Electronic Word-of-Mouth, Organizational Justice, and the Distributed Formation of Reputation in Scientific and Research Organizations

LaKeshia Nall; Robert Zinko; Audria Ford; Wayne Ballentine

doi:10.2478/minib-2025-0016

.blurhash-client-img { display: none !important; }

Electronic Word-of-Mouth, Organizational Justice, and the Distributed Formation of Reputation in Scientific and Research Organizations

Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations

Volume 58 (2025): Issue 4 (December 2025)

By: LaKeshia Nall, Robert Zinko , Audria Ford and Wayne Ballentine

Open Access

|Jul 2026

Abstract

Purpose

This paper extends electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) theory beyond consumer markets to explain how reputations are formed for scientific and research organizations operating under conditions of uncertainty and limited observability.

Design/methodology/approach

Drawing on reputation theory and organizational justice, the study develops a conceptual framework that positions eWOM as a distributed, audience-driven mechanism through which evaluative judgments from heterogeneous stakeholders are aggregated into shared reputational beliefs.

Findings

The framework identifies three interrelated dimensions of eWOM-based reputation—competence, social contribution, and integrity—and explains how perceptions of organizational justice shape the legitimacy and influence of eWOM signals. Rather than merely transmitting information, eWOM actively constructs reputational meaning by stabilizing fragmented evaluations across digital environments.

Practical implications

The findings indicate that marketing scientific and research organizations requires sustained attention to how organizational actions are interpreted across online platforms. Effective reputation stewardship depends on consistency, transparency, and ethical engagement, rather than short-term image management or reliance on formal performance metrics alone.

Originality/value

This study advances eWOM theory by demonstrating its relevance in non-commercial contexts and contributes to reputation research by clarifying how audience-driven reputational beliefs emerge under uncertainty. It provides a conceptual foundation for understanding the marketing and legitimization of scientific and research organizations in contemporary digital landscapes.

