IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v35y2024i2p629-641.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Direct Communication and Two-Sided Matching Quality on a Digital Platform: A Perspective of Choice Based on Consideration Set

Author

Listed:
  • Xia Zhao

    (Department of Management Information Systems, Terry College of Business, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602)

  • Ling Xue

    (Department of Management Information Systems, Terry College of Business, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602)

  • Peijian Song

    (Department of Marketing and Electronic Business, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China)

  • Elena Karahanna

    (Department of Management Information Systems, Terry College of Business, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602)

Abstract

Extant research has revealed that direct communication between buyers and sellers on digital platforms facilitates transaction completion. However, the understanding of how direct communication influences the matching quality of these two-sided transactions is still limited. This study uses a multimethod approach to provide a perspective on how direct communication contributes to matching quality. In an observational study in the context of a peer-to-peer platform for long-term real estate rental properties, the study shows that longer direct phone communication between the renter (i.e., buyers) and the host (i.e., sellers) enables the renter to choose a relatively more unique alternative within her consideration set (i.e., an alternative that is distant from the average attribute levels of the consideration set) for the transaction. Also, we find that the relationship between having direct phone communication and ex post transaction satisfaction is stronger when a relatively more unique alternative is chosen. The implication is that direct phone communication allows the renter to collect supplemental information that is not observable online. Consequently, the renter can better leverage the breadth of her search results (i.e., the consideration set) in making her choice decision. We complement the observational study with a field survey to verify this informational mechanism. Furthermore, we conduct two randomized experiments to verify the motivation for engaging in direct phone communication and for choosing unique alternatives within the consideration set. Taken together, these insights extend the existing understanding of the benefits of direct communication on digital platforms.

