Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Effects of conflicting aggregated rating on eWOM review credibility and diagnosticity: The moderating role of review valence

Research output: Journal Publications and ReviewsRGC 21 - Publication in refereed journalpeer-review

Abstract

Most B2C websites provide consumers with two types of electronic Word-of-Mouth (eWOM) information, namely aggregated rating and individual review. The present research investigates the effects of a conflicting aggregated rating on the perceived credibility and diagnosticity of individual reviews. The results of our laboratory experiment demonstrate that the presence of a conflicting aggregated rating will decrease review credibility and diagnosticity via its negative effect on consumers' product-related attributions of the review. In addition, these effects are more salient for positive reviews than for negative ones. These findings contribute to a better understanding of the interactions between different types of eWOM information and provide practitioners with actionable suggestions on how to improve the design of their eWOM systems. © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)631-643
JournalDecision Support Systems
Volume54
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2012

Research Keywords

  • Aggregated rating
  • Attribution
  • Electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM)
  • Individual review
  • Perceived credibility
  • Perceived diagnosticity

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Effects of conflicting aggregated rating on eWOM review credibility and diagnosticity: The moderating role of review valence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this