References

Babić Rosario, A., De Valck, K., & Sotgiu, F. (2020). Conceptualizing the electronic word-of-mouth process: What we know and need to know about eWOM creation, exposure, and evaluation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(3), 422–448.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Babić Rosario, A., Sotgiu, F., De Valck, K., & Bijmolt, T. H. (2016). The effect of electronic word of mouth on sales: A meta-analytic review of platform, product, and metric factors. Journal of marketing research, 53(3), 297–318.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Besley, J. C., & Nisbet, M. (2013). How scientists view the public, the media and the political process. Public understanding of science, 22(6), 644–659.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. (2015). The “macro” and the “micro” of legitimacy: Toward a multilevel theory of the legitimacy process. Academy of Management Review, 40(1), 49–75.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bonaccorsi, A., & Secondi, L. (2017). The determinants of research performance in European universities: a large scale multilevel analysis. Scientometrics, 112(3), 1147–1178.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bouazzaoui, M., Wu, H.-J., Roehrich, J. K., Squire, B., & Roath, A. S. (2020). Justice in inter-organizational relationships: A literature review and future research agenda. Industrial Marketing Management, 87, 128–137.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bozeman, B., & Youtie, J. (2017). Socio-economic impacts and public value of government-funded research: Lessons from four US National Science Foundation initiatives. Research Policy, 46(8), 1387–1398.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: a meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425–436.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Connelly, B. L., Crook, T. R., Combs, J. G., Ketchen Jr, D. J., & Aguinis, H. (2018). Competence-and integrity-based trust in interorganizational relationships: which matters more? Journal of Management, 44(3), 919–945.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Eisingerich, A. B., Chun, H. H., Liu, Y., Jia, H., & Bell, S. J. (2015). Why recommend a brand face-to-face but not on Facebook? How word-of-mouth on online social sites differs from traditional word-of-mouth. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(1), 120–128.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Furner, C. P., Yoon, T. E., Zinko, R., & Goh, S. H. (2021). The influence of reviewer and consumer congruence in online word-of-mouth Transactions. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), 19(3), 1–15.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Giannarakis, G., Konteos, G., Zafeiriou, E., & Partalidou, X. (2016). The impact of corporate social responsibility on financial performance. Investment management and financial innovations, 13, (3-1), 171–182.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gołata, K., & Sojkin, B. (2020). Determinants of building image and reputation of university towards its stakeholders. Marketing Instytucji Naukowych i Badawczych, 1(35), 29–58.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Grange, C., & Benbasat, I. (2018). Opinion seeking in a social network-enabled product review website: a study of word-of-mouth in the era of digital social networks. European Journal of Information Systems, 27(6), 629–653.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lee, L. H., & Abdullah, Z. (2024). Antecedents of internal reputation and its consequences on organizational outcomes: a systematic review. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior, 27(1), 55–79.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Morschheuser, P., & Redler, J. (2015). Reputation management for scientific organisations–framework development and exemplification. Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations, 4(18), 1–36.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mróz–Gorgoń, B., & Całka, A. (2016). Building scientific institution’s brand with online instruments. Marketing Instytucji Naukowych i Badawczych, 1(19), 117–129.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mubashar, T., Musharraf, S., Khan, S., & Butt, T. A. (2022). Impact of organizational justice on employee engagement: The mediating role of organizational trust. Cogent Psychology, 9(1), 208–216.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nadkarni, N. M., Weber, C. Q., Goldman, S. V., Schatz, D. L., Allen, S., & Menlove, R. (2019). Beyond the deficit model: The ambassador approach to public engagement. BioScience, 69(4), 305–313.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nosek, B. A., Hardwicke, T. E., Moshontz, H., Allard, A., Corker, K. S., Dreber, A., Fidler, F., Hilgard, J., Kline Struhl, M., & Nuijten, M. B. (2022). Replicability, robustness, and reproducibility in psychological science. Annual review of psychology, 73(1), 719–748.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Prike, T., Butler, L. H., & Ecker, U. K. (2024). Source-credibility information and social norms improve truth discernment and reduce engagement with misinformation online. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 69–78.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Raimbault, B., & Joly, P.-B. (2021). The emergence of technoscientific fields and the new political sociology of science. Community and Identity in Contemporary Technosciences, 31, 85–92.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Redler, J., & Morschheuser, P. (2024). Three root causes for the impasse in reputation measuremant for higher education institutions. Marketing Instytucji Naukowych i Badawczych, 52(2), 26–45.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Reif, A., Guenther, L., & Yokoyama, H. M. (2024). Public (dis)trust in science in digital media environments. Journal of Science Communication, 23(09), 94–118.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Rindova, V. P., Williamson, I. O., Petkova, A. P., & Sever, J. M. (2005). Being good or being known: An empirical examination of the dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of organizational reputation. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 1033–1049.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Scheufele, D. A., Hoffman, A. J., Neeley, L., & Reid, C. M. (2021). Misinformation about science in the public sphere. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 118(15), e2104068118.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Suddaby, R., Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. (2017). Legitimacy. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 451–478.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sumba Nacipucha, N., Sánchez-Bayón, A., Cueva Estrada, J., & Valencia-Arias, A. (2024). Social networks as a strategy to improve the visibility of scientific journals. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1), 230–244.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Varda, C., Iordanou, K., Antoniou, J., Barrios, M. M. Z., Yalaz, E., Gurzawska, A., Szüdi, G., Bartar, P., & Häberlein, L. (2025). The role of stewards of trust in facilitating trust in science: a multistakeholder view. Journal of Academic Ethics, 23(3), 463–483.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Williams, K. (2022). What counts: Making sense of metrics of research value. Science and Public Policy, 49(3), 518–531.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Yeo-Teh, N. S. L., & Tang, B. L. (2023). Post-publication peer review with an intention to uncover data/result irregularities and potential research misconduct in scientific research: Vigilantism or volunteerism? Science and Engineering Ethics, 29(4), 24–33.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zimba, O., & Gasparyan, A. Y. (2021). Social media platforms: a primer for researchers. Reumatologia/Rheumatology, 59(2), 68–72.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zinko, R., Ferris, G. R., Blass, F. R., & Dana Laird, M. (2007). Toward a theory of reputation in organizations. In Research in personnel and human resources management (pp. 163–204). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zinko, R., Ferris, G. R., Humphrey, S. E., Meyer, C. J., & Aime, F. (2012). Personal reputation in organizations: Two-study constructive replication and extension of antecedents and consequences. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85(1), 156–180.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zinko, R., Furner, C. P., de Burgh-Woodman, H., Johnson, P., & Sluhan, A. (2020). The addition of images to eWOM in the travel industry: an examination of hotels, cruise ships and fast food reviews. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16(3), 525–541.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zinko, R., Gentry, W. A., & Laird, M. D. (2016). A development of the dimensions of personal reputation in organizations. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 24(4), 634–649.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/minib-2025-0016 | Journal eISSN: 2353-8414 | Journal ISSN: 2353-8503

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 18 - 34

Submitted on: Feb 7, 2026

Accepted on: Jun 14, 2026

Published on: Jul 30, 2026

Published by: ŁUKASIEWICZ RESEARCH NETWORK – INSTITUTE OF AVIATION

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Keywords:

Electronic word-of-mouth,

Organizational reputation,

Scientific and research organizations

Related subjects:

Business and economics,

Business management,

Marketing, sales, customer relations,

Management, organization, corporate governance,

Business development, change management, cooperation,

Key competences in scholarly research

© 2026 LaKeshia Nall, Robert Zinko, Audria Ford, Wayne Ballentine, published by ŁUKASIEWICZ RESEARCH NETWORK – INSTITUTE OF AVIATION
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 58 (2025): Issue 4 (December 2025)