IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infott/v22y2020i1d10.1007_s40558-019-00156-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Choosing between hotels: impact of bimodal rating summary statistics and maximizing behavioral tendency

Author

Listed:
  • Ludovik Coba

    (Free University of Bozen-Bolzano)

  • Laurens Rook

    (Delft University of Technology)

  • Markus Zanker

    (Free University of Bozen-Bolzano)

Abstract

Rating summary statistics are basic aggregations that reflect users’ assessments of experienced products and services in numerical form. Thus far, scholars primarily investigated textual reviews, but dedicated considerably less time and effort exploring the potential impact of plain rating summary statistics on people’s choice behavior. Notwithstanding their fundamental nature, however, rating summary statistics also are relevant to electronic commerce in general, and to e-tourism in particular. In this work, we attempted to fill this void, by exploring the effects of different types of rating attributes (the mean rating value, the overall number of ratings, and the bimodality of rating distributions) on hotel choice behavior. We also investigated whether individual differences in the cause of people’s maximizing behavioral tendency moderated the effect of rating summary statistics on hotel choice behavior. Results of an eye-tracked conjoint experiment show that people’s high or low on decision difficulty as the cause of maximization determined whether and how rating summary statistics have an impact on the choice between hotels. Implications for the tourism and hospitality domain are addressed.

Suggested Citation

  • Ludovik Coba & Laurens Rook & Markus Zanker, 2020. "Choosing between hotels: impact of bimodal rating summary statistics and maximizing behavioral tendency," Information Technology & Tourism, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 167-186, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:infott:v:22:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s40558-019-00156-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s40558-019-00156-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40558-019-00156-z
    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/s40558-019-00156-z?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. Elena Reutskaja & Rosemarie Nagel & Colin F. Camerer & Antonio Rangel, 2011. "Search Dynamics in Consumer Choice under Time Pressure: An Eye-Tracking Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 900-926, April.
    2. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    3. Benjamin Scheibehenne & Rainer Greifeneder & Peter M. Todd, 2010. "Can There Ever Be Too Many Options? A Meta-Analytic Review of Choice Overload," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(3), pages 409-425, October.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:2:p:126-146 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Dorfman, Robert, 1979. "A Formula for the Gini Coefficient," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 61(1), pages 146-149, February.
    6. Park, Jeong-Yeol & Jang, SooCheong (Shawn), 2013. "Confused by too many choices? Choice overload in tourism," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 1-12.
    7. Bart de Langhe & Philip M. Fernbach & Donald R. Lichtenstein, 2016. "Navigating by the Stars: Investigating the Actual and Perceived Validity of Online User Ratings," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(6), pages 817-833.
    8. Vithala R. Rao, 2008. "Developments in Conjoint Analysis," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Berend Wierenga (ed.), Handbook of Marketing Decision Models, chapter 0, pages 23-53, Springer.
    9. Glauber Eduardo De Oliveira Santos & Vicente Ramos & Javier Rey-Maquieira, 2011. "A Microeconomic Model of Multidestination Tourism Trips," Tourism Economics, , vol. 17(3), pages 509-529, June.
    10. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. "Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    11. 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.
    12. Michael Antioco & Kristof Coussement, 2018. "Misreading of consumer dissatisfaction in online product reviews: Writing style as a cause for bias," Post-Print hal-02572087, HAL.
    13. Xiang, Zheng & Du, Qianzhou & Ma, Yufeng & Fan, Weiguo, 2017. "A comparative analysis of major online review platforms: Implications for social media analytics in hospitality and tourism," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 51-65.
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i::p:371-388 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Judith A. Chevalier & Yaniv Dover & Dina MayzlinDina Mayzlin, 2018. "Channels of Impact: User Reviews When Quality Is Dynamic and Managers Respond," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(5), pages 688-709, September.
    16. Xiang, Zheng & Magnini, Vincent P. & Fesenmaier, Daniel R., 2015. "Information technology and consumer behavior in travel and tourism: Insights from travel planning using the internet," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 244-249.
    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. 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.
    2. Fabrice Le Lec & Marianne Lumeau & Benoît Tarroux, 2016. "Choice or information overload ?," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes & University of Caen) 2016-07, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes, University of Caen and CNRS.
    3. Zuschke, Nick, 2020. "The impact of task complexity and task motivation on in-store marketing effectiveness: An eye tracking analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 337-350.
    4. Michel Wedel & Rik Pieters & Ralf Lans, 2023. "Modeling Eye Movements During Decision Making: A Review," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 697-729, June.
    5. Zuschke, Nick, 2020. "An analysis of process-tracing research on consumer decision-making," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 305-320.
    6. Malone, Trey & Lusk, Jayson L., 2017. "The excessive choice effect meets the market: A field experiment on craft beer choice," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 8-13.
    7. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean & Daniel Martin, 2011. "Search and Satisficing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(7), pages 2899-2922, December.
    8. Yucheng Zhang & Zhiling Wang & Lin Xiao & Lijun Wang & Pei Huang, 2023. "Discovering the evolution of online reviews: A bibliometric review," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-22, December.
    9. James Agarwal & Wayne DeSarbo & Naresh K. Malhotra & Vithala Rao, 2015. "An Interdisciplinary Review of Research in Conjoint Analysis: Recent Developments and Directions for Future Research," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 2(1), pages 19-40, March.
    10. Jhunjhunwala, Tanushree, 2021. "Searching to avoid regret: An experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 298-319.
    11. Greenacre, Luke & Martin, James & Patrick, Sarah & Jaeger, Victoria, 2016. "Boundaries of the centrality effect during product choice," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 32-38.
    12. Erlend Dancke Sandorf & Danny Campbell, 2019. "Accommodating satisficing behaviour in stated choice experiments," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(1), pages 133-162.
    13. Ary José A. de Souza-Jr. & Flávio Terto, 2021. "The propensity to adaptation under the new era of climate changes," Working Papers REM 2021/0167, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    14. Minnema, Alec & Bijmolt, Tammo H.A. & Gensler, Sonja & Wiesel, Thorsten, 2016. "To Keep or Not to Keep: Effects of Online Customer Reviews on Product Returns," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 253-267.
    15. David Stadelmann & Benno Torgler, 2012. "Bounded Rationality and Voting Decisions Exploring a 160-Year Period," Working Papers 2012.70, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    16. Kashaev, Nail & Aguiar, Victor H., 2022. "A random attention and utility model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    17. Sungsik Park & Woochoel Shin & Jinhong Xie, 2021. "The Fateful First Consumer Review," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 481-507, May.
    18. Shao, Wei & Lye, Ashley & Rundle-Thiele, Sharyn, 2009. "Different strokes for different folks: A method to accommodate decision -making heterogeneity," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 495-501.
    19. Aguiar, Victor H. & Boccardi, Maria Jose & Dean, Mark, 2016. "Satisficing and stochastic choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 445-482.
    20. Peter Stüttgen & Peter Boatwright & Robert T. Monroe, 2012. "A Satisficing Choice Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 878-899, 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:spr:infott:v:22:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s40558-019-00156-z. 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.