IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/nbripp/v7y2016i2p231-257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do review valence and review volume impact consumers’ purchase decisions as assumed?

Author

Listed:
  • Jing Yang
  • Rathindra Sarathy
  • Stephen M. Walsh

Abstract

Purpose - To explore the psychological mechanism through which consumer reviews affect people’s purchasing decisions and behavior, this study aims to examine the impact of statistical evidence embedded in product reviews on consumers’ perceptions and purchasing intentions. Design/methodology/approach - The effects review valence and review volume are tested using a 3 (valence: positive vs neutral vs negative) × 2 (volume: high vs low) quasi-experimental design and online questionnaires. Findings - The study finds that review valence has a stronger impact on consumers’ perceptions than review volume does. Negative reviews induce higher risk perception and a less favorable attitude toward purchases compared to positive reviews. In addition, although both attitude toward purchase and subjective norm are good antecedents of purchase intention, the attitude statistically has a stronger impact than the subjective norm. Research limitations/implications - This study contributes to extant literature from three perspectives. The authors have reexamined the findings of econometric models and advanced their implications by explaining the related psychological changes in people’s perceptions. Second, the authors have extended the application of the theory of reasoned action and found it to be a good fit in explaining consumers’ behavior related to consumer reviews. And finally, the authors have provided a clear guideline on the magnitude of the effects of review valence and volume on consumers’ perceptions. Originality/value - This study provides a good complement to econometric studies from both theoretical and practical perspectives. It bridges the gap between exploratory studies and behavioral studies in the field of consumer reviews.

Suggested Citation

  • Jing Yang & Rathindra Sarathy & Stephen M. Walsh, 2016. "Do review valence and review volume impact consumers’ purchase decisions as assumed?," Nankai Business Review International, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(2), pages 231-257, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:nbripp:v:7:y:2016:i:2:p:231-257
    DOI: 10.1108/NBRI-11-2015-0028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/NBRI-11-2015-0028/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/NBRI-11-2015-0028/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/NBRI-11-2015-0028?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Li, Liangqiang & Yang, Liang & Zhao, Meng & Liao, Miyan & Cao, Yunzhong, 2022. "Exploring the success determinants of crowdfunding for cultural and creative projects: An empirical study based on signal theory," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    2. Takumi Kato, 2022. "Rating valence versus rating distribution: perceived helpfulness of word of mouth in e-commerce," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(11), pages 1-24, November.

    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:eme:nbripp:v:7:y:2016:i:2:p:231-257. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.