IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i6p3297-d518794.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards Digital Sustainability: Profiles of Millennial Reviewers, Reputation Scores and Intrinsic Motivation Matter

Author

Listed:
  • Alejandro García-Jurado

    (Department of Computer Science and Numerical Analysis, Rabanales Campus, University of Córdoba, 14071 Córdoba, Spain)

  • José Javier Pérez-Barea

    (Department of Business Management, Faculty of Business Administration, Córdoba Campus, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, 14004 Córdoba, Spain)

  • Francisco Fernández-Navarro

    (Department of Quantitative Methods, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, 41704 Sevilla, Spain)

Abstract

Profiles of millennial reviewers and gamification can contribute to digital sustainability as a driver of innovation and growth. The study aims to detect if there are profiles of reviewers that can be grouped together, in order to apply a specific gamification to them and to make it sustainable over time. In this way, more information will be generated through the reviews that will help responsible consumers to choose better in their purchase decisions. The objective of this study is twofold. First, it aims to characterize online product reviewers based on their intrinsic motivations and self-perception when they comment, identifying their main motivations. Second, it aims to classify these individuals based on the acceptance of gamification elements while commenting on and relating them to the intrinsic attributes that determine their behaviors. A survey method design was used to capture responses from 187 millennial reviewers of Amazon in Spain. The relationships between motivations and the types of reviewer were extracted from the accommodation of the dataset using decision trees (DTs), specifically, the J48 algorithm. To contribute to the second objective, this paper elaborates a typology of reviewer analysis based on cluster analysis and DTs. It is confirmed that online product reviewers can be characterized based on their intrinsic motivations, which are mainly egoistic motives, competence and social relatedness. The obtained results show that the J48 DT provides excellent classification accuracy of approximately 95% in identifying reviewers based on intrinsic motivations. Similarly, egoistic intrinsic motives are decisive in focusing gamification strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Alejandro García-Jurado & José Javier Pérez-Barea & Francisco Fernández-Navarro, 2021. "Towards Digital Sustainability: Profiles of Millennial Reviewers, Reputation Scores and Intrinsic Motivation Matter," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-19, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:6:p:3297-:d:518794
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/6/3297/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/6/3297/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon, Herbert A, 1993. "Altruism and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 156-161, May.
    2. Kozinets, Robert V., 1999. "E-tribalized marketing?: the strategic implications of virtual communities of consumption," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 252-264, June.
    3. Yoon-Joo Park, 2018. "Predicting the Helpfulness of Online Customer Reviews across Different Product Types," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Charla Mathwick & Caroline Wiertz & Ko de Ruyter, 2008. "Social Capital Production in a Virtual P3 Community," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(6), pages 832-849, November.
    5. Liu, Qianqian (Ben) & Karahanna, Elena & Watson, Richard T., 2011. "Unveiling user-generated content: Designing websites to best present customer reviews," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 231-240, May.
    6. Satish Nambisan, 2017. "Digital Entrepreneurship: Toward a Digital Technology Perspective of Entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 41(6), pages 1029-1055, November.
    7. Labrecque, Lauren I. & vor dem Esche, Jonas & Mathwick, Charla & Novak, Thomas P. & Hofacker, Charles F., 2013. "Consumer Power: Evolution in the Digital Age," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 257-269.
    8. Kai Huotari & Juho Hamari, 2017. "A definition for gamification: anchoring gamification in the service marketing literature," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 27(1), pages 21-31, February.
    9. Alejandro García-Jurado & José Javier Pérez-Barea & Rodrigo J. Nova, 2021. "A New Approach to Social Entrepreneurship: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-16, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bradford, Tonya Williams & Grier, Sonya A. & Henderson, Geraldine Rosa, 2017. "Weight Loss Through Virtual Support Communities: A Role for Identity-based Motivation in Public Commitment," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 9-23.
