 6 0 279 8 165 100 5 190 24 84 157 1 734 57 1 93 82 244 12 0 1 0 232 5 100 827 78 201 279 188 13 78 279 47 21 211 279 1 7 10 31 61 86 50 28 5 279 7.2 16.5 12.2 44.4 19.0 0.7 100.0 0.7 12.5 32.6 29.7 18.6 3.6 2.2 0.0 100.0 1.1 22.5 13.6 0.7 25.9 3.3 11.4 21.4 0.1 100.0 6.9 0.1 11.2 9.9 29.5 1.5 0.0 0.1 0.0 28.1 0.6 12.1 100.0 28.0 72.0 100.0 67.4 4.7 28.0 100.0 16.8 7.5 75.6 100.0 0.4 2.5 3.6 11.1 21.9 30.8 17.9 10.0 1.8 100.0 5/ESSA001 1000 Number of Blog 27 25 21 100 39 4 216 23 54 48 37 28 20 4 2 216 23 53 71 0 130 7 12 56 0 352 21 4 91 6 206 6 1 7 0 75 4 21 442 82 134 216 173 3 40 216 30 8 178 216 2 1 9 16 57 73 23 34 1 216 12.5 11.6 9.7 46.3 18.1 1.9 100.0 10.6 25.0 22.2 17.1 13.0 9.3 1.9 0.9 100.0 6.5 15.1 20.2 0.0 36.9 2.0 3.4 15.9 0.0 100.0 4.8 0.9 20.6 1.4 46.6 1.4 0.2 1.6 0.0 17.0 0.9 4.8 100.0 38.0 62.0 100.0 80.1 1.4 18.5 100.0 13.9 3.7 82.4 100.0 0.9 0.5 4.2 7.4 26.4 33.8 10.6 15.7 0.5 100.0 4/YHMK001 1100 Number of Blog 74 156 236 278 43 34 821 2 68 224 254 168 69 29 7 821 714 58 15 22 18 20 572 13 0 1432 261 1 327 98 788 128 32 2 0 38 38 493 2206 137 684 821 503 41 277 821 126 95 600 821 2 42 35 86 168 272 158 56 2 821 9.0 19.0 28.7 33.9 5.2 4.1 100.0 0.2 8.3 27.3 30.9 20.5 8.4 3.5 0.9 100.0 49.9 4.1 1.0 1.5 1.3 1.4 39.9 0.9 0.0 100.0 11.8 0.0 14.8 4.4 35.7 5.8 1.5 0.1 0.0 1.7 1.7 22.3 100.0 16.7 83.3 100.0 61.3 5.0 33.7 100.0 15.3 11.6 73.1 100.0 0.2 5.1 4.3 10.5 20.5 33.1 19.2 6.8 0.2 100.0
Average Number of Blog 42.0 80.5 93.0 185.5 46.3 12.8 460.0 7.8 49.3 132.0 128.0 89.8 36.8 14.0 2.5 460.0 233.3 124.0 72.8 12.3 126.8 82.0 215.3 71.3 1.3 938.8 135.0 1.5 192.3 93.3 416.5 40.0 8.8 4.3 0.3 155.0 18.0 205.3 1270.0 116.3 343.8 460.0 315.0 17.5 127.5 460.0 74.5 42.8 342.8 460.0 2.0 18.5 21.3 46.8 93.5 141.8 87.3 45.0 4.0 460.0 9.1 17.5 20.2 40.3 10.1 2.8 100.0 1.7 10.7 28.7 27.8 19.5 8.0 3.0 0.5 100.0 24.8 13.2 7.7 1.3 13.5 8.7 22.9 7.6 0.1 100.0 10.6 0.1 15.1 7.3 32.8 3.1 0.7 0.3 0.0 12.2 1.4 16.2 100.0 25.3 74.7 100.0 68.5 3.8 27.7 100.0 16.2 9.3 74.5 100.0 0.4 4.0 4.6 10.2 20.3 30.8 19.0 9.8 0.9 100.0
4 weak acidness 5 additive-free Sub total 6 stickiness 7 penetration Sub total 8 glossiness 9 elastic softness 10 wet softness 11 dry softness 12 smoothness 13 coolness 14 pleasantness 15 smart 16 glow 17 driness Sub total 18 youthfulness 19 moistness 20 freshness 21 warming 22 conditioning 23 texture 24 wrinkle 25 wet freshness 26 whitening Sub total 27 quasi drug 28 sensitiveness Sub total Key words Total Blog Total
Table 4.1 Low Price Products
Ranking KNRM001
4 (A,) (25) wet freshness
( A,) (16) glow
Ranking KAO103
20
60
1
Touchsmooth
Touchrough
( B,) (1) thickness
9
Touchsmooth
Touchrough
( B,) (1) thickness
( A,) (15) smart
9 (A,5) (28) sensitiveness
( A,) (13) coolness
( C,) (22) conditioning ( A,) (23) texture
( C,) ( B,) (5) additive free (6) stickiness ( A,) (17) driness ( B,) (2) clamminess
( C,) ( A,) (3) effectiveness for sebaceous (20) freshness 2 trouble

