IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/schmbr/v72y2020i3d10.1007_s41464-020-00097-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discussion of “The Market for Reviews: Strategic Behavior of Online Product Reviewers with Monetary Incentives”

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Ressi

    (WHU – Otto Beisheim School of Management)

Abstract

In this note, I discuss the article of Dorner et al. who experimentally study the issue of generating high-quality online product reviews under two different incentive schemes. I first classify their work in the existing literature on marketing and information systems and highlight their contribution. I then argue that the existence of cognitive dissonance costs serve as a reasonable explanatory factor for their main results. Two further critical issues warn against the limited generalizability of the present study to the real review market and ability to provide practical implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Ressi, 2020. "Discussion of “The Market for Reviews: Strategic Behavior of Online Product Reviewers with Monetary Incentives”," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 72(3), pages 437-445, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:schmbr:v:72:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s41464-020-00097-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s41464-020-00097-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41464-020-00097-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41464-020-00097-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. King, Robert Allen & Racherla, Pradeep & Bush, Victoria D., 2014. "What We Know and Don't Know About Online Word-of-Mouth: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 167-183.
    2. Jeffrey Carpenter & Peter Hans Matthews & John Schirm, 2010. "Tournaments and Office Politics: Evidence from a Real Effort Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 504-517, March.
    3. Luís Cabral & Lingfang (Ivy) Li, 2015. "A Dollar for Your Thoughts: Feedback-Conditional Rebates on eBay," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(9), pages 2052-2063, September.
    4. Yan Chen & F. Maxwell Harper & Joseph Konstan & Sherry Xin Li, 2010. "Social Comparisons and Contributions to Online Communities: A Field Experiment on MovieLens," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1358-1398, September.
    5. Andreas Leibbrandt & Liang Choon Wang & Cordelia Foo, 2018. "Gender Quotas, Competitions, and Peer Review: Experimental Evidence on the Backlash Against Women," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3501-3516, August.
    6. Christine Harbring & Bernd Irlenbusch & Matthias Krakel & Reinhard Selten, 2007. "Sabotage in Corporate Contests - An Experimental Analysis," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 367-392.
    7. Lingfang (Ivy) Li & Erte Xiao, 2014. "Money Talks: Rebate Mechanisms in Reputation System Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(8), pages 2054-2072, August.
    8. Harbring, Christine & Irlenbusch, Bernd, 2008. "How many winners are good to have?: On tournaments with sabotage," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(3-4), pages 682-702, March.
    9. Christine Harbring & Bernd Irlenbusch, 2005. "Incentives in Tournaments with Endogenous Prize Selection," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 161(4), pages 636-663, December.
    10. Warut Khern-am-nuai & Karthik Kannan & Hossein Ghasemkhani, 2018. "Extrinsic versus Intrinsic Rewards for Contributing Reviews in an Online Platform," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 871-892, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    2. Subhasish Chowdhury & Oliver Gürtler, 2015. "Sabotage in contests: a survey," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 135-155, July.
    3. Christine Harbring & Bernd Irlenbusch, 2011. "Sabotage in Tournaments: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(4), pages 611-627, April.
    4. Andreas Leibbrandt & Liang Choon Wang & Cordelia Foo, 2015. "Gender Quotas, Competitions, and Peer Review: Experimental Evidence on the Backlash Against Women," CESifo Working Paper Series 5526, CESifo.
    5. Danilov, Anastasia & Harbring, Christine & Irlenbusch, Bernd, 2019. "Helping under a combination of team and tournament incentives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 120-135.
    6. Andreas Leibbrandt & Liang Choon Wang & Cordelia Foo, 2018. "Gender Quotas, Competitions, and Peer Review: Experimental Evidence on the Backlash Against Women," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3501-3516, August.
    7. Simon Dato & Petra Nieken, 2020. "Gender differences in sabotage: the role of uncertainty and beliefs," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(2), pages 353-391, June.
    8. Yan Chen & Peter Cramton & John A. List & Axel Ockenfels, 2021. "Market Design, Human Behavior, and Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5317-5348, September.
    9. J. Atsu Amegashie, 2013. "Sabotage in Contests: An Overview," CESifo Working Paper Series 4422, CESifo.
    10. Alexandros Karakostas & Nhu Tran & Daniel John Zizzo, 2022. "Experimental Insights on Anti-Social Behavior: Two Meta-Analyses," Discussion Papers Series 658, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    11. Simon Piest & Philipp Schreck, 2021. "Contests and unethical behavior in organizations: a review and synthesis of the empirical literature," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 679-721, October.
    12. Dirk van Straaten, 2021. "Incentive Schemes in Customer Rating Systems - Comparing the Effects of Unconditional and Conditional Rebates on Intrinsic Motivation," Working Papers Dissertations 71, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    13. Glenn Dutcher & Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Dmitry Ryvkin, 2016. "Don't hate the player, hate the game: Uncovering the foundations of cheating in contests," Working Papers 2016-29, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    14. Loukas Balafoutas & Florian Lindner & Matthias Sutter, 2012. "Sabotage in Tournaments: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(4), pages 425-441, November.
    15. Dominik Gutt & Jürgen Neumann & Steffen Zimmermann & Dennis Kundisch & Jianqing Chen, 2018. "Design of Review Systems - A Strategic Instrument to shape Online Review Behavior and Economic Outcomes," Working Papers Dissertations 42, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    16. Dato, Simon & Nieken, Petra, 2014. "Gender differences in competition and sabotage," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 64-80.
    17. Kato, Takao & Shu, Pian, 2016. "Competition and social identity in the workplace: Evidence from a Chinese textile firm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 37-50.
    18. Charness, Gary & Kuhn, Peter, 2011. "Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 3, pages 229-330, Elsevier.
    19. Yang, Liu & Dong, Shaozeng, 2018. "Rebate strategy to stimulate online customer reviews," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 99-107.
    20. Tamaddoni, Ali & Seenivasan, Satheesh & Pallant, Jason I. & Skiera, Bernd, 2023. "Investigating the effect of status changes in review platforms," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 189-209.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:schmbr:v:72:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s41464-020-00097-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.