The impact of review valence and awareness of deceptive practices on consumers’ responses to online product ratings and reviews

Abstract

Many online retailers and some manufacturers/service providers have recently been engaging in questionable practices, where product reviews are often fabricated and/or posted without sufficient clarity and objectivity. Across an exploratory study and two main studies, we empirically examine this phenomenon and observe a pattern of effects that suggests that review valence (i.e., the average number of rating-stars a product receives) influences product attitudes and intentions, but that these outcomes are significantly impacted by the extent to which consumers are aware of potentially deceptive online review practices. Awareness of deceptive practices was found to differentially influence attitudes and intentions, depending upon whether the star-ratings were perfect (5/5 stars), highly positive (4.9/5 stars), or generally positive (4.5/5 or 4.7/5 stars). Participants' perceptions of the e-retailer's manipulative intent were also shown to mediate these effects, with higher perceptions of perceived manipulative intent yielding less favorable product attitudes and reduced purchase intentions.

Rating valence versus rating distribution: perceived helpfulness of word of mouth in e-commerce

“…First, rating valence has a significant effect on purchase intention. These results are similar to other recent studies conducted (Karabas et al 2021 ; Maslowska et al 2017 ; Von Helversen et al 2018 ; Yang et al 2016 ). The current study was not only limited to a comparison with the amount of WOM (Chintagunta et al 2010 ; Gopinath et al 2014 ) but also showed the magnitude of the influence of rating valence when compared with the rating distribution.…”

“…Next, in rating valence, the following two viewpoints were considered. First, WOM reviews with 4.2 stars are more likely to influence purchase than perfect 5-star ones, as stated above (Karabas et al 2021 ; Maslowska et al 2017 ). Second, EC platforms use product information and accumulated WOM data to recommend products that are presumed to be easy to purchase and are present at the top of the search page (Barton, 2006 ; Liu and Pang 2018 ; Lin 2014 ).…”

“…When consumers post WOM on an EC platform, it is common to provide a rating. Owing to its prominent placement, rating valence is one of the most recognized and compelling sources of information (Karabas et al 2021 ). Rating valence is more influential than the amount of WOM (Maslowska et al 2017 ; Yang et al 2016 ).…”

“…For mobile phones (Gopinath et al 2014 ) and movies (Chintagunta et al 2010 ), rating valence has been confirmed to have a greater effect than the amount of WOM. However, a 4.2-star WOM is more likely to influence a purchase than a perfect 5-star WOM that gives the impression of tampering (Karabas et al 2021 ; Maslowska et al 2017 ). Additionally, as attention is paid to rating valence, individual WOMs with large deviations from this value are less useful to consumers (Baek et al 2012 ).…”

“…WOM is reliable because it highlights a product's positive and negative aspects (Filieri and Mariani 2021 ). Therefore, a perfect 5-star WOM gives the impression of tampering (Karabas et al 2021 ; Maslowska et al 2017 ). In other words, the effect of polarized evaluation changes depending on the preferred purchase channel.…”