( A,) (24) wrinkle
3
60
( A,) (15) smart
80
8
( A,) (13) coolness
( A,) (8) glossiness 16
20
( C,) (21) warming

( C,) (4) weak acidness ( A,) (26) whitening ( C,) (7) penetration
( C,) ( B,) (5) additive free (6) stickiness ( A,) (17) driness

( A,) (14) pleasantness
( A,) (23) texture
( A,) (24) wrinkle
( A,) (12) smoothness
9
10
( C,) (21) warming

( C,) (4) weak acidness ( C,) (7) penetration
( A,) (18) youthfulness ( A,) (19) moistness ( C,) (27) quasi drug
15
100
14
180
~
Ranking KEI001
Ranking SRE002
( A,) (25) wet freshness
16
6 8
20 3
4
( B,) (1) thickness
( A,) (16) glow
19
( C,) 1 (22) conditioning
Touchrough
Touchsmooth
20
17
( B,) (1) thickness ( A,) (13) coolness ( C,) (22) conditioning
Touchrough
Touchsmooth
40
8 7
( A,) 3 (8) glossiness
5 ( A,) (15) smart
( A,) (13) coolness
2 13
2
( A,) 2 (12) smoothness ( A,) (18) youthfulness ( A,) (19) moistness ( C,) (27) quasi drug
20
( B,) (6) stickiness ( A,) (17) driness
( C,) (5) additive free
( C,) ( A,) (3) effectiveness for sebaceous (20) freshness20 trouble ( A,) (14) pleasantness
( A,) (23) texture
( A,) 2 (24) wrinkle
( A,) (12) smoothness ( A,) (18) youthfulness
( A,) (15) smart
13
( C,) (21) warming

( A,) (14) pleasantness
( A,) (23) texture
( A,) (24) wrinkle
( C,) (21) warming

( C,) (4) weak acidness ( C,) (7) penetration
10
19
( C,) (4) weak acidness

( A,) (19) moistness

( C,) (27) quasi drug
20
12
( B,) (2) clamminess ( A,) (11) dry softness
40
3
20
100
Figure 4.2 Middle Price Products

