What makes a review voted? An empirical investigation of review voting in online review systems

Journal of the Association for Information Systems

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 48-71

  Kuan, Kevin K Y ^a   Hui, Kai Lung ^b   Prasarnphanich, Pattarawan ^c   Lai, Hok Yin ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Hong Kong)

^c CHULALONGKORN UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

^d HONG KONG BAPTIST UNIVERSITY   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Diagnosticity; Online review systems; Readability; Review extremity; Review helpfulness; Review length; Review valence; Review voting; Reviewer credibility; Sample selection bias; Vividness

Indexed keywords

ONLINE SYSTEMS; PURCHASING; RISK PERCEPTION;

DIAGNOSTICITY; ONLINE REVIEWS; READABILITY; REVIEW VALENCES; REVIEWER CREDIBILITY; SAMPLE SELECTION BIAS; VIVIDNESS;

ELECTRONIC VOTING;

EID: 84921868280     PISSN: 15369323     EISSN: 15583457     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.17705/1jais.00386     Document Type: Article

References (94)

1. Ahluwalia, R. (2000). Examination of psychological processes underlying resistance to persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 217-232.
2. Akerlof, G. A., & Dickens, W. T. (1982). The economic consequences of cognitive dissonance. The American Economic Review, 72(3), 307-319.
3. Baek, H., Ahn, J., & Choi, Y. (2012). Helpfulness of online consumer reviews: readers' objectives and review cues. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 17(2), 99-126.
4. Bhattacharjee, S., Gopal, R. D., Lertwachara, K., & Marsden, J. R. (2006). Consumer search and retailer strategies in the presence of online music sharing. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(1), 129-159.
5. Bikhchandani, S., Hirshleifer, D., & Welch, I. (1998). Learning from the behavior of others: Conformity, fads, and informational cascades. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12(3), 151-170.
6. Bradley, S. D., & Meeds, R. (2002). Surface-structure transformations and advertising slogans: The case for moderate syntactic complexity. Psychology & Marketing, 19(7-8), 595-619.
7. Brown, J., Broderick, A. J., & Lee, N. (2007). Word of mouth communication within online communities: Conceptualizing the online social network. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(3), 2-20.
8. Buvac, V., & Stone, P. (2001). The General Inquirer User’s Guide. Retrieved July 5, 2010, from http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~inquirer/j1_0/manual/manual.html
9. Cao, Q., Duan, W. J., & Gan, Q. W. (2011). Exploring determinants of voting for the "helpfulness" of online user reviews: A text mining approach. Decision Support Systems, 50(2), 511-521.
10. Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information-processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752-766.
11. Chaiken, S., & Maheswaran, D. (1994). Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing—effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task Importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(3), 460-473.
12. Chen, Y., Harper, F. M., Konstan, J., & Li, S. X. (2010). Social comparisons and contributions to online communities: A field experiment on MovieLens. American Economic Review, 100(4) 1358-1398.
13. Cheung, C. M. K., Lee, M. K. O., & Rabjohn, N. (2008). The impact of electronic word-of-mouth—the adoption of online opinions in online customer communities. Internet Research, 18(3), 229-247.
14. Cheung, C. M. Y., Sia, C. L., & Kuan, K. K. Y. (2012). Is this review believable? A study of factors affecting the credibility of online consumer reviews from an ELM perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(8), 618-635.
15. Cheung, M. Y., Luo, C., Sia, C. L., & Chen, H. (2009). Credibility of electronic word-of-mouth: Informational and normative determinants of on-line consumer recommendations. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 13(4), 9-38.
16. Chevalier, J. A., & Mayzlin, D. (2006). The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(3), 345-354.
17. Cooper, J. (2007). Cognitive dissonance: Fifty years of a classic theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18. Cui, G., Lui, H. K., & Guo, X. N. (2012). The effect of online consumer reviews on new product sales. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 17(1), 39-57.
19. Dellarocas, C., Zhang, X. Q., & Awad, N. F. (2007). Exploring the value of online product reviews in forecasting sales: The case of motion pictures. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(4), 23-45.
20. Dou, X., Walden, J. A., Lee, S., & Lee, J. Y. (2012). Does source matter? Examining source effects in online product reviews. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1555-1563.
21. Eisend, M. (2004). Is it still worth to be credible? A meta-analysis of temporal patterns of source credibility effects in marketing. Advances in Consumer Research, 31(1), 352-357.
22. Eisend, M. (2010). Explaining the joint effect of source credibility and negativity of information in two-sided messages. Psychology & Marketing, 27(11), 1032-1049.
23. eMarketer. (2010). The role of customer product reviews. Retrieved from http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Role-of-Customer-Product-Reviews/1008019
24. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
25. Fiske, S. T. (1980). Attention and weight in person perception—the impact of negative and extreme behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(6), 889-906.
26. Flesch, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32(3), 221-233.
27. Flesch, R. F. (1951). How to test readability. New York: Harper.
28. Flesch, R. F. (1974). The art of readable writing: With the Flesch readability formula. New York: Harper & Row.
29. Forman, C., Ghose, A., & Wiesenfeld, B. (2008). Examining the relationship between reviews and sales: The role of reviewer identity disclosure in electronic markets. Information Systems Research, 19(3) 291-313.
