IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-01522497.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assisting consumers in detecting fake reviews: The role of identity information disclosure and consensus

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Munzel

    (CRM - Centre de Recherche en Management - UT Capitole - Université Toulouse Capitole - UT - Université de Toulouse - IAE - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises - Toulouse - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Current discussions in academia and in the press increase consumers' awareness of potentially deceptive online reviews. The increasing practice of fake reviews posted online not only jeopardizes the credibility of review sites as important information sources for individuals but also endangers a valuable source of information for service providers. Two studies shed further light on the role of consensus and identity-related information in assisting consumers detect potentially faked reviews. In one preliminary study, a sample of 4826 rejected and 4881 published online reviews was analyzed to investigate the differences in the disclosure of author-related information such as name and age as well as star ratings across those reviews. In the main study, a 3 (identity disclosure) x 2 (consensus) x 2 (priming of fake reviews) experiment was carried out with 390 respondents. The results highlight the relevance of the review's consensus in relation to the overall rating of previous reviews and corroborate the results of the preliminary study from the perspective of an internet user: the value of the amount of available information on the review's author in assisting individuals detect potential fake reviews. This study complements research in computer science by highlighting the relevance of contextual—in addition to textual—indicators that assist internet users in detecting potentially deceptive online reviews.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Munzel, 2016. "Assisting consumers in detecting fake reviews: The role of identity information disclosure and consensus," Post-Print halshs-01522497, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-01522497
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.06.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:hal:journl:halshs-01522497. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.