IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rcitxx/v23y2020i10p1248-1260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why are ratings so high in the sharing economy? Evidence based on guest perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Jacques Bulchand-Gidumal
  • Santiago Melián-González

Abstract

One issue that has been identified in the literature is the relatively high average of guest client ratings that properties receive on sharing accommodation platforms. High ratings seem to be the norm in most online platforms that include consumer reviews, but the case of Airbnb seems more extreme than the others. Several reasons have been proposed to explain this apparently positively-biased eWOM. However, none of these proposals have taken into account the guests’ perspective on the matter. In this study, we develop a two-step methodology to research and verify the reasons for this issue. First, with a sample of 391 Airbnb guests, we analyse the specific causes that explain these high ratings. Second, we carry out in-depth interviews with 20 additional guests who did not rate or who recognized that they were not fully accurate in their reviews. Not wanting to harm a reputed host that performed well in stays that did not involve serious problems was the main reason behind these behaviours. Theoretical and managerial implications are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacques Bulchand-Gidumal & Santiago Melián-González, 2020. "Why are ratings so high in the sharing economy? Evidence based on guest perspectives," Current Issues in Tourism, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(10), pages 1248-1260, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rcitxx:v:23:y:2020:i:10:p:1248-1260
    DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2019.1602597
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13683500.2019.1602597
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13683500.2019.1602597?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.

    More about this item

    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:taf:rcitxx:v:23:y:2020:i:10:p:1248-1260. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rcit .

    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.