2020
DOI: 10.1177/0022243720941832
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Polarity of Online Reviews: Prevalence, Drivers and Implications

Abstract: In this research, the authors investigate the prevalence, robustness, and possible reasons underlying the polarity of online review distributions, with the majority of the reviews at the positive end of the rating scale, a few reviews in the midrange, and some reviews at the negative end of the scale. Compiling a large data set of online reviews—over 280 million reviews from 25 major online platforms—the authors find that most reviews on most platforms exhibit a high degree of polarity, but the platforms vary … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
62
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 135 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
(107 reference statements)
3
62
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The predominant positivity in comments and reviews left by users online has already been noted in a recent study including 25 online platforms [51]. We can also support these findings for diet-tracking app reviews, as our results suggest that the users leaving reviews for diet-tracking apps generally tend to give positive ratings.…”
Section: Principal Findingssupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The predominant positivity in comments and reviews left by users online has already been noted in a recent study including 25 online platforms [51]. We can also support these findings for diet-tracking app reviews, as our results suggest that the users leaving reviews for diet-tracking apps generally tend to give positive ratings.…”
Section: Principal Findingssupporting
confidence: 89%
“…However, the size, timeliness, and richness of UGC does not guarantee that these data are representative. Relying on social listening could bias perceptions of the marketplace due to differences in users across platforms (Schweidel and Moe 2014; Schoenmueller, Netzer, and Stahl 2020).…”
Section: Marketing Data and The Streetlight Effectmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Platforms for UGC have proven to be a rich data source, but limited research has documented differences across platforms (Schoenmueller, Netzer, and Stahl 2020; Schweidel and Moe 2014). As users’ motives for engaging with each other likely differ across platforms, inferring social ties from one venue will not capture all meaningful connections between users.…”
Section: Customer Acquisitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, controlling for the business's average rating prior to consumption accounts for differences in expectations that may arise from selecting a specific restaurant, as demonstrated by Yin et al (2016). Moreover, Schoenmueller et al (2020) validated that the number of reviews by reviewer prior to visiting reviewing business serves as an effective proxy to control for rating polarity-related self-selection into reviewing. We followed this approach and incorporated _ _ to safeguard against systematic differences of reviewers to self-select into reviewing a particularly negative or positive experience that could bias our focal coefficients.…”
Section: Empirical Methodsmentioning
confidence: 84%