Although word-of-mouth (WOM) is recognized as a powerful force in persuasion, we know little about the new communication phenomenon known as e-WOM. One of the main forms of e-WOM is the product reviews consumers post on different Web sites, and how this form of e-WOM stands up to this claim is yet unknown. For example, do consumers trust the accuracy of these reviews posted by anonymous reviewers, and, do readers trust negative and positive reviews equally? Past research has shown that people tend to weight negative information more than positive information during evaluation. Through an observation study and two laboratory experiments, we investigate the existence of this negativity effect in e-WOM consumer reviews for utilitarian versus hedonic products, and investigate the influence of the reader's attributions regarding the reviewer's motivations on this. Both types of studies show that product type moderates the effect of review valence, and readers exhibit a negativity bias for utilitarian product reviews only. Furthermore, the lab studies show that the reader's attributions about the motivations of the reviewer mediate the effect of this moderation on their attitude about the review. We find that compared with the utilitarian case, readers of negative hedonic product reviews are more likely to attribute the negative opinions expressed, to the reviewer's internal (or non-product related) reasons; and therefore are less likely to find the negative reviews useful. However, in the utilitarian case, readers’ are more likely to attribute the reviewer's negative opinions to external (or product related) motivations, and therefore find negative reviews more useful than positive reviews on average.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdavalR.Sometimes IT Just Feels Right: The Differential Weighting of Affect-Consistent and Affect-Inconsistent Product InformationJournal of Consumer Research2820011–17
2.
AhluwaliaR.Examination of Psychological Processes Underlying Resistance to PersuasionJournal of Consumer Research272000217–232
3.
AhluwaliaR.How Prevalent is the Negativity Effect in Consumer Environments?Journal of Consumer Research292002270–279
4.
AhluwaliaR.ShivB.The Effects of Negative Information in the Political and Marketing Arenas: Exceptions to the Negativity EffectAdvances in Consumer Research241997222
5.
BaronR.M.KennyD.A.The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical ConsiderationsJournal of Personality and Social Psychology5119861173–1182
6.
BartY.ShankarV.SultanF.UrbanG.Are the Drivers and Role of Online Trust the Same for All Web Sites and Consumers? A Large Scale Exploratory and Empirical StudyJournal of Marketing692005133–152
7.
BatraR.AhtolaO.T.Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Sources of Consumer AttitudesMarketing Letters21990159–170
8.
BickartB.SchindlerR.Internet Forums as Influential Sources of Consumer InformationJournal of Interactive Marketing15200131–40
9.
ChatterjeeP.Online Reviews: Do Consumers Use Them?Advances in Consumer Research282001129–133
10.
Chen, Y. B., Fay, S., & Wang, Q. (2002). Online Consumer Product Reviews: What Can We Learn. Working Paper, June 2002, University of Florida.
11.
CurrenM.T.Attributional Influences on Consumers’ Desires to Communicate About ProductsPsychology and Marketing4198731–45
12.
CurrenM.T.FolkesV.S.Attributional Influences on Consumers’ Desires to Communicate About ProductsPsychology & Marketing4198731–45
13.
DharR.WertenbrochK.Consumer Choice Between Hedonic and Utilitarian GoodsJournal of Marketing Research37200060–71
14.
DholakiaR.R.SternthalB.Highly Credible Sources: Persuasive Facilitators or Persuasive LiabilitiesJournal of Consumer Research31977223–232
15.
DroletA.SimonsonI.TverskyA.Indifference Curves That Travel with the Choice SetMarketing Letters112000199–209
16.
EaglyA.H.WoodW.ChaikenS.Causal Inferences About Communicators and Their Effect on Opinion ChangeJournal of Personality and Social Psychology361978424–435
17.
FeldmanS.Motivational Aspects of Attitudinal Elements and Their Place in Cognitive InteractionFeldmanS.Cognitive Consistency1966Academic PressNew York424–435
18.
FolkesV.S.The Availability Heuristic and Perceived RiskJournal of Consumer Research15198813–23
19.
GodesD.MayzlinD.Using Online Conversations to Study Word-of-Mouth CommunicationMarketing Science232004545–560
20.
HeiderF.The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations1958John Wiley & SonNew York
21.
Hennig-ThurauT.GwinnerK.P.WalshG.GremlerD.D.Electronic word-of-mouth Via Consumer-Opinion Platforms: What Motivates Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the Internet?Journal of Interactive Marketing18200438–52
22.
Henricks, M. (1998). When Your Customers Talk … People Listen. So Why Aren't More Business Owners Using the Cheapest and Easiest Form of Advertising? Entrepreneur, February. URL: http://www.Entrepreneur.com/article/0,4621,228051,00.html.
23.
HerrP.M.KardesF.R.KimJ.The Effects of Word-of-Mouth and Product-Attribute Information on Persuasion: An Accessibility-Diagnosticity PerspectiveJournal of Consumer Research171991454–462
24.
