IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/elmark/v32y2022i3d10.1007_s12525-021-00499-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An empirical analysis of experienced reviewers in online communities: what, how, and why to review

Author

Listed:
  • Hoon S. Choi

    (Appalachian State University)

  • Michele Maasberg

    (United States Naval Academy)

Abstract

Online consumer reviews significantly impact market performance as potential customers rely heavily on these reviews for consumer decision making. Accordingly, experienced online reviewers, or highly motivated reviewers who account for the largest attribution of reviews, are proposed to be an important part of the online reviewing ecosystem. This research examines experienced reviewers in the online communities. Using empirical data, this study found that experienced reviewers tend to behave as experts with the aim to achieve a common good with rating and selection attributes similar to critics. Hence, results showed that experienced reviewers leave lower ratings, have less extremity in their ratings, prefer sophisticated products but do not prefer popular products. The female experienced reviewers are less generous than novice female reviewers and their generosity decreases more dramatically than males in the rating propensity as they become experienced reviewers.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoon S. Choi & Michele Maasberg, 2022. "An empirical analysis of experienced reviewers in online communities: what, how, and why to review," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1293-1310, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:elmark:v:32:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s12525-021-00499-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s12525-021-00499-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12525-021-00499-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12525-021-00499-8?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. Fang, Bin & Ye, Qiang & Kucukusta, Deniz & Law, Rob, 2016. "Analysis of the perceived value of online tourism reviews: Influence of readability and reviewer characteristics," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 498-506.
    2. Buchanan, Kathryn & Russo, Riccardo & Anderson, Ben, 2014. "Feeding back about eco-feedback: How do consumers use and respond to energy monitors?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 138-146.
    3. Erik Brynjolfsson & Yu (Jeffrey) Hu & Duncan Simester, 2011. "Goodbye Pareto Principle, Hello Long Tail: The Effect of Search Costs on the Concentration of Product Sales," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(8), pages 1373-1386, August.
    4. Sandra Baez & Daniel Flichtentrei & María Prats & Ricardo Mastandueno & Adolfo M García & Marcelo Cetkovich & Agustín Ibáñez, 2017. "Men, women…who cares? A population-based study on sex differences and gender roles in empathy and moral cognition," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-21, June.
    5. Sujan, Mita, 1985. "Consumer Knowledge: Effects on Evaluation Strategies Mediating Consumer Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 12(1), pages 31-46, June.
    6. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 2008. "Differences in the Economic Decisions of Men and Women: Experimental Evidence," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 57, pages 509-519, Elsevier.
    7. Lafky, Jonathan, 2014. "Why do people rate? Theory and evidence on online ratings," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 554-570.
    8. Liu, Zhiwei & Park, Sangwon, 2015. "What makes a useful online review? Implication for travel product websites," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 140-151.
    9. Sanbonmatsu, David M. & Kardes, Frank R. & Herr, Paul M., 1992. "The role of prior knowledge and missing information in multiattribute evaluation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 76-91, February.
    10. Wang Zhongmin, 2010. "Anonymity, Social Image, and the Competition for Volunteers: A Case Study of the Online Market for Reviews," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-35, May.
    11. repec:dau:papers:123456789/12751 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Katrine Kunst & Ravi Vatrapu, 2019. "Understanding electronic word of behavior: conceptualization of the observable digital traces of consumers’ behaviors," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(3), pages 323-336, September.
    13. Girish Punj, 2013. "Do consumers who conduct online research also post online reviews? A model of the relationship between online research and review posting behavior," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 97-108, March.
    14. James C. Cox & Cary A. Deck, 2006. "When Are Women More Generous than Men?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 44(4), pages 587-598, October.
    15. Aakash Aakash & Ajay Jaiswal, 2020. "Segmentation and Ranking of Online Reviewer Community: The Role of Reviewers' Frequency, Helpfulness, and Recency," International Journal of E-Adoption (IJEA), IGI Global, vol. 12(1), pages 63-83, January.
    16. Chung-Yi Lin & Shu-Yi Liaw & Chao-Chun Chen & Mao-Yuan Pai & Yuh-Min Chen, 2017. "A computer-based approach for analyzing consumer demands in electronic word-of-mouth," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 27(3), pages 225-242, August.
    17. Costa, Ana & Guerreiro, João & Moro, Sérgio & Henriques, Roberto, 2019. "Unfolding the characteristics of incentivized online reviews," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 272-281.
    18. Christopher P. Furner & Robert A. Zinko, 2017. "The influence of information overload on the development of trust and purchase intention based on online product reviews in a mobile vs. web environment: an empirical investigation," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 27(3), pages 211-224, August.