Ranking/Product ID 9/KNRM001 2625 Number of Blog 1: Ordinary Skin 8 9 15 29 0 1 62 0 5 14 13 19 9 1 1 62 57 6 1 0 10 0 25 47 0 146 10 0 28 5 61 15 0 3 2 37 11 15 Total Yes Repeated Use No Total 0: Not Mentioning Desire to Repeat 1: No 2: Yes Total M Overall Impression N P Total 0 1 2 3 Score 4 5 6 7 N Total 187 3 59 62 41 1 20 62 5 1 56 62 0 0 1 1 12 17 22 7 2 62 Total 1: Moist 2: Pore & Corneous Care 3: Acne Care 4: Aging Care Attracted Factors 5: Strain 6: Whitening 7: Low Stimulus 8: Unevenness Prevention 9: Sunblock Total 1: Recommended via Word of Mouth 2: Advertisement 3: Product Quality 4: Potential Effects 5: Feeling Elements Mentioned 6: Comparison 7: Favorite Manufacturer 8: Sample 9: Service 10: Smell 11: Design 12: Price 2: Sensitive Skin 3: Dry Skin Skin Type 4: Mixed Skin 5: Oily Skin 6: Atopi skin Total 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 Age 30-34 35-39 40-44 45 and over 12.9 14.5 24.2 46.8 0.0 1.6 100.0 0.0 8.1 22.6 21.0 30.6 14.5 1.6 1.6 100.0 39.0 4.1 0.7 0.0 6.8 0.0 17.1 32.2 0.0 100.0 5.3 0.0 15.0 2.7 32.6 8.0 0.0 1.6 1.1 19.8 5.9 8.0 100.0 4.8 95.2 100.0 66.1 1.6 32.3 100.0 8.1 1.6 90.3 100.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.6 19.4 27.4 35.5 11.3 3.2 100.0 1/KAO103 5250 Number of Blog 43 64 211 202 18 11 549 0 1 58 184 179 83 34 10 549 487 99 26 156 35 76 236 35 0 1150 170 2 227 46 512 90 14 172 57 133 11 142 1576 126 423 549 419 45 85 549 97 79 373 549 6 14 25 53 88 126 112 53 72 549 7.8 11.7 38.4 36.8 3.3 2.0 100.0 0.0 0.2 10.6 33.5 32.6 15.1 6.2 1.8 100.0 42.3 8.6 2.3 13.6 3.0 6.6 20.5 3.0 0.0 100.0 10.8 0.1 14.4 2.9 32.5 5.7 0.9 10.9 3.6 8.4 0.7 9.0 100.0 23.0 77.0 100.0 76.3 8.2 15.5 100.0 17.7 14.4 67.9 100.0 1.1 2.6 4.6 9.7 16.0 23.0 20.4 9.7 13.1 100.0 6/KEI001 5250 Number of Blog 35 37 59 140 10 3 284 0 3 72 107 85 10 5 2 284 244 74 23 59 26 52 129 26 0 633 76 2 95 39 243 41 4 66 70 48 10 110 804 88 196 284 174 34 76 284 52 31 201 284 2 3 9 36 57 64 67 26 20 284 12.3 13.0 20.8 49.3 3.5 1.1 100.0 0.0 1.1 25.4 37.7 29.9 3.5 1.8 0.7 100.0 38.5 11.7 3.6 9.3 4.1 8.2 20.4 4.1 0.0 100.0 9.5 0.2 11.8 4.9 30.2 5.1 0.5 8.2 8.7 6.0 1.2 13.7 100.0 31.0 69.0 100.0 61.3 12.0 26.8 100.0 18.3 10.9 70.8 100.0 0.7 1.1 3.2 12.7 20.1 22.5 23.6 9.2 7.0 100.0 8/SRE002 6300 Number of Blog 10 13 56 35 1 3 118 0 0 2 18 42 24 21 11 118 96 39 8 73 25 16 29 2 0 288 31 0 75 7 112 22 7 30 3 29 9 50 375 19 99 118 74 10 34 118 26 12 80 118 0 4 2 12 14 27 34 12 13 118 8.5 11.0 47.5 29.7 0.8 2.5 100.