IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v141y2022icp633-645.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The importance of being earnest: Mandatory vs. voluntary disclosure of incentives for online product reviews

Author

Listed:
  • Cui, Geng
  • Chung, Yuho
  • Peng, Ling
  • Zheng, Wanyi

Abstract

Many sellers provide incentives for online product reviews to influence consumer perceptions and purchase decisions. Although relevant laws require disclosure of such incentives, compliance has been low as sellers fear that it may dampen consumer trust and product sales. We analyze product reviews on Amazon.com and find that reviews with mandatory disclosures by platform are associated with lower product ratings thus have a restraining effect on reviewers, while voluntary disclosures by reviewers lead to higher ratings, thus a potential upward bias due to moral licensing. Regression analyses based on propensity score matching show that in comparison with voluntary disclosures, mandatory disclosures have a positive effect on review helpfulness and sales, thus benefitting both sellers and consumers. These findings provide novel insight into the disclosure of incentives for online product reviews and have broad implications for e-marketing, consumer welfare, and public policy in the platform economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Cui, Geng & Chung, Yuho & Peng, Ling & Zheng, Wanyi, 2022. "The importance of being earnest: Mandatory vs. voluntary disclosure of incentives for online product reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 633-645.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:141:y:2022:i:c:p:633-645
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.068
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296321008754
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.068?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. Sah, Sunita & Malaviya, Prashant & Thompson, Debora, 2018. "Conflict of interest disclosure as an expertise cue: Differential effects due to automatic versus deliberative processing," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 127-146.
    2. Dina Mayzlin & Yaniv Dover & Judith Chevalier, 2014. "Promotional Reviews: An Empirical Investigation of Online Review Manipulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(8), pages 2421-2455, August.
    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. Hirshleifer, David & Teoh, Siew Hong, 2003. "Limited attention, information disclosure, and financial reporting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-3), pages 337-386, December.
    5. Zhuang, Mengzhou & Cui, Geng & Peng, Ling, 2018. "Manufactured opinions: The effect of manipulating online product reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 24-35.
    6. Daylian M. Cain & George Loewenstein & Don A. Moore, 2011. "When Sunlight Fails to Disinfect: Understanding the Perverse Effects of Disclosing Conflicts of Interest," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(5), pages 836-857.
    7. 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.
    8. Singh, Jaywant & Crisafulli, Benedetta & Quamina, La Toya & Xue, Melanie Tao, 2020. "‘To trust or not to trust’: The impact of social media influencers on the reputation of corporate brands in crisis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 464-480.
    9. Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2012. "Evidence on the effects of mandatory disclaimers in advertising," MPRA Paper 37766, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Kim, Do Yuon & Kim, Hye-Young, 2021. "Influencer advertising on social media: The multiple inference model on influencer-product congruence and sponsorship disclosure," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 405-415.
    11. Yubo Chen & Jinhong Xie, 2008. "Online Consumer Review: Word-of-Mouth as a New Element of Marketing Communication Mix," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(3), pages 477-491, March.
    12. Michael J. Fishman & Kathleen M. Hagerty, 2003. "Mandatory Versus Voluntary Disclosure in Markets with Informed and Uninformed Customers," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 45-63, April.
    13. Chris Forman & Anindya Ghose & Batia Wiesenfeld, 2008. "Examining the Relationship Between Reviews and Sales: The Role of Reviewer Identity Disclosure in Electronic Markets," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 291-313, September.
    14. George Loewenstein & Cass R. Sunstein & Russell Golman, 2014. "Disclosure: Psychology Changes Everything," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 391-419, August.
    15. Lingfang (Ivy) Li & Erte Xiao, 2014. "Money Talks: Rebate Mechanisms in Reputation System Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(8), pages 2054-2072, August.
    16. Ryan Hamilton & Kathleen D. Vohs & Ann L. McGill, 2014. "We'll Be Honest, This Won't Be the Best Article You'll Ever Read: The Use of Dispreferred Markers in Word-of-Mouth Communication," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(1), pages 197-212.
    17. Dina Mayzlin, 2006. "Promotional Chat on the Internet," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 155-163, 03-04.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Harrison-Walker, L. Jean & Jiang, Ying, 2023. "Suspicion of online product reviews as fake