This presentation was created for the Social Media Metrics Spring 2015 at the University of Nebraska - Omaha.

1. E F F E C T S O F
P O O R S O C I A L
I N T E G R A T I O N
Shev Sayed

2. KEY TERMS
• Social Media Integration
• “The act of spreading a brand across popular social media
platforms, and maintaining an active presence.” (Hennessey, NP)
• Audience Formation
• “Clear cut loyalties that effectively narrow their diet of media to a
few flavored offerings.” (Webster, 107)

3. KEY TERMS
• Electronic Word of Mouth
• “Dependent on positive, neutral, or negative experiences related
to a product, service, brand, or company. This definition implies
that eWoM is a coping response resulting from an emotional
reaction/degree of satisfaction that itself is the outcome of an
appraisal process.” (Bagozzi, NP)

4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
• Do audiences form stronger when social integration is communicated
between platforms?
• If social media does not integrate appropriately, does this limit the potential
for electronic word of mouth or engagement?
• What are the effects of poor social integration on social measurement?
• Will poor integration affect the likelihood of an impression or engagement?
• What is the role of the Facebook algorithm in determining what type of
content is delivered to an audience?

5. METHODOLOGY
• Examine the impressions, engagement and like count on 6 videos
over a 1 week period.
• The 6 videos are all similar in shot type, colors, set, and content.
• 3 videos were posted using native integration, 3 videos were
posted using external integration.

6. EXTERNAL VIDEO DATA
Total Impressions: 1117
Total Engagement:115
Total Likes: -2
Total Impressions: 1178
Total Engagement: 79
Total Likes: 3

7. Total Impressions: 1002
Total Engagement: 50
Total Likes: 3
EXTERNAL VIDEO DATA

8. NATIVE VIDEO DATA
Total Impressions: 4644
Total Engagement: 1973
Total Likes: 8
Total Impressions: 5466
Total Engagement: 3978
Total Likes: 12

9. NATIVE VIDEO DATA
Total Impressions: 2923
Total Engagement: 1693
Total Likes: 10

10. INTERPRETATIONS
• Do audiences form stronger when social integration is communicated between
platforms?
• Like count increased over a one week period with native integration.
• If social media does not integrate appropriately, does this limit the potential for
electronic word of mouth or engagement?
• Engagement increased over a one week period with native integration.
• What are the effects of poor social integration on social measurement?
• Over a one week period poor social integration decreased impressions,
engagement, and like count.

11. INTERPRETATIONS
• Native hosted content receives higher impressions and engagement.
Native hosted content typically results in more likes.
• The examined target audience engages most with visual content
(images and video). Though Vimeo is a video hosting site, Facebook
recognizes the post as a link rather than a video. Since the target
audience typically engages most with visual content, the Facebook
algorithm does not distribute the link as evenly as a video. This
results in lower impressions and engagement. Links also result in a
fewer number of likes when compared to natively hosted content.

12. LIMITATIONS
• Integration is constantly evolving.
• A lack of substantial data over an extended period of time.
• Uniformity of content.
• Facebook Algorithm.

13. FURTHER RESEARCH
• More Data over an extended period of time.uniformity of content
• Examine different types of platforms (i.e open source platforms).
• Repeat process on different platforms and compare results.
• Different Media types.

14. REFERENCES
• Hennessey, J. (2013, June 24). 26 Tactics, Tools and Tips to Create a
Strong Social Media Content Strategy. Retrieved April 18, 2015
• Webster, James G. (2014) The Marketplace of Attention: How
Audiences Take Shape in a Digital Age. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 2014.
• Bagozzi, Richard P. The self-regulation of attitudes, intentions, and
behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol 55(2), Jun 1992,
178-204.