Suggested Citation

  • Xia Zhao & Ling Xue & Peijian Song & Elena Karahanna, 2024. "Direct Communication and Two-Sided Matching Quality on a Digital Platform: A Perspective of Choice Based on Consideration Set," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(2), pages 629-641, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:35:y:2024:i:2:p:629-641
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.2023.1235
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.2023.1235
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.2023.1235?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Liran Einav & Chiara Farronato & Jonathan Levin, 2016. "Peer-to-Peer Markets," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 615-635, October.
    2. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    3. King, Gary & Zeng, Langche, 2001. "Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 137-163, January.
    4. Yili Hong & Paul A. Pavlou, 2017. "On Buyer Selection of Service Providers in Online Outsourcing Platforms for IT Services," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 547-562, September.
    5. Xue (Jane) Tan & Youwei Wang & Yong Tan, 2019. "Impact of Live Chat on Purchase in Electronic Markets: The Moderating Role of Information Cues," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 1248-1271, December.
    6. DeSarbo, Wayne S, et al, 2002. "A Gravity-Based Multidimensional Scaling Model for Deriving Spatial Structures Underlying Consumer Preference/Choice Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(1), pages 91-100, June.
    7. Babur De Los Santos & Ali Hortacsu & Matthijs R. Wildenbeest, 2012. "Testing Models of Consumer Search Using Data on Web Browsing and Purchasing Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2955-2980, October.
    8. Steven D. Levitt & Chad Syverson, 2008. "Market Distortions When Agents Are Better Informed: The Value of Information in Real Estate Transactions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(4), pages 599-611, November.
    9. Gunter J. Hitsch & Ali Hortaçsu & Dan Ariely, 2010. "Matching and Sorting in Online Dating," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 130-163, March.
    10. John R. Hauser, 1978. "Consumer Preference Axioms: Behavioral Postulates for Describing and Predicting Stochastic Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(13), pages 1331-1341, September.
    11. Bart J. Bronnenberg & Jun B. Kim & Carl F. Mela, 2016. "Zooming In on Choice: How Do Consumers Search for Cameras Online?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(5), pages 693-712, September.
    12. Gordon Burtch & Anindya Ghose & Sunil Wattal, 2013. "An Empirical Examination of the Antecedents and Consequences of Contribution Patterns in Crowd-Funded Markets," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 499-519, September.
    13. D. Harrison McKnight & Vivek Choudhury & Charles Kacmar, 2002. "Developing and Validating Trust Measures for e-Commerce: An Integrative Typology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 334-359, September.
    14. Stephan Seiler & Fabio Pinna, 2017. "Estimating Search Benefits from Path-Tracking Data: Measurement and Determinants," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(4), pages 565-589, July.
    15. Huber, Joel & Payne, John W & Puto, Christopher, 1982. "Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 9(1), pages 90-98, June.
    16. Capon, Noel & Kuhn, Deanna, 1982. "Can Consumers Calculate Best Buys?," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 8(4), pages 449-453, 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. Apostolos Filippas & John J. Horton & Richard J. Zeckhauser, 2020. "Owning, Using, and Renting: Some Simple Economics of the “Sharing Economy”," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 4152-4172, September.
    2. Yili Hong & Jing Peng & Gordon Burtch & Ni Huang, 2021. "Just DM Me (Politely): Direct Messaging, Politeness, and Hiring Outcomes in Online Labor Markets," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 786-800, September.
    3. Michael Rivera & Liangfei Qiu & Subodha Kumar & Tony Petrucci, 2021. "Are Traditional Performance Reviews Outdated? An Empirical Analysis on Continuous, Real-Time Feedback in the Workplace," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 517-540, June.
    4. Hämäläinen, Saara, 2022. "Multiproduct search obfuscation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:2:p:136-149 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Marianne Bertrand & Dean S. Karlan & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "What's Psychology Worth? A Field Experiment in the Consumer Credit Market," Working Papers 918, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    7. Martinovici, A., 2019. "Revealing attention - how eye movements predict brand choice and moment of choice," Other publications TiSEM 7dca38a5-9f78-4aee-bd81-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Andrés Elberg & Pedro M. Gardete & Rosario Macera & Carlos Noton, 2019. "Dynamic effects of price promotions: field evidence, consumer search, and supply-side implications," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-58, March.
    9. Zhang, Tao & Zhang, David, 2007. "Agent-based simulation of consumer purchase decision-making and the decoy effect," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(8), pages 912-922, August.
    10. Raluca M. Ursu & Qingliang Wang & Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 2020. "Search Duration," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(5), pages 849-871, September.
    11. Zhijun Yan & Lini Kuang & Liangfei Qiu, 2022. "Prosocial behaviors and economic performance: Evidence from an online mental healthcare platform," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(10), pages 3859-3876, October.
    12. Marcu, Emanuel & Noussair, Charles, 2018. "Sequential Search with a Price Freeze Option - Theory and Experimental Evidence," Other publications TiSEM dacf4815-c001-44c3-bda3-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Georgios Gerasimou, 2016. "Asymmetric dominance, deferral, and status quo bias in a behavioral model of choice," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(2), pages 295-312, February.
    14. Diane Pelly & Orla Doyle, 2022. "Nudging in the workplace: increasing participation in employee EDI wellness events," Working Papers 202208, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    15. Ravi Bapna & Jui Ramaprasad & Galit Shmueli & Akhmed Umyarov, 2016. "One-Way Mirrors in Online Dating: A Randomized Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3100-3122, November.
    16. Rafael P. Greminger, 2022. "Optimal Search and Discovery," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(5), pages 3904-3924, May.
    17. Slaughter, Jerel E. & Bagger, Jessica & Li, Andrew, 2006. "Context effects on group-based employee selection decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 47-59, May.
    18. Helmers, Christian & Krishnan, Pramila & Patnam, Manasa, 2019. "Attention and saliency on the internet: Evidence from an online recommendation system," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 216-242.
    19. Masatlioglu, Yusufcan & Uler, Neslihan, 2013. "Understanding the reference effect," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 403-423.
    20. Chunhua Wu & Koray Cosguner, 2020. "Profiting from the Decoy Effect: A Case Study of an Online Diamond Retailer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(5), pages 974-995, September.
    21. Georgios, Gerasimou, 2013. "A Behavioural Model of Choice in the Presence of Decision Conflict," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-25, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).

    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:inm:orisre:v:35:y:2024:i:2:p:629-641. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.