HirschmanE.C.HolbrookM.B.Hedonic Consumption: Emerging Concepts, Methods, and PropositionsJournal of Marketing46198292–101
25.
HuntJ.M.DomzalT.J.KernanJ.B.Casual Attributions and Persuasion: The Case of Disconfirmed ExpectanciesAdvances in Consumer Research91981287–292
26.
HuttonJ.G.MulhernF.J.Marketing Communications: Integrated Theory, Strategy and Tactics2002Pentagram PublishingHackensack, NJ
27.
JonesE.E.DavisK.E.From Acts to DispositionsBerkowitzL.Advances in Experimental Social PsychologyVol. 21965Academic PressNew York287–292
28.
JonesE.E.NisbettR.E.The Actor and the Observer: Divergent Perceptions of the Causes of BehaviorJonesE.E.Atribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior1972General Learning PressMorristown, NJ287–292
29.
KaminsM.A.AssaelH.Moderating Disconfirmation of Expectations Through the Use of Two-Sided Appeals: A Longitudinal ApproachJournal of Economic Psychology81987237–253
30.
KanouseD.E.HansonL.R.Negativity in EvaluationsJonesE.E.Atribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior1972General Learning PressMorristown, NJ
31.
KatzE.LazarsfeldP.F.Personal Influence1957Free PressGlencoe, IL
32.
KellerK.L.StaelinR.Effects of Quality and Quantity of Information on Decision EffectivenessJournal of Consumer Research141987200–213
33.
KelleyH.H.Attribution Theory in Social PsychologyLevineD.Nebraska Symposium on MotivationVol. 151967University of Nebraska PressLincoln200–213
34.
KelleyH.H.The Process of Causal AttributionAmerican Psychologist281973107–128
35.
KundaZ.The Case for Motivated ReasoningPsychological Bulletin1081990480–498
36.
MalhotraN.K.Information Load and Consumer Decision MakingJournal of Consumer Research81982419–430
37.
Mayzlin, D. (2003). Promotional Chat on the Internet, Working Paper, Yale School of Management, New Haven, CT.
38.
MayzlinD.Promotional Chat on the InternetMarketing Science252006155–164
39.
MizerskiR.W.An Attribution Explanation of the Disproportionate nfluence of Unfavorable InformationJournal of Consumer Research91982301–310
40.
MortG.S.RoseT.The Effect of Product Type on Value Linkages in the Means-End Chain: Implications for Theory and MethodJournal of Consumer Behaviour32004221–234
41.
MoskowitzH.R.BernsteinR.Variability in Hedonics: Indications of Worldwide Sensory & Cognitive Preference SegmentationJournal of Sensory Studies152000263–284
42.
PangbornR.M.Individuality in responses to sensory stimuliSolmsJ.HallR.L.Criteria of Food Acceptance: How Man Chooses What He Eats1981Forster VerlagZurich177–219
43.
PayneJ.W.BettmanJ.R.JohnsonE.J.Adaptive Strategy Selection in Decision MakingJournal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition141988534–552
44.
PhamM.T.Representativeness, Relevance, and the Use of Feelings in Decision MakingJournal of Consumer Research251998144–160
45.
SilvermanG.How to Harness the Awesome Power of Word of MouthDirect Marketing, November199732–37
46.
SkowronskiJ.J.CarlstonD.E.Social Judgment and Social Memory: The Role of Cue Diagnosticity in Negativity, Positivity, and Extremity BiasesJournal of Personality and Social Psychology521987689
47.
SobelM.E.Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations modelsLeinhartS.Sociological methodology1982Jossey-BassSan Francisco
48.
StrahilevitzM.MeyersJ.G.Donations to Charity as Purchase Incentives: How Well They Work May Depend on What You Are Trying to SellJournal of Consumer Research241998434–446
49.
Tedeschi, B. (1999). Consumer Products Are Being Reviewed on More Web Sites, Some Featuring Comments From Anyone With An Opinion. New York Times, E-Commerce Report; October 25.
50.
Thompson, N. (2003). More Companies Pay Heed to Their “Word of Mouse” Reputation. New York Times, Business/Financial Desk, June 23.
51.
Ward, J., & Ostrom, A. (2002). Motives for Posting Negative Word of Mouth Communications on the Internet. In B. Bickart & R. Schindler (Eds.), Expanding the Scope of WOM: Consumer-to-Consumer Information on the Internet. Special Session Summary (pp. 428–430) Advances in Consumer Research, 29.
52.
WeinbergerM.C.DillonW.R.The Effects of Unfavorable Product InformationOlsonJ.C.Advances in Consumer ResearchVol. 71980Association for Consumer ResearchAnn Arbor, MI528–532
53.
WhyteW.H.JrThe Web of Word of MouthFortune501954140–143
54.
YangZ.PetersonR.T.I Read About It Online…Marketing Research152003
55.
ZajoncR.B.Attitudinal Effects of Mere ExposureJournal of Personality and Social Psychology7Monograph19681–29
