#9 - Organized word-of-mouth marketing campaigns are driven

[Administrator]

Please post below with any questions!

[Eduardo de la Rosa]

I chose B, incorrectly; credited response is E. If someone could evaluate this reasoning:

B is not credited because it doesn't resolve the paradox presented: If someone who is most likely to be receptive to mass-media campaign is also least likely to have their minds changed by knowing a product booster is a product booster, then this couldn't explain why product boosters disclosing their affiliation makes the product more likely to be sold, as answer choice B already states that these folks are immune to the product booster disclosing their affiliation. E, on the other hand, is essentially saying that disclosing product booster's affiliation creates conditions that make it more likely for someone to buy the product, thereby increasing the success of the campaign and resolving the paradox.

Is there a straighter road to get to answer choice E?

[Jeremy Press]

Hi Eduardo,

You've got it exactly right! I wouldn't change a thing about your explanations or understanding of answer choices B and E.

I don't think there's a straighter road than the one you've traced out. One thing that may be helpful on future Resolve questions is (before you dive into the answer choices) to clearly state to yourself with precision and specificity what the "paradox" is you're trying to explain. Here, I'd say something like what you said in your explanation: "why does a product booster disclosing his or her affiliation make the product they're boosting more likely to be sold?" That way, as you're going through the list of answer choices, you can immediately evaluate them based on their explanatory power for that particular paradox.

I hope this helps!

Jeremy

[lemonade42]

The paradox of the surprising finding seems to be based on word of mouth campaigns where you tell someone you are affiliated vs. word of mouth campaigns where you don't tell someone you are affiliated. But I was confused when the stimulus started comparing word of mouth campaigns to mass media ads. Because then that led me to search for an answer that's trying to find an an answering relating to mass media ads. I'm confused on how to interpret this stimulus organization. Am I just supposed to ignore the mass media part and just believe people are less skeptical to word of mouth campaigns in general and assume it's because they are more "independent". So then it's "surprising" when they say they are not independent (and affiliated with an organized marketing campaign)?

[Dana D]

Hey lemonade,

The stimulus is comparing word of mouth campaigns and mass media ads. People are supposedly less skeptical towards word of mouth messages than mass media ads - you would think this is because you are more likely to trust someone you know than an obvious add. But the confusion comes when the stimulus adds in that people trust word of mouth campaigns even more once they know someone has disclosed that they work with the campaign. Why would that be?

So we're looking for an answer choice that explains why disclosing affiliation with the campaign would actually increase success for word-of-mouth marketing, and answer choice (E) does this by showing that disclosure generates a more in depth and relaxed discussion of the product.