The effect of subjectivity and objectivity in online reviews: A convolutional neural network approach

Abstract

User reviews are now an essential source of information for consumers, exerting strong influence on purchase decisions. Broadly speaking, reviews rated by consumers as more helpful exert a greater influence downstream. The current research examines how the linguistic characteristics of a review affect its helpfulness score. Using a convolutional neural network (CNN), this research analyzes the linguistic subjectivity and objectivity of over 2 million reviews on Amazon. The results show that, ceteris paribus, both linguistic subjectivity and objectivity have a positive impact on review helpfulness. However, contrary to consumers' intuition, when subjectivity and objectivity are combined in the same review, review helpfulness increases less than their respective separate effects would predict, especially for hedonic products. We conceptualize that this results from the increased complexity of messages mixing subjective and objective sentences, which requires more effortful processing. The findings extend the literature on online reviews, word‐of‐mouth, and text analysis in marketing, and offer practical implications for marketing communication and facilitation of reviews.

How to respond to negative online reviews: language style matters

“…Second, our research adds to the literature on language styles in marketing communication. Previous studies have explored the impact of various linguistic dimensions in online reviews, such as figurative versus literal language (Kronrod and Danziger, 2013;Wu et al, 2017), concrete versus abstract language (Schellekens et al, 2010(Schellekens et al, , 2013Aerts et al, 2017;Lee and Theokary, 2021), and subjective versus objective language (Liu et al, 2018;Park et al, 2023). Implicitness in marketing communication has been recognized for its effectiveness (Ahearne et al, 2000;Hwang and Shin, 2019;Sawyer and Howard, 1991), as implicit advertisements, for instance, are less coercive and more likely to evoke positive inferences, favorable brand beliefs, and attitudes among audiences (Martin et al, 2003;Yi, 1990).…”

“…In the first stage, recipients assume that the information is true and concentrate on interpreting the content of the information, and in the second stage they devote cognitive resources to evaluating the validity of the information (Gilbert, 1991). Regarding the validity, this study specifically shed light on prospective consumers' evaluation towards the objectivity of NORs, which refers to the extent to which prospective consumers view NORs as devoid of emotion, unbiased, and impartial (Blaagaard, 2013;Park et al, 2023). The willingness and abilities of recipients to commit cognitive resources to evaluate the objectivity of the information in the second stage depends on the amount of resources devoted to interpreting the information in the first stage (Hung and Wyer, 2008).…”

“…In the first stage, recipients assume that the information is true and concentrate on interpreting the content of the information, and in the second stage they devote cognitive resources to evaluating the validity of the information (Gilbert, 1991). Regarding the validity, this study specifically shed light on prospective consumers’ evaluation towards the objectivity of NORs, which refers to the extent to which prospective consumers view NORs as devoid of emotion, unbiased, and impartial (Blaagaard, 2013; Park et al. , 2023).…”

Evaluating Public Library Services in Taiwan through User-Generated Content: Analyzing Google Maps Reviews

“…Various online social networks (OSNs) have rapidly developed on the Internet. Previous studies have analyzed different aspects of these OSNs, primarily focusing on the formation and evolution of the networks and the propagation of information within them [12]. Social networks enable users to connect with friends, discover new acquaintances, and share UGC, including videos, documents, blogs, and photos [13].…”

“…A previous study found that linguistic subjectivity and objectivity positively affect review helpfulness. However, combining subjective and objective sentences in the same review can reduce its perceived helpfulness due to the increased complexity and the effort required for processing [12]. In the context of public library services, the advantages of using internet reviews include access to real-time, diverse perspectives and detailed user experiences that traditional survey methods may not capture.…”