Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 2,332 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 467 - Next  Jump:
2012 - International Communication Association Pages: unavailable || Words: 1463 words || 
Info
1. Utz, Sonja., Vermeulen, Ivar. and Limas de Brito, Diana. "The Reviewer Reviewed: Impact of Reviewer Credibility Indicators on Online Review Persuasiveness" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Sheraton Phoenix Downtown, Phoenix, AZ, May 24, 2012 Online <PDF>. 2019-05-23 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p553547_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: We extend prior research on the processing of online reviews by examining the influence of review valence and reviewer credibility cues in the domain of low involvement/risk products - in this case free online fanfiction stories. Moreover, we test whether reviews do not only influence consumer intentions, but also post-exposure product evaluation. A 2 (review valence: negative vs. positive) x 2 (reviewer experience: low vs. high) x 2 (writing style: poor vs. good)online experiment revealed significant effects of all three factors. The effects of review valence on reading intention and evaluation where strongest for well-written expert reviews. The results indicate that reviewer credibility cues are also processed heuristically in case of low involvement/risk products.

2015 - International Communication Association 65th Annual Conference Pages: unavailable || Words: 2073 words || 
Info
2. Vendemia, Megan. and Lee-Won, Roselyn. "(Re)viewing the Reviews: Effects of Review Emotionality, Valence, and Reviewer Status Cues on Credibility Perceptions" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association 65th Annual Conference, Caribe Hilton, San Juan, Puerto Rico, May 21, 2015 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-05-23 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p986244_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: We examined the effects of review emotionality (high vs. low), valence (positive vs. negative), and reviewer status cues (presence vs. absence) on source credibility (competence, trustworthiness, and goodwill) and content credibility. We also tested a moderated mediation model with the source credibility dimensions as possible mediators and need for affect as a moderator for the effects of review emotionality. An online experiment conducted with U.S. adults (N = 327) with stimuli featured as reviews from Amazon.com revealed that high-emotionality reviews, when compared with low-emotionality reviews, were perceived lower in source credibility, in both perceived competence and trustworthiness, and also in content credibility perceptions. We also found that the effects of emotionality on content credibility were significantly mediated by trustworthiness of the source and this mediation was moderated by review readers’ need for affect, with the credibility-hampering effects of emotionality found only among participants with low levels of need for affect.

2017 - ICA's 67th Annual Conference Pages: unavailable || Words: unavailable || 
Info
3. Lee-Won, Roselyn., Vendemia, Megan. and Coduto, Kathryn. "When Are Emotional Online Product Reviews Persuasive? The Role of Reviewer Expertise Cues and Review Valence" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ICA's 67th Annual Conference, Hilton San Diego Bayfront, San Diego, USA, May 25, 2017 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-05-23 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p1230081_index.html>
Publication Type: Extended Abstract
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Emotionality of messages can exert significant influence on how people process and act upon the message. In electronic word-of-moth (eWOM) research, studies on how message emotionality of online product reviews affects consumer decision-making has yielded mixed results. Guided by consumer behavior research based on attribution theory, the present research examined whether reviewer expertise cues moderate the effects of review emotionality on perceived argument strength and purchase intention. An online experiment conducted with U.S. adults (N = 368) showed that a three-way interaction effect of review emotionality, reviewer expertise cues, and review valence on perceived argument strength was significant. Analyses further revealed that review emotionality had a significant effect on perceived argument strength only when the review valence was positive and the reviewer expertise cues were present. Likewise, review emotionality influenced purchase intention through perceived argument strength only when the review valence was positive and the reviewer expertise cues were present.

2016 - ICA's 66th Annual Conference Words: 415 words || 
Info
4. Willemsen, Lotte., Verlegh, Peeter. and Zwinkels, Eline. "The Hidden Costs of Paying Your Reviewers: How Incentives Affect the Content, Perceived Usefulness and Credibility of Online Reviews" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ICA's 66th Annual Conference, Hilton Fukuoka Sea Hawk, Fukuoka, Japan, <Not Available>. 2019-05-23 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p1106432_index.html>
Publication Type: Session Paper
Abstract: Online reviews are known for having positive effects on sales. To capitalize on these effects, companies are increasingly rewarding consumers to write online reviews. Until now, it is not clear how this practice impacts the content of reviews, and subsequently their perceived credibility and usefulness. Reward programs raise concerns about the value of reviews as unbiased sources of information, especially given the commonly-held belief that rewarded reviews are more positive in valence than non-rewarded reviews, and contain more persuasive rhetoric. This paper investigates this issue by exploring how incentives affect (1) the content characteristics, and subsequently (2) the perceived usefulness and credibility of rewarded reviews (vis-à-vis traditional, unrewarded, reviews). In Study 1 we conducted a content analysis comparing reviews posted on an actual review website (n=700) during: (1) a period where reviews were rewarded with a small incentive (5-dollar book voucher); (2) a period where reviews were rewarded with a larger incentive (chance of winning an iPad); and (3) a non-promotional period. Reviews from the promotional periods were not any more positive than those from the non-promotional period. However, reviews from the large incentive period (vs. small and no-incentive) contained more content characteristics that are commonly used to persuade an audience of a message. These included the use of multiple punctuation (!!!), blank spaces (proxy for textual aesthetics), expertise claims (“I’m an expert”), and emotional arguments (“I love this product”). However, reviews from the large incentive period were also less likely to contain rational arguments (“the 4x-optical zoom gives vivid photos”). Study 2 tested whether consumers are able to differentiate rewarded reviews from unrewarded reviews based on these content characteristics, and, furthermore, are able to protect themselves against unfair persuasion (n=114). A one-factor between-subjects experiment with two cells showed that reviews with characteristics from rewarded reviews raised less suspicion than reviews with characteristics from unrewarded reviews. At the same time, however, reviews with characteristics from rewarded reviews were considered less useful. More importantly, these reviews were less likely to incite purchase intentions than unrewarded reviews. These effects were explained by perceptions of usefulness. Altogether these results suggest that rewarded reviews differ from unrewarded reviews in terms of content characteristics. Although these textual deviances do not make a rewarded review more suspicious, they do make them less useful in the eyes of consumers, with negative consequences for purchase intentions. As this study is the first to examine the potential negative effects of rewarding reviewers, it offers important implications on the value of reviews and reward programs.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 467 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy