IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joinma/v33y2016icp43-56.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of User Review Volume on Consumers' Willingness-to-Pay: A Consumer Uncertainty Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Wu, Yinglu
  • Wu, Jianan

Abstract

Numerous studies have investigated the impact of review volume and review variance on product price, but their findings are mixed. The perspective of mismatch cost framework (e.g., Sun 2012) argues that, at the market level, the impact of review variance on product price varies with review valence due to diverse product tastes across individuals. The perspective of classic expected utility framework (e.g., Wu and Ayala Gaytán 2013; Wu et al. 2013) further argues that heterogeneous risk attitudes across individuals directly drives the varying impact of both review volume and variance on willingness-to-pay, regardless of review valence. Although both frameworks have gained good empirical support, neither of them probed whether the impact of review volume or review variance varies within an individual.

Suggested Citation

  • Wu, Yinglu & Wu, Jianan, 2016. "The Impact of User Review Volume on Consumers' Willingness-to-Pay: A Consumer Uncertainty Perspective," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 43-56.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:joinma:v:33:y:2016:i:c:p:43-56
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intmar.2015.11.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094996815000511
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intmar.2015.11.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wakker, Peter P, 2001. "Testing and Characterizing Properties of Nonadditive Measures through Violations of the Sure-Thing Principle," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 1039-1059, July.
    2. King, Robert Allen & Racherla, Pradeep & Bush, Victoria D., 2014. "What We Know and Don't Know About Online Word-of-Mouth: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 167-183.
    3. Robin M. Hogarth & Hillel J. Einhorn, 1990. "Venture Theory: A Model of Decision Weights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(7), pages 780-803, July.
    4. Ulrich Schmidt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2008. "Third-generation prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 203-223, June.
    5. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    6. Monic Sun, 2012. "How Does the Variance of Product Ratings Matter?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(4), pages 696-707, April.
    7. Leisch, Friedrich, 2004. "FlexMix: A General Framework for Finite Mixture Models and Latent Class Regression in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 11(i08).
    8. Mikhail I Melnik & James Alm, 2002. "Does a Seller’s eCommerce Reputation Matter? Evidence from eBay Auctions," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(3), pages 337-349, September.
    9. Grewal, Dhruv & Janakiraman, Ramkumar & Kalyanam, Kirthi & Kannan, P.K. & Ratchford, Brian & Song, Reo & Tolerico, Stephen, 2010. "Strategic Online and Offline Retail Pricing: A Review and Research Agenda," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 138-154.
    10. Kamel Jedidi & Harsharanjeet S. Jagpal & Wayne S. DeSarbo, 1997. "Finite-Mixture Structural Equation Models for Response-Based Segmentation and Unobserved Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 39-59.
    11. Sungha Jang & Ashutosh Prasad & Brian Ratchford, 2012. "How consumers use product reviews in the purchase decision process," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 825-838, September.
    12. Camerer, Colin & Weber, Martin, 1992. "Recent Developments in Modeling Preferences: Uncertainty and Ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 325-370, October.
    13. John A. List, 2004. "Neoclassical Theory Versus Prospect Theory: Evidence from the Marketplace," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 615-625, March.
    14. Jianan Wu & Arvind Rangaswamy, 2003. "A Fuzzy Set Model of Search and Consideration with an Application to an Online Market," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 411-434, March.
    15. Kamins, Michael A & Dreze, Xavier & Folkes, Valerie S, 2004. "Effects of Seller-Supplied Prices on Buyers' Product Evaluations: Reference Prices in an Internet Auction Context," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(4), pages 622-628, March.
    16. Hu, Ye & Wang, Xin, 2010. "Country-of-Origin Premiums for Retailers in International Trades: Evidence from eBay's International Markets," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 200-207.
    17. Jiménez, Fernando R. & Mendoza, Norma A., 2013. "Too Popular to Ignore: The Influence of Online Reviews on Purchase Intentions of Search and Experience Products," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 226-235.
    18. Einhorn, Hillel J & Hogarth, Robin M, 1986. "Decision Making under Ambiguity," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 225-250, October.
    19. repec:bla:jindec:v:50:y:2002:i:3:p:337-49 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Khare, Adwait & Labrecque, Lauren I. & Asare, Anthony K., 2011. "The Assimilative and Contrastive Effects of Word-of-Mouth Volume: An Experimental Examination of Online Consumer Ratings," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 111-126.
    21. Elke U. Weber & Christopher Hsee, 1998. "Cross-Cultural Differences in Risk Perception, but Cross-Cultural Similarities in Attitudes Towards Perceived Risk," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(9), pages 1205-1217, September.