30. Ghose, A., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2006). Designing ranking systems for consumer reviews: The impact of review subjectivity on product sales and review quality. Paper presented at the Workshop on Information Technology and Systems, Milwaukee, WI.
31. Ghose, A., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2011). Estimating the helpfulness and economic impact of product reviews: Mining text and reviewer characteristics. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 23(10), 1498-1512.
32. Greene, W. H. (2007). Econometric analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
33. Greenwald, A. G., & Ronis, D. L. (1978). Twenty years of cognitive dissonance: Case study of the evolution of a theory. Psychological Review,85(1), 53-57.
34. Hamilton, M. A., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The effect of language intensity on receiver evaluations of message, source, and topic. In M. Allen & R. Preiss (Eds.), Persuasion: Advances through Meta-analysis(pp. 99-138). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
35. Hamilton, M. A., & Nowak, K. L. (2005). Information systems concepts across two decades: An empirical analysis of trends in theory, methods, process, and research domains. Journal of Communication, 55(3), 529-553.
36. Hansen, M. T., & Haas, M. R. (2001). Competing for attention in knowledge markets: Electronic document dissemination in a management consulting company. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(1), 1-28.
37. Harmon-Jones, E. E., & Mills, J. E. (1999). Cognitive dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
38. Heckman, J. J. (1976). Common structure of statistical-models of truncation, sample selection and limited dependent variables and a simple estimator for such models. Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, 5(4), 475-492.
39. Heckman, J. J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47(1), 153-161.
40. Herr, P. M., Kardes, F. R., & Kim, J. (1991). Effects of word-of-mouth and product-attribute information on persuasion—an accessibility-diagnosticity perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(4), 454-462.
41. Holmqvist, K., Holsanova, J., Barthelson, M., & Lundqvist, D. (2003). Reading or scanning? A study of newspaper and net paper reading. In J. Hyona, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind’s eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 657-670). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
42. Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
43. Hu, N., Liu, L., & Zhang, J. J. (2008). Do online reviews affect product sales? The role of reviewer characteristics and temporal effects. Information Technology & Management, 9(3) 201-214.
44. Hu, N., Pavlou, P. A., & Zhang, J. (2009). Overcoming the J-shaped distribution of product reviews. Communications of the ACM, 52(10), 144-147.
45. Ito, T. A., Larsen, J. T., Smith, N. K., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1998). Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(4), 887-900.
46. Jiang, Z. H., & Benbasat, I. (2004). Virtual product experience: Effects of visual and functional control of products on perceived diagnosticity and flow in electronic shopping. Journal of Management Information Systems, 21(3), 111-147.
47. Jiang, Z. H., & Benbasat, I. (2007). Investigating the influence of the functional mechanisms of online product presentations. Information Systems Research, 18(4), 454-470.
48. Jones, L. W., Sinclair, R. C., & Courneya, K. S. (2003). The effects of source credibility and message framing on exercise intentions, behaviors, and attitudes: An integration of the elaboration likelihood model and prospect theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(1), 179-196.
49. Khare, A., Labrecque, L. I., & Asare, A. K. (2011). The assimilative and contrastive effects of word-of-mouth volume: An experimental examination of online consumer ratings. Journal of Retailing, 87(1), 111-126.
50. Korfiatis, N., Garcia-Bariocanal, E., & Sanchez-Alonso, S. (2012). Evaluating content quality and helpfulness of online product reviews: The interplay of review helpfulness vs. review content. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 11(3), 205-217.
51. Korfiatis, N., Rodríguez, D., & Sicilia, M. A. (2008). The impact of readability on the usefulness of online product reviews: A case study on an online bookstore. In M. D. Lytras, J. M. Carroll, E. Damiani, & R. D. Tennyson (Eds.), Emerging technologies and information systems for the knowledge society (pp. 423-432). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
52. Lee, M., & Youn, S. (2009). Electronic word of mouth (eWOM): How eWOM platforms influence consumer product judgement. International Journal of Advertising, 28(3), 473-499.
53. Liu, Y., Jin, J., Ji, P., Harding, J. A., & Fung, R. Y. K. (2013). Identifying helpful online reviews: A product designer's perspective. Computer-Aided Design, 45(2), 180-194.
54. Lowrey, T. M. (1998). The effects of syntactic complexity on advertising persuasiveness. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(2), 187-206.
55. MacInnis, D. J., Moorman, C., & Jaworski, B. J. (1991). Enhancing and measuring consumers motivation, opportunity, and ability to process brand information from ads. Journal of Marketing, 55(4), 32-53.
56. McGuire, W. J. (1968). Personality and attitude change: An information-processing theory. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock, & T. M. Ostrom (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes(pp.171-196). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
57. McGuire, W. J. (1969). The nature of attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology(pp. 136-314). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
58. Mudambi, S. M., & Schuff, D. (2010). What makes a helpful online review? A study of customer reviews on Amazon.com. MIS Quarterly, 34(1), 185-200.
59. Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human Inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
60. Okada, E. M. (2005). Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(1), 43-53.