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 15.3 35.6 20.3 17.8 9.3 100.0 33.3 13.5 2.8 25.3 8.7 5.6 10.1 0.7 0.0 100.0 8.3 0.0 20.0 1.9 29.9 5.9 1.9 8.0 0.8 7.7 2.4 13.3 100.0 16.1 83.9 100.0 62.7 8.5 28.8 100.0 22.0 10.2 67.8 100.0 0.0 3.4 1.7 10.2 11.9 22.9 28.8 10.2 11.0 100.0 Average Number of Blog 24.0 30.8 85.3 101.5 7.3 4.5 253.3 0.0 2.3 36.5 80.5 81.3 31.5 15.3 6.0 253.3 221.0 54.5 14.5 72.0 24.0 36.0 104.8 27.5 0.0 554.3 71.8 1.0 106.3 24.3 232.0 42.0 6.3 67.8 33.0 61.8 10.3 79.3 735.5 59.0 194.3 253.3 177.0 22.5 53.8 253.3 45.0 30.8 177.5 253.3 2.0 5.3 9.3 25.5 42.8 58.5 58.8 24.5 26.8 253.3 9.5 12.1 33.7 40.1 2.9 1.8 100.0 0.0 0.9 14.4 31.8 32.1 12.4 6.0 2.4 100.0 39.9 9.8 2.6 13.0 4.3 6.5 18.9 5.0 0.0 100.0 9.8 0.1 14.4 3.3 31.5 5.7 0.8 9.2 4.5 8.4 1.4 10.8 100.0 33.3 109.7 143.1 69.9 8.9 21.2 100.0 17.8 12.1 70.1 100.0 0.8 2.1 3.7 10.1 16.9 23.1 23.2 9.7 10.6 100.0
Ranking/Product ID NO Price Type
9/KNRM001 2625 Number of Blog 0 0 0 0 0 0 B C A A A A A A A A A A A A A C C A A A A C A 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 5 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 13 0 9 9 27 62 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 7.4 0.0 0.0 7.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.5 0.0 33.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.8 0.0 48.1 0.0 33.3 33.3 100.0
1/KAO103 5250 Number of Blog 56 1 0 0 3 60 70 181 251 16 9 65 15 2 0 0 3 9 10 129 2 118 12 0 8 24 5 27 14 210 0 95 95 745 549 7.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 8.1 9.4 24.3 33.7 2.1 1.2 8.7 2.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.2 1.3 17.3 0.3 15.8 1.6 0.0 1.1 3.2 0.7 3.6 1.9 28.2 0.0 12.8 12.8 100.0
6/KEI001 5250 Number of Blog 19 0 0 1 1 21 23 117 140 8 3 36 19 7 0 2 5 4 10 94 1 38 22 0 1 13 2 16 7 100 0 58 58 413 284 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 5.1 5.6 28.3 33.9 1.9 0.7 8.7 4.6 1.7 0.0 0.5 1.2 1.0 2.4 22.8 0.2 9.2 5.3 0.0 0.2 3.1 0.5 3.9 1.7 24.2 0.0 14.0 14.0 100.0
8/SRE002 6300 Number of Blog 23 0 0 0 0 23 13 34 47 3 0 6 12 2 0 0 2 8 2 35 1 47 13 0 2 1 2 6 3 75 3 17 20 200 118 11.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.5 6.5 17.0 23.5 1.5 0.0 3.0 6.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 4.0 1.0 17.5 0.5 23.5 6.5 0.0 1.0 0.5 1.0 3.0 1.5 37.5 1.5 8.5 10.0 100.0
Price
Average Number of Blog 24.5 0.3 0.0 0.3 1.0 26.0 26.5 83.0 109.5 6.8 3.3 26.8 12.0 2.8 0.0 1.0 2.5 5.3 5.5 65.8 1.0 53.0 11.8 0.0 2.8 9.5 2.3 13.3 6.0 99.5 0.8 44.8 45.5 346.3 253.3 7.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 7.5 7.7 24.0 31.6 1.9 0.9 7.7 3.5 0.8 0.0 0.3 0.7 1.5 1.6 19.0 0.3 15.3 3.4 0.0 0.8 2.7 0.6 3.8 1.7 28.7 0.2 12.9 13.1 100.0
1 thickness 2 clamminess 3 effectiveness for sebaceous trouble
B B C C C
Table 4.2 Middle Price Products
Ranking 3 SICR001
Ranking PRBB001
4
8
5
20
40
Touchrough
( B,) (1) thickness
20
13
2
6
Touchsmooth
Touchrough
Touchsmooth
( B,) (1) thickness
( A,) (15) smart
( A,) (13) coolness
1
13
20
( C,) ( B,) (5) additive free (6) stickiness ( A,) (17) driness ( B,) (2) clamminess
3 ( C,) ( A,) (3) effectiveness for sebaceous (20) freshness trouble