    22. Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Shyam Gopinath & Sriram Venkataraman, 2010. "The Effects of Online User Reviews on Movie Box Office Performance: Accounting for Sequential Rollout and Aggregation Across Local Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 944-957, 09-10.
    23. Kahn, Barbara E & Sarin, Rakesh K, 1988. "Modeling Ambiguity in Decisions under Uncertainty," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(2), pages 265-272, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Casado-Aranda, Luis-Alberto & Dimoka, Angelika & Sánchez-Fernández, Juan, 2019. "Consumer Processing of Online Trust Signals: A Neuroimaging Study," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 159-180.
    2. Kawaf, Fatema & Istanbulluoglu, Doga, 2019. "Online fashion shopping paradox: The role of customer reviews and facebook marketing," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 144-153.
    3. Chan, Haksin & Yang, Morgan X. & Zeng, Kevin J., 2022. "Bolstering ratings and reviews systems on multi-sided platforms: A co-creation perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 208-217.
    4. Yu Wang & Minqiang Li & Haiyang Feng & Nan Feng, 2019. "Optimal sequential releasing strategy for software products in the presence of word-of-mouth and requirements uncertainty," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 153-174, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Paul Dolan & Martin Jones, 2004. "Explaining Attitudes Towards Ambiguity: An Experimental Test Of The Comparative Ignorance Hypothesis," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 51(3), pages 281-301, August.
    2. Huber, Jürgen & Kirchler, Michael & Stefan, Matthias, 2014. "Experimental evidence on varying uncertainty and skewness in laboratory double-auction markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PB), pages 798-809.
    3. Hagen Lindstädt, 2004. "Entscheidungskalküle jenseits des subjektiven Erwartungsnutzens," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 56(6), pages 495-519, September.
    4. Horst Zank, 2010. "On probabilities and loss aversion," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 243-261, March.
    5. Peter, Richard & Ying, Jie, 2020. "Do you trust your insurer? Ambiguity about contract nonperformance and optimal insurance demand," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 938-954.
    6. Kostyra, Daniel S. & Reiner, Jochen & Natter, Martin & Klapper, Daniel, 2016. "Decomposing the effects of online customer reviews on brand, price, and product attributes," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 11-26.
    7. Jean Desrochers & J. Francois Outreville, 2013. "Uncertainty, Ambiguity and Risk Taking: an experimental investigation of consumer behavior and demand for insurance," ICER Working Papers 10-2013, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    8. Smithson, Michael, 1999. "Conflict Aversion: Preference for Ambiguity vs Conflict in Sources and Evidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 179-198, September.
    9. José Lara Resende & George Wu, 2010. "Competence effects for choices involving gains and losses," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 109-132, April.
    10. Koch, Christopher & Schunk, Daniel, 2007. "The Case for Limited Auditor Liability - The Effects of Liability Size on Risk Aversion and Ambiguity Aversion," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 07-04, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    11. King, Robert Allen & Racherla, Pradeep & Bush, Victoria D., 2014. "What We Know and Don't Know About Online Word-of-Mouth: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 167-183.
    12. Aurélien Baillon & Laure Cabantous & Peter Wakker, 2012. "Aggregating imprecise or conflicting beliefs: An experimental investigation using modern ambiguity theories," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 115-147, April.
    13. Nathan F. Dieckmann & Robert Mauro & Paul Slovic, 2010. "The Effects of Presenting Imprecise Probabilities in Intelligence Forecasts," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(6), pages 987-1001, June.
    14. Arthur Snow, 2011. "Ambiguity aversion and the propensities for self-insurance and self-protection," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 27-43, February.
    15. Mr. S. Nuri Erbas, 2002. "Primeron Reforms in a Second-Best Ambiguous Environment: A Case for Gradualism," IMF Working Papers 2002/050, International Monetary Fund.
    16. Arthur Snow, 2010. "Ambiguity and the value of information," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 133-145, April.
    17. W. Viscusi & Harrell Chesson, 1999. "Hopes and Fears: the Conflicting Effects of Risk Ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 157-184, October.
    18. Zhen Li & Aoi Shimizu, 2018. "Impact of Online Customer Reviews on Sales Outcomes: An Empirical Study Based on Prospect Theory," The Review of Socionetwork Strategies, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 135-151, December.
    19. Marcello Basili & Stefano Dalle Mura, 2004. "Ambiguity and macroeconomics:a rationale for price stickiness," Department of Economics University of Siena 428, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    20. Mercè Roca & Robin Hogarth & A. Maule, 2006. "Ambiguity seeking as a result of the status quo bias," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 175-194, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joinma:v:33:y:2016:i:c:p:43-56. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-interactive-marketing/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.