IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jcopol/v45y2022i3d10.1007_s10603-022-09514-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Unreliability of Online Review Mechanisms

Author

Listed:
  • M. Narciso

    (Maastricht University)

Abstract

Online reviews have an undeniable impact on the market and are an important source of consumer information. From a legal perspective, online reviews actively influence consumers’ decisions to enter into a contract. Moreover, online reviews convey pre-contractual information that consumers find relevant and easy to understand, unlike the pre-contractual information disclosed as a result of EU law–based information duties. From this perspective, online reviews could potentially be seen as a complement of the flawed EU law–based information paradigm and regulatory improvement options based on reviews could be explored. However, the unreliability of online reviews is an obstacle that haunts consumers, practitioners, regulators, and academics alike. This unreliability has previously been identified as a reason not to award online reviews a more significant role in the EU law–based regulatory framework of pre-contractual information in consumer contracts. This paper explores the merits of this argument by discussing how the unreliability of online reviews is currently regulated. This paper takes a broad perspective on regulation, focusing not only on EU consumer legislation, but also looking at standardization, soft law, self-regulation, and the role of national consumer authorities. Overall, this paper argues that there are sufficient measures in place to shift the debate from the unreliability of reviews to reviews’ potential role in the protection of consumer informational interests.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Narciso, 2022. "The Unreliability of Online Review Mechanisms," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 349-368, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jcopol:v:45:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10603-022-09514-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10603-022-09514-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10603-022-09514-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10603-022-09514-7?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. Thakur, Rakhi, 2018. "Customer engagement and online reviews," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 48-59.
    2. Dina Mayzlin & Yaniv Dover & Judith Chevalier, 2014. "Promotional Reviews: An Empirical Investigation of Online Review Manipulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(8), pages 2421-2455, August.
    3. 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.
    4. Liran Einav & Chiara Farronato & Jonathan Levin, 2016. "Peer-to-Peer Markets," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 615-635, October.
    5. Benjamin Edelman, 2017. "The market design and policy of online review platforms," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 635-649.
    6. Bettina Lis & Christian Neßler, 2014. "Electronic Word of Mouth," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 6(1), pages 63-65, February.
    7. Yubo Chen & Jinhong Xie, 2008. "Online Consumer Review: Word-of-Mouth as a New Element of Marketing Communication Mix," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(3), pages 477-491, March.
    8. Chris Nosko & Steven Tadelis, 2015. "The Limits of Reputation in Platform Markets: An Empirical Analysis and Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 20830, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Hunold, Matthias & Kesler, Reinhold & Laitenberger, Ulrich, 2018. "Hotel rankings of online travel agents, channel pricing and consumer protection," DICE Discussion Papers 300, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    10. Guo, Yue & Barnes, Stuart J. & Jia, Qiong, 2017. "Mining meaning from online ratings and reviews: Tourist satisfaction analysis using latent dirichlet allocation," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 467-483.
    11. Willem Boom, 2011. "Price Intransparency, Consumer Decision Making and European Consumer Law," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 359-376, September.
    12. Michael Luca & Georgios Zervas, 2016. "Fake It Till You Make It: Reputation, Competition, and Yelp Review Fraud," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(12), pages 3412-3427, December.
    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. Young Joon Park & Jaewoo Joo & Charin Polpanumas & Yeujun Yoon, 2021. "“Worse Than What I Read?” The External Effect of Review Ratings on the Online Review Generation Process: An Empirical Analysis of Multiple Product Categories Using Amazon.com Review Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-22, September.
    2. Dominik Gutt & Jürgen Neumann & Steffen Zimmermann & Dennis Kundisch & Jianqing Chen, 2018. "Design of Review Systems - A Strategic Instrument to shape Online Review Behavior and Economic Outcomes," Working Papers Dissertations 42, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    3. 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.
    4. Paul Belleflamme & Martin Peitz, 2018. "Inside the Engine Room of Digital Platforms: Reviews, Ratings, and Recommendations," Working Papers halshs-01714549, HAL.
    5. Sherry He & Brett Hollenbeck & Davide Proserpio, 2022. "The Market for Fake Reviews," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(5), pages 896-921, September.
    6. Hui, Xiang & Klein, Tobias & Stahl, Konrad, 2022. "Learning from Online Ratings," CEPR Discussion Papers 17006, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Sungsik Park & Woochoel Shin & Jinhong Xie, 2021. "The Fateful First Consumer Review," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 481-507, May.
    8. Lingfang (Ivy) Li & Steven Tadelis & Xiaolan Zhou, 2020. "Buying reputation as a signal of quality: Evidence from an online marketplace," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(4), pages 965-988, December.
    9. Gesche, Tobias, 2018. "Reference Price Shifts and Customer Antagonism: Evidence from Reviews for Online Auctions," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181650, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    10. Erfan Rezvani & Christian Rojas, 2022. "Firm responsiveness to consumers' reviews: The effect on online reputation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 898-922, November.
    11. Weijia (Daisy) Dai & Ginger Jin & Jungmin Lee & Michael Luca, 2018. "Aggregation of consumer ratings: an application to Yelp.com," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 289-339, September.
    12. Andreas J. Steur & Mischa Seiter, 2021. "Properties of feedback mechanisms on digital platforms: an exploratory study," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(4), pages 479-526, May.
    13. Apostolos Filippas & John J. Horton & Joseph M. Golden, 2022. "Reputation Inflation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(4), pages 733-745, July.
    14. Xiang Hui & Tobias J. Klein & Konrad Stahl, 2021. "When and Why Do Buyers Rate in Online Markets?," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2021_267v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    15. Cheng Zhao & Chong Alex Wang, 2023. "A cross-site comparison of online review manipulation using Benford’s law," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 365-406, March.
    16. Brett Hollenbeck & Sridhar Moorthy & Davide Proserpio, 2019. "Advertising Strategy in the Presence of Reviews: An Empirical Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 793-811, September.
    17. Alex Wood-Doughty, 2016. "Do Employers Learn from Public, Subjective, Performance Reviews?," Working Papers 16-11, NET Institute.
    18. Georgios Zervas & Davide Proserpio & John W. Byers, 2021. "A first look at online reputation on Airbnb, where every stay is above average," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 1-16, March.
    19. Aishwarya Deep Shukla & Guodong (Gordon) Gao & Ritu Agarwal, 2021. "How Digital Word-of-Mouth Affects Consumer Decision Making: Evidence from Doctor Appointment Booking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1546-1568, March.
    20. Ina Garnefeld & Sabrina Helm & Ann-Kathrin Grötschel, 2020. "May we buy your love? psychological effects of incentives on writing likelihood and valence of online product reviews," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(4), pages 805-820, December.

    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:kap:jcopol:v:45:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10603-022-09514-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.