Effects of conflicting aggregated rating on eWOM review credibility and diagnosticity : The moderating role of review valence
Research output: Journal Publications and Reviews (RGC: 21, 22, 62) › 21_Publication in refereed journal › peer-review
Author(s)
Related Research Unit(s)
Detail(s)
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 631-643 |
| Journal / Publication | Decision Support Systems |
| Volume | 54 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2012 |
Link(s)
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.
Research Area(s)
- Aggregated rating, Attribution, Electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM), Individual review, Perceived credibility, Perceived diagnosticity
Citation Format(s)
Effects of conflicting aggregated rating on eWOM review credibility and diagnosticity : The moderating role of review valence. / Qiu, Lingyun; Pang, Jun; Lim, Kai H.
In: Decision Support Systems, Vol. 54, No. 1, 12.2012, p. 631-643.Research output: Journal Publications and Reviews (RGC: 21, 22, 62) › 21_Publication in refereed journal › peer-review
