Better abstract or concrete, narrating or not: optimal strategies for the communication of innovation

IF 5 3区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Ernesto Cardamone, Gaetano Miceli, Maria Antonietta Raimondo
{"title":"Better abstract or concrete, narrating or not: optimal strategies for the communication of innovation","authors":"Ernesto Cardamone, Gaetano Miceli, Maria Antonietta Raimondo","doi":"10.1108/ejim-10-2023-0856","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This paper investigates how two characteristics of language, abstractness vs concreteness and narrativity, influence user engagement in communication exercises on innovation targeted to the general audience. The proposed conceptual model suggests that innovation fits well with more abstract language because of the association of innovation with imagination and distal construal. Moreover, communication of innovation may benefit from greater adherence to the narrativity arc, that is, early staging, increasing plot progression and climax optimal point. These effects are moderated by content variety and emotional tone, respectively.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>Based on a Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) application on a sample of 3225 TED Talks transcripts, the authors identify 287 TED Talks on innovation, and then applied econometric analyses to test the hypotheses on the effects of abstractness vs concreteness and narrativity on engagement, and on the moderation effects of content variety and emotional tone.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The authors found that abstractness (vs concreteness) and narrativity have positive effects on engagement. These two effects are stronger with higher content variety and more positive emotional tone, respectively.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>This paper extends the literature on communication of innovation, linguistics and text analysis by evaluating the roles of abstractness vs concreteness and narrativity in shaping appreciation of innovation.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This paper reports conceptual and empirical analyses on innovation dissemination through a popular medium – TED Talks – and applies modern text analysis algorithms to test hypotheses on the effects of two pivotal dimensions of language on user engagement.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":51462,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Innovation Management","volume":"61 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Innovation Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ejim-10-2023-0856","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This paper investigates how two characteristics of language, abstractness vs concreteness and narrativity, influence user engagement in communication exercises on innovation targeted to the general audience. The proposed conceptual model suggests that innovation fits well with more abstract language because of the association of innovation with imagination and distal construal. Moreover, communication of innovation may benefit from greater adherence to the narrativity arc, that is, early staging, increasing plot progression and climax optimal point. These effects are moderated by content variety and emotional tone, respectively.

Design/methodology/approach

Based on a Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) application on a sample of 3225 TED Talks transcripts, the authors identify 287 TED Talks on innovation, and then applied econometric analyses to test the hypotheses on the effects of abstractness vs concreteness and narrativity on engagement, and on the moderation effects of content variety and emotional tone.

Findings

The authors found that abstractness (vs concreteness) and narrativity have positive effects on engagement. These two effects are stronger with higher content variety and more positive emotional tone, respectively.

Research limitations/implications

This paper extends the literature on communication of innovation, linguistics and text analysis by evaluating the roles of abstractness vs concreteness and narrativity in shaping appreciation of innovation.

Originality/value

This paper reports conceptual and empirical analyses on innovation dissemination through a popular medium – TED Talks – and applies modern text analysis algorithms to test hypotheses on the effects of two pivotal dimensions of language on user engagement.

抽象好还是具体好,叙述好还是不叙述好:创新传播的最佳战略
目的 本文研究了语言的两个特点--抽象性与具体性和叙述性--如何影响用户参与面向普通受众的创新交流活动。所提出的概念模型表明,由于创新与想象力和远距离构思相关联,因此创新非常适合使用较为抽象的语言。此外,创新的传播可能得益于对叙事弧线的更多坚持,即早期分期、增加情节进展和高潮最佳点。设计/方法/途径作者在对 3225 篇 TED 演讲稿样本进行潜狄利克特分配(LDA)的基础上,确定了 287 篇关于创新的 TED 演讲稿,然后应用计量经济学分析检验了抽象性与具体性、叙事性对参与度的影响,以及内容多样性和情感基调的调节作用。研究局限/意义本文通过评估抽象性与具体性和叙述性在塑造创新鉴赏力方面的作用,扩展了有关创新传播、语言学和文本分析的文献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
17.60%
发文量
107
期刊介绍: The subject of innovation is receiving increased interest both from companies because of their increased awareness of the impact of innovation in determining market success and also from the research community. Academics are increasingly beginning to place innovation as a priority area in their research agenda. This impetus has been partly fuelled by the Economic & Social Research Council (ESRC) who have designated innovation as one of nine research areas in their research initiative schemes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信