( A,) 1 (14) pleasantness
( A,) ( A,) (23) texture (24) wrinkle
( A,) (12) smoothness ( A,) (18) youthfulness ( A,) 40 (19) moistness ( C,) (27) quasi drug
( A,) (15) smart
20
1
( A,) (13) coolness
4 1
( C,) (21) warming

( C,) (4) weak acidness
( C,) 1 ( A,) (3) effectiveness for sebaceous (20) freshness trouble

( A,) ( A,) (23) texture (24) wrinkle
( A,) 1 (12) smoothness ( A,) (18) youthfulness ( A,) (19) 20 moistness
( C,) (21) warming

( C,) (4) weak acidness ( A,) 20 (26) whitening ( C,) (7) penetration
13
20
( C,) (27) quasi drug
40
Figure 4.3 High Price Products

Ranking/Product ID 3/SICR001 11025 Number of Blog 1: Ordinary Skin 2: Sensitive Skin 3: Dry Skin Skin Type 4: Mixed Skin 5: Oily Skin 6: Atopi skin Total 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 Age 30-34 35-39 40-44 45 and over Total 1: Moist 2: Pore & Corneous Care 3: Acne Care 4: Aging Care Attracted Factors 5: Strain 6: Whitening 7: Low Stimulus 8: Unevenness Prevention 9: Sunblock Total 1: Recommended via Word of Mouth 2: Advertisement 3: Product Quality 4: Potential Effects 5: Feeling Elements Mentioned 6: Comparison 7: Favorite Manufacturer 8: Sample 9: Service 10: Smell 11: Design 12: Price Total Yes Repeated Use No Total 0: Not Mentioning Desire to Repeat 1: No 2: Yes Total M Overall Impression N P Total 0 1 2 3 Score 4 5 6 7 N Total 22 37 90 71 3 7 230 0 1 18 51 80 41 27 12 230 198 68 14 116 30 68 62 8 0 564 15 3 88 15 209 41 10 71 1 36 6 127 622 76 154 230 172 18 40 230 35 27 168 230 0 5 11 19 34 45 54 36 26 230 9.6 16.1 39.1 30.9 1.3 3.0 100.0 0.0 0.4 7.8 22.2 34.8 17.8 11.7 5.2 100.0 35.1 12.1 2.5 20.6 5.3 12.1 11.0 1.4 0.0 100.0 2.4 0.5 14.1 2.4 33.6 6.6 1.6 11.4 0.2 5.8 1.0 20.4 100.0 33.0 67.0 100.0 74.8 7.8 17.4 100.0 15.2 11.7 73.0 100.0 0.0 2.2 4.8 8.3 14.8 19.6 23.5 15.7 11.3 100.0 10/PRBB001 21000 Number of Blog 8 20 30 31 0 1 90 0 0 6 20 37 18 9 0 90 84 32 7 66 15 23 30 3 0 260 6 2 51 3 83 9 2 29 4 31 2 66 288 18 72 90 68 6 16 90 11 9 70 90 3 2 4 3 15 12 26 19 6 90 8.9 22.2 33.3 34.4 0.0 1.1 100.0 0.0 0.0 6.7 22.2 41.1 20.0 10.0 0.0 100.0 32.3 12.3 2.7 25.4 5.8 8.8 11.5 1.2 0.0 100.0 2.1 0.7 17.7 1.0 28.8 3.1 0.7 10.1 1.4 10.8 0.7 22.9 100.0 20.0 80.0 100.0 75.6 6.7 17.8 100.0 12.2 10.0 77.8 100.0 3.3 2.2 4.4 3.3 16.7 13.3 28.9 21.1 6.7 100.0
Ranking/Product ID NO Price Type
3/SICR001 11025 Number of Blog 24 0 0 0 0 24 B C A A A A A A A A A A A A A C C A A A A C A 21 55 76 4 6 26 4 4 0 1 2 5 1 53 0 55 3 0 1 13 4 8 13 97 2 43 45 295 230 8.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.1 7.1 18.6 25.8 1.4 2.0 8.8 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.3 0.7 1.7 0.3 18.0 0.0 18.6 1.0 0.0 0.3 4.4 1.4 2.7 4.4 32.9 0.7 14.6 15.3 100.0
10/PRBB001 21000 Number of Blog 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 37 41 3 1 13 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 20 1 20 1 0 1 4 1 4 34 66 0 25 25 152 90 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 24.3 27.0 2.0 0.7 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.7 13.2 0.7 13.2 0.7 0.0 0.7 2.6 0.7 2.6 22.4 43.4 0.0 16.4 16.4 100.0
Average Number of Blog 12 0 0 0 0 12 12.5 46 58.5 3.5 3.5 19.5 2 2 0 0.5 1 3.5 1 36.5 0.5 37.5 2 0 1 8.5 2.5 6 23.5 81.5 1 34 35 197.5 160 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 6.3 23.3 29.6 1.8 1.8 9.9 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.3 0.5 1.8 0.5 18.5 0.3 19.0 1.0 0.0 0.5 4.3 1.3 3.0 11.9 41.3 0.5 17.2 17.7 100.0
Price