    2. Busca, Laurent & Bertrandias, Laurent, 2020. "A Framework for Digital Marketing Research: Investigating the Four Cultural Eras of Digital Marketing," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-19.
    3. Brodie, Roderick J. & Ilic, Ana & Juric, Biljana & Hollebeek, Linda, 2013. "Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: An exploratory analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 105-114.
    4. Tony Cooper & Constantino Stavros & Angela R. Dobele, 2019. "The levers of engagement: an exploration of governance in an online brand community," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(3), pages 240-254, May.
    5. Benedict G. C. Dellaert, 2019. "The consumer production journey: marketing to consumers as co-producers in the sharing economy," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 238-254, March.
    6. Ana Babić Rosario & Kristine Valck & Francesca Sotgiu, 2020. "Conceptualizing the electronic word-of-mouth process: What we know and need to know about eWOM creation, exposure, and evaluation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 422-448, May.
    7. Kuo, Ying-Feng & Feng, Lien-Hui, 2013. "Relationships among community interaction characteristics, perceived benefits, community commitment, and oppositional brand loyalty in online brand communities," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 948-962.
    8. Leitão, Maria Eugénia & Amaral, Miguel & Carvalho, Ana, 2024. "Reconceptualizing socio-tech entrepreneurship: A systematic literature review and research agenda," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    9. Liviu Ciucan-Rusu & Valentina Vasile & Daniel Stefan & Calin-Adrian Comes & Anamari-Beatrice Stefan & Mihai Timus & Anca Oltean & Elena Bunduchi & Maria-Alexandra Popa, 2022. "Consumers Behavior Determinants on Online Local Market Platforms in COVID-19 Pandemic—A Probit Qualitative Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(22), pages 1-17, November.
    10. Johanna Gummerus & Veronica Liljander & Reija Sihlman, 2017. "Do Ethical Social Media Communities Pay Off? An Exploratory Study of the Ability of Facebook Ethical Communities to Strengthen Consumers’ Ethical Consumption Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(3), pages 449-465, September.
    11. Tonya Williams Bradford, 2021. "We can fix this! Donor activism for nonprofit supply generation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 397-417, March.
    12. Elia, Gianluca & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Urbinati, Andrea, 2020. "Implementing open innovation through virtual brand communities: A case study analysis in the semiconductor industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    13. Raïes, Karine & Mühlbacher, Hans & Gavard-Perret, Marie-Laure, 2015. "Consumption community commitment: Newbies' and longstanding members' brand engagement and loyalty," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2634-2644.
    14. Pedeliento, Giuseppe & Andreini, Daniela & Veloutsou, Cleopatra, 2020. "Brand community integration, participation and commitment: A comparison between consumer-run and company-managed communities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 481-494.
    15. Weinberg, Bruce D. & de Ruyter, Ko & Dellarocas, Chrysanthos & Buck, Michael & Keeling, Debbie Isobel, 2013. "Destination Social Business: Exploring an Organization's Journey with Social Media, Collaborative Community and Expressive Individuality," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 299-310.
    16. de Almeida, Stefânia Ordovás & Scaraboto, Daiane & dos Santos Fleck, João Pedro & Dalmoro, Marlon, 2018. "Seriously Engaged Consumers: Navigating Between Work and Play in Online Brand Communities," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 29-42.
    17. Sanam Akhavannasab & Danilo C. Dantas & Sylvain Senecal, 2018. "Consumer empowerment in consumer–firm relationships: conceptual framework and implications for research," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 8(3), pages 214-227, December.
    18. Eiteneyer, Nils & Bendig, David & Brettel, Malte, 2019. "Social capital and the digital crowd: Involving backers to promote new product innovativeness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    19. Labrecque, Lauren I. & vor dem Esche, Jonas & Mathwick, Charla & Novak, Thomas P. & Hofacker, Charles F., 2013. "Consumer Power: Evolution in the Digital Age," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 257-269.
    20. Dineva, Denitsa & Breitsohl, Jan & Garrod, Brian & Megicks, Philip, 2020. "Consumer Responses to Conflict-Management Strategies on Non-Profit Social Media Fan Pages," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 118-136.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:6:p:3297-:d:518794. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.