    19. Vamsi Vallurupalli & Indranil Bose, 2020. "Exploring thematic composition of online reviews: A topic modeling approach," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(4), pages 791-804, December.
    20. Vera Herédia-Colaço & Rita Coelho do Vale, 2018. "Seize the Day or Save the World? The Importance of Ethical Claims and Product Nature Congruity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 783-801, October.
    21. Chakravarty, Anindita & Liu, Yong & Mazumdar, Tridib, 2010. "The Differential Effects of Online Word-of-Mouth and Critics' Reviews on Pre-release Movie Evaluation," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 185-197.
    22. Hailin Zhang & Xina Yuan & Tae Ho Song, 2020. "Examining the role of the marketing activity and eWOM in the movie diffusion: the decomposition perspective," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 589-608, September.
    23. 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.
    24. 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)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Rainer Alt, 2022. "Electronic Markets on platform culture," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1019-1031, 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. Supriyo Mandal & Abyayananda Maiti, 2022. "Network promoter score (NePS): An indicator of product sales in E-commerce retailing sector," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1327-1349, September.
    2. Arenas-Márquez, F.J. & Martínez-Torres, M.R. & Toral, S.L., 2021. "How can trustworthy influencers be identified in electronic word-of-mouth communities?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    3. Uttara M. Ananthakrishnan & Beibei Li & Michael D. Smith, 2020. "A Tangled Web: Should Online Review Portals Display Fraudulent Reviews?," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 950-971, September.
    4. Warut Khern-am-nuai & Karthik Kannan & Hossein Ghasemkhani, 2018. "Extrinsic versus Intrinsic Rewards for Contributing Reviews in an Online Platform," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 871-892, December.
    5. Jake Hoskins & Shyam Gopinath & J. Cameron Verhaal & Elham Yazdani, 2021. "The influence of the online community, professional critics, and location similarity on review ratings for niche and mainstream brands," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1065-1087, November.
    6. Harrison-Walker, L. Jean & Jiang, Ying, 2023. "Suspicion of online product reviews as fake: Cues and consequences," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    7. Becchetti, Leonardo & Degli Antoni, Giacomo & Ottone, Stefania & Solferino, Nazaria, 2013. "Allocation criteria under task performance: The gendered preference for protection," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 96-111.
    8. Cho, Daegon & Hwang, Youngdeok & Park, Jongwon, 2018. "More buzz, more vibes: Impact of social media on concert distribution," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 103-113.
    9. Gary Bolton & Kevin Breuer & Ben Greiner & Axel Ockenfels, 2023. "Fixing feedback revision rules in online markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 247-256, April.
    10. Inmaculada Rabadán-Martín & Francisco Aguado-Correa & Nuria Padilla-Garrido, 2020. "Online reputation of 4- and 5-star hotels," Tourism and Hospitality Management, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management, vol. 26(1), pages 157-172, June.
    11. Kaushik, Kapil & Mishra, Rajhans & Rana, Nripendra P. & Dwivedi, Yogesh K., 2018. "Exploring reviews and review sequences on e-commerce platform: A study of helpful reviews on Amazon.in," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 21-32.
    12. C. Cadsby & Maroš Servátka & Fei Song, 2010. "Gender and generosity: does degree of anonymity or group gender composition matter?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 13(3), pages 299-308, September.
    13. Sungsik Park & Woochoel Shin & Jinhong Xie, 2021. "The Fateful First Consumer Review," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 481-507, May.
    14. Pradeep Kumar Ponnamma Divakaran & Jie Xiong, 2022. "Eliciting brand association networks: A new method using online community data," Post-Print hal-03700393, HAL.
    15. 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.
    16. Moradi, Masoud & Dass, Mayukh & Kumar, Piyush, 2023. "Differential effects of analytical versus emotional rhetorical style on review helpfulness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    17. , 2015. "Quality Versus Quantity in Information Transmission: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Working Paper 539, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2015.
    18. 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.
    19. Raoofpanah, Iman & Zamudio, César & Groening, Christopher, 2023. "Review reader segmentation based on the heterogeneous impacts of review and reviewer attributes on review helpfulness: A study involving ZIP code data," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    20. Alistair Wilson & Jonathan Lafky, 2015. "Quality Versus Quantity in Information Transmission: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Working Paper 540, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2015.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Online review; Experienced reviewer; Female reviewer; Expert reviewer; Online review community; Yahoo! Movie;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:elmark:v:32:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s12525-021-00499-8. 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.