Average Number of Blog 15.0 28.5 60.0 51.0 1.5 4.0 160.0 0.0 0.5 12.0 35.5 58.5 29.5 18.0 6.0 160.0 141.0 50.0 10.5 91.0 22.5 45.5 46.0 5.5 0.0 412.0 10.5 2.5 69.5 9.0 146.0 25.0 6.0 50.0 2.5 33.5 4.0 96.5 455.0 47.0 113.0 160.0 120.0 12.0 28.0 160.0 23.0 18.0 119.0 160.0 1.5 3.5 7.5 11.0 24.5 28.5 40.0 27.5 16.0 160.0 9.4 17.8 37.5 31.9 0.9 2.5 100.0 0.0 0.3 7.5 22.2 36.6 18.4 11.3 3.8 100.0 34.2 12.1 2.5 22.1 5.5 11.0 11.2 1.3 0.0 100.0 2.3 0.5 15.3 2.0 32.1 5.5 1.3 11.0 0.5 7.4 0.9 21.2 100.0 29.4 70.6 100.0 75.0 7.5 17.5 100.0 14.4 11.3 74.4 100.0 0.9 2.2 4.7 6.9 15.3 17.8 25.0 17.2 10.0 100.0
1 thickness 2 clamminess 3 effectiveness for sebaceous trouble
B B C C C
Table 4.3 High Price Products
The following observations can be made. 1) In general, the intents of development engineers are not well communicated to consumers, as can be seen from Figures 4.1 through 4.3 where the shaded boxes largely contain only small numbers. 2) One exception for 1) is the key word penetration (C,) of KAO103 for witch 24% of the bloggers who wrote about the product KAO103 made reference to the key word. Noting that the popularity ranking of KAO103 is No.1, this suggests that it would be important to make the intents of development engineers conveyed to consumers with more efforts in e-marketing. 3) Low Price Products are developed more or less with emphasis on one factor, which is technologically easy to realize, with one exception of YHMK001. In contrast, Middle Price Products and High Price Products tend to be developed with broader objectives involving higher technological difficulties. 4) Low Price Products attract substantially more bloggers with 460 per product than Middle Price Products with 253 per product and High Price Products with 160 per product. 5) The bloggers reacting to either Low Price Products or High Price Products are mostly concerned with the overall feeling of the product, while those writing about Middle Price Products appreciate the feeling after several seconds of use. 6) The skin type of 46 % of the bloggers for Low Price Products is largely Mixed Skin. For Middle Price Products, the situation is similar with 47 %. The skin type of the bloggers for High Price Products is split between Mixed Skin with 31 % and Dry Skin with 39 %. 7) Regarding age, the seniority of the bloggers increases from Low Price Products toward High Price Products as depicted in Figure 4.4. Here the bloggers writing about Low Price Products are centered around late 10`s and 20`s, while the majority of the bloggers for Middle Price Products is in late 20`s and 30`s. Those caring for High Price Products are definitely senior with age 40 or above accounting for 17 %.
8)
For Low Price Products, the bloggers are attracted by Low Stimulus with 23 % and Strain with 14 %. The bloggers for Middle Price Products similarly care about Low Stimulus with 19 % but Aging Care comes into consideration with 13 %. The bloggers for High Price Products are attracted by more factors with Aging Care accounting for 22 % , followed by Low Stimulus with 11 % as well as Whitening with 11 %.
9)
All the bloggers are concerned with both Feeling and Price and Product Quality. In addition, the bloggers for High Price Products also consider it important to experience Sample.
10) About 25~33 % of all the bloggers are repeaters. However, the percentage for expressing desire to repeat is much less with 21 % for Middle Price Products and 18 % for High Price Products, except with 28 % for Low Price Products. 11) Most of the bloggers are in favor of the product they write about, with 70 % or more of them providing Positive Comments. 12) In parallel with 11), Score is also rather high with the averages of 4.61, 4.29 and 4.53 for Low Price Products, Middle Price Products and High Price Products respectively.
