Quality or Quantity? The Power of Expert Reviews in the Presence of Conflicting Aggregated Ratings

Anna Naujoks
{"title":"Quality or Quantity? The Power of Expert Reviews in the Presence of Conflicting Aggregated Ratings","authors":"Anna Naujoks","doi":"10.15358/2511-8676-2021-2-119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many consumers consult online reviews to evaluate services. Online review platforms present them with multiple cues by which to assess whether a review message is useful in their decision-making process. However, consumers are often faced with conflicting opinions from different information sources. By using the theoretical framework of dual-process theory and signaling theory, this paper examines the effect of majority and minority influences.It further investigates how expert reviewers are perceived, and the role played by the total number of available reviews. A 2 x 2 x 2 (review valence x expertise of conflicting review x number of reviews) scenario-based experiment is conducted. The results demonstrate that expert sources weaken the prominent influence of the majority, especially when majority size is small. The research contributes to existing literature by explaining how the simultaneous presence of majority and minority influences affects consumers’ decision-making process. Moreover, it examines the power of online expert reviewers.","PeriodicalId":17054,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice","volume":"25 1","pages":"119-129"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15358/2511-8676-2021-2-119","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many consumers consult online reviews to evaluate services. Online review platforms present them with multiple cues by which to assess whether a review message is useful in their decision-making process. However, consumers are often faced with conflicting opinions from different information sources. By using the theoretical framework of dual-process theory and signaling theory, this paper examines the effect of majority and minority influences.It further investigates how expert reviewers are perceived, and the role played by the total number of available reviews. A 2 x 2 x 2 (review valence x expertise of conflicting review x number of reviews) scenario-based experiment is conducted. The results demonstrate that expert sources weaken the prominent influence of the majority, especially when majority size is small. The research contributes to existing literature by explaining how the simultaneous presence of majority and minority influences affects consumers’ decision-making process. Moreover, it examines the power of online expert reviewers.
质量还是数量?在相互冲突的综合评级存在的专家评论的力量
许多消费者通过在线评论来评估服务。在线评论平台为他们提供了多种线索,通过这些线索,他们可以评估评论信息在他们的决策过程中是否有用。然而,消费者经常面临来自不同信息来源的相互矛盾的意见。本文运用双过程理论和信号理论的理论框架,考察了多数影响和少数影响的影响。它进一步研究了专家审稿人是如何被感知的,以及可用审稿人总数所扮演的角色。进行2 × 2 × 2(评论效价x冲突评论的专业知识x评论数)的场景实验。结果表明,专家资源削弱了多数人的显著影响,尤其是在多数人规模较小的情况下。该研究通过解释多数和少数影响的同时存在如何影响消费者的决策过程,为现有文献做出了贡献。此外,它还检验了在线专家审稿人的力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
9 months
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信