61. Otterbacher, J. (2009). “Helpfulness” in online communities: A measure of message quality. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-4, 955-964.
62. Pan, Y., & Zhang, J. Q. (2011). Born unequal: A study of the helpfulness of user-generated product reviews. Journal of Retailing, 87(4), 598-612.
63. Pang, B., & Lee, L. (2004). A sentimental education: Sentiment analysis using subjectivity summarization based on minimum cuts. Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics.
64. Park, C. W., & Young, S. M. (1986). Consumer response to television commercials—the impact of involvement and background music on brand attitude formation. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(1), 11-24.
65. Pathak, B., Garfinkel, R., Gopal, R. D., Venkatesan, R., & Yin, F. (2010). Empirical analysis of the impact of recommender systems on sales. Journal of Management Information Systems, 27(2), 159-188.
66. Pavlou, P. A., & Dimoka, A. (2006). The nature and role of feedback text comments in online marketplaces: Implications for trust building, price premiums, and seller differentiation. Information Systems Research, 17(4), 392-414.
67. Petty, R. E., & Brinol, P. (2002). Attitude change: The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In G. Bartels & W. Nelissen (Eds.), Marketing for sustainability: Towards transactional policy making(pp. 176-190). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
68. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion—classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: W.C. Brown.
69. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
70. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness—the moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146.
71. Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1998). Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 323-390). New York: McGraw-Hill.
72. Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of five decades' evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243-281.
73. Purnawirawan, N., de Pelsmacker, P., & Dens, N. (2012). Balance and sequence in online reviews: How perceived usefulness affects attitudes and intentions. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4), 244-255.
74. Qiu, L. Y., Pang, J., & Lim, K. H. (2012). Effects of conflicting aggregated rating on eWOM review credibility and diagnosticity: The moderating role of review valence. Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 631-643.
75. Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(4), 296-320.
76. Sadoski, M. (1999). Theoretical, empirical, and practical considerations in designing informational text. Document Design, 1(1), 25-34.
77. Sadoski, M., Goetz, E. T., & Fritz, J. B. (1993). A causal model of sentence recall—effects of familiarity, concreteness, comprehensibility, and interestingness. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25(1), 5-16.
78. Sen, S., & Lerman, D. (2007). Why are you telling me this? An examination into negative consumer reviews on the Web. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(4), 76-94.
79. Skowronski, J. J., & Carlston, D. E. (1987). Social judgment and social memory—the role of cue diagnosticity in negativity, positivity, and extremity biases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(4), 689-699.
80. Smith, D., Menon, S., & Sivakumar, K. (2005). Online peer and editorial recommendations, trust, and choice in virtual markets. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(3), 15-37.
81. Smith, N. K., Cacioppo, J. T., Larsen, J. T., & Chartrand, T. L. (2003). May I have your attention, please: Electrocortical responses to positive and negative stimuli. Neuropsychologia, 41(2), 171-183.
82. Strong, S. R. (1968). Counseling: An interpersonal influence process. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 15(3), 215-224.
83. Sussman, S. W., & Siegal, W. S. (2003). Informational influence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Information Systems Research, 14(1), 47-65.
84. Tormala, Z. L., & Petty, R. E. (2004). Source credibility and attitude certainty: A metacognitive analysis of resistance to persuasion. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(4), 427-442.
85. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty—heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124-1131.
86. Van Hoye, G., & Lievens, F. (2009). Tapping the grapevine: A closer look at word-of-mouth as a recruitment source. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 341-352.
87. Vonk, R. (1993). The negativity effect in trait ratings and in open-ended descriptions of persons. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19(3), 269-278.
88. Wang, X., Teo, H. H., & Wei, K. K. (2007). The acceptance of product recommendation from Web-based word-of-mouth systems: Effects of information, informant, and system characteristics. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems.
89. Weathers, D., Sharma, S., & Wood, S. L. (2007). Effects of online communication practices on consumer perceptions of performance uncertainty for search and experience goods. Journal of Retailing, 83(4), 393-401.
90. ZDNet. (2008). 26% of online customers go to Amazon reviews before buying. Retrieved from http://www.zdnet.com/article/26-of-online-customers-go-to-amazon-reviews-before-buying/
91. Zhang, J. Q., Craciun, G., & Shin, D. (2010). When does electronic word-of-mouth matter? A study of consumer product reviews. Journal of Business Research, 63(12), 1336-1341.
92. Zhang, R. C., & Tran, T. (2009). Helping e-commerce consumers make good purchase decisions: A user reviews-based approach. E-Technologies-Innovation in an Open World, 26, 1-11.
93. Zhang, X. M., & Zhu, F. (2010). Group size and incentive to contribute: A natural experiment at Chinese Wikipedia. American Economic Review, 101(4), 1601-1615.
94. Zhu, F., & Zhang, X. (2010). Impact of online consumer reviews on sales: The moderating role of product and consumer characteristics. Journal of Marketing, 74(2), 133-148.