Figure 4.4 Survival Function of Ages of Bloggers
Score
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Average
Low 0.00 4.02 9.24 30.49 81.30 154.08 113.80 68.48 461.41 4.61
Middle 0.00 2.07 7.30 30.20 67.51 115.48 139.16 67.71 429.43 4.29
High 0.00 2.19 9.38 20.63 61.25 89.06 150.00 120.31 452.81 4.53
Table 4.4 Score of Ten Products 5. Conclusion In this paper, a methodological approach is proposed to understand the potential importance of e-WOM in e-Marketing. Focusing on the cosmetic product market in Japan, a social network named @COSME is chosen for the study. More specifically, actual blogs concerning skin lotions are collected from @COSME in the period between November 1, 2007 and October 31, 2008. By identifying key words which are used by either manufactures for promoting skin lotions on the Internet or consumers in their blogs, our analysis is examine how such key words would overlap each other, thereby providing a basis to establish effective e-marketing strategies in e-WOM communications. The data set to be employed throughout the paper is first introduced. The basic analysis of the data set is also provided. Then, key words used by either manufactures for promoting skin lotions on the Internet or consumers in their blogs are identified. These key words are categorized in terms of development intention, the content of the key words, engineering difficulty and touch (sense of feel). The collected blog data are examined through text-mining in order to see how the key words overlap between the product descriptions and the blog data. Some implications of the analysis are also discussed. This study is still in its infancy. Deeper analyses would be needed to understand the power of e-WOM in e-Marketing better. It is also desirable to collect more blog data. This research is in progress and will be reported elsewhere.
REFERENCES Balasubramanian, S., and Mahajan, V., The Economic Leverage of the Virtual Community, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol.5(Spring), pp.103-138, 2001 Banerjee , A. and Fudenberg, D., Word-of-Mouth learning, Games and Economic Behavior , Vol.46, pp1-22, 2003 Bone, P.F., Word-of-Mouth Effects on Short term and Long-term Product Judgments, Journal of business Research, Vol.32, No.3, pp. 213-223, 1995 Dellarocas, C.,The Digitization of Word-of-mouth learning,Games and Economic Behavior, Vol.46 , pp.1-22, 2003 Ellison ,G., Fudenberg Hung, D., Word-of-Mouth Communication and Social Learning, The Quarterly Journal of Economics,Vol.110,NO.1,pp 93-125, 1995 Goldenberg , J., Libai , B., and Muller, E., Talk of the Network: A Complex Systems Looked at the Underlying Process of Word-of-Mouth, Marketing Letters 12:3, pp.211-223, 2001 Henning-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K.P., Walsh, G., and Gremler, D.D.,Electronic Word-of-Mouth via Consumer-Opinion Platforms: What Motivates 2004 Kobayashi and Nisizaka, interview at Kao Corporation, December 9, 2008 Shardanand, U., and Maes, P., Social Information Filtering: Algorithms for Automating Word-of-Mouth, ACM Press/Addison-Wesley, 1995 Stauss, B., Global Word-of-Mouth. Service Bashing on the Internet is a Thorny Issue., Marketing Management, Vol.6, No.3, pp.28-30, 1997 Stauss, B., Using New Media for Customer Interaction: A Challenge for Relationship Marketing,Relationship Marketing (pp.233-253) edited by T. enningThurau and U., Hamsen, Berling:Spinger, 2000 Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the Internet?Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 18, No .1,

