Reviewer Motivations, Bias, and Credibility in Online Reviews
نویسنده
چکیده
In the emerging CMC genre of online reviews, lay people, as opposed to professional writers, evaluate products and services, and they receive no pay for their time or effort. This chapter examines possible motivations for writing reviews, particularly efficacy and altruism. In addition, this chapter examines a sample of 640 online reviews to see whether a positive bias existed; indeed, over 48 percent of reviews bestowed the highest rating—5 stars. Finally, the chapter investigates how reviews manifest reviewers’ concern for establishing credibility by examining four reviews’ varying degrees of careful editing: use of low-frequency vocabulary, planned content, prescription-adhering grammar, correct punctuation, and correct spelling. Detailed analysis of the four online reviews—reviews of a recipe, a camcorder, a tour guide service, and a book—according to the extent to which they displayed careful editing, revealed that the reviews displayed spelling and punctuation errors. However, two of the four reviews showed careful
منابع مشابه
Is This Opinion Leader’s Review Useful? Peripheral Cues for Online Review Helpfulness
With the growing popularity of online user-generated reviews, research has emerged to understand the mechanism of how a review is voted helpful, focusing on the central-route influences of review content and quality, yet little research has studied the roles of peripheral cues such as reviewer credibility and contextual factors. Drawing on the theories of elaboration likelihood model and source...
متن کاملCS224w Final Report: Community-Based Yelp Personalization
People use Yelp to search for everything and get recommendations. When we are reading a review, we want to know if the review itself and the reviewer are credible. Thus, it helps if we can know the credibility of the reviewer. In turn, a reviewer might be motivated to write more high-quality reviews. The user scores can be incorporated into calculating new (and hopefully more accurate) scores f...
متن کاملWhat Makes a Review Voted? An Empirical Investigation of Review Voting in Online Review Systems
Research Article Kevin K.Y. Kuan The University of Sydney [email protected] Kai-Lung Hui Hong Kong University of Science and Technology [email protected] Many online review systems adopt a voluntary voting mechanism to identify helpful reviews to support consumer purchase decisions. While several studies have looked at what makes an online review helpful (review helpfulness), little is known ...
متن کاملThe Effects of Repeating Purchase Cues and Mixed Reviews on Product Attribution
Prior research has shown that negative online reviews are more valuable than positive reviews due to differences in casual attribution for positive versus negative information such that negative reviews tend to be relatively attributed more to the product (vs. reviewer) than positive reviews. We propose that the presence of repeating purchase cues, which indicates using a product for a reasonab...
متن کاملTemporal Contiguity and Negativity Bias in the Impact of Online Word of Mouth
Prior research shows that positive online reviews are less valued than negative reviews. The authors argue that this is due to differences in causal attributions for positive versus negative information such that positive reviews tend to be relatively more attributed to the reviewer (vs. product experience) than negative reviews. The presence of temporal contiguity cues, which indicate that rev...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2008