Department of Social Systems and Management Discussion Paper Series

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Department of Social Systems and Management Discussion Paper Series

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Department of Social Systems and Management Discussion Paper Series

by Ushio Sumita, A Hyoung Kim Feb 2010

10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44

31 207 698 905 801 332 153

1.0 6.5 22.0 28.5 25.2 10.5 4.8

45 and over 46 1.4 Total 3173 100.0

8 : U n e v e n n e s s P r e v 406 e n t i o n 6.0 9: Sunblock Total 5 6796 0.1 100.0

Repeated Use of Blogs % Yes No Total

Des i re f or Re p eoaf t B l o g s% 0 : N o t M e n t i o n i2208 ng 1: No 2: Yes Total

Overall Impression of Blogs M N P Total 524 330 2319 3173

% 16.5 10.4 73.1 100.0

795 2378 3173

25.1 74.9 100.0

69.6 5.8 24.6 100.0

184 781 3173

Figure 2.3 Summary of Blog Profile Vectors

Figure 3.1 List of Key Words

Technological Difficulty (high)

( A,) (25) wet freshness ( A,) (16) glow

(A,5) (28) sensitiveness ( C,) (5) additive free

( C,) ( A,) (3) effectiveness for sebaceous (20) freshness trouble

( A,) (24) wrinkle

( C,) (21) warming

Technological Difficulty (low)

Touch vs. Technological Difficulty

Middle Price Products: KNRM001(9), KAO103(1), KEI001(6),SRE002(8)

180 and over

from 80 to 99 from 60 to 79 from 40 to 59 from 20 to 39 from 0 to 20

from 160 to 179

from 140 to 159

from 120 to 139 from 100 to 119

Technological Difficulty (high)

T e c h n o l o g i c a l(D hig f fhi ) culty

( A,) (10) wet softness ( A,) (9) elastic softness

( B,) 2 (1) thickness

( A,) (15) smart

(A,5) (28) sensitiveness

( A,) 1 (13) coolness 0

( C,) (22) conditioning

( A,) 20 (8) glossiness

( C,) ( B,) (5) additive free 12 (6) stickiness

6 ( C,) ( A,) (3) effectiveness 0 for sebaceous (20) freshness trouble

( A,) (23) texture

( A,) 4 (24) wrinkle

( C,) (21) warming

6 ( A,) (17) driness

( A,) (26) whitening

( C,) (4) weak acidness ( C,) 20 (7) penetration

Technological Difficulty (low)

Technological Difficulty (low)

Technological Difficulty (high)

T e c h n o l o g i c a l(D hig f fhi )c u l t y

( B,) (1) thickness

(A,5) (28) sensitiveness

( A,) 2 (13) coolness

( C,) (22) conditioning ( A,) (23) texture

( C,) ( A,) 20 (3) effectiveness for sebaceous (20) freshness trouble

( A,) (24) wrinkle

1 ( A,) (12) smoothness

( C,) (21) warming

) a d d it iv e 160 ( 6 ()B ,s)t i c k( 5 in e ss 3 ( A , ) 14 ( 1 7 d )r i n e s s

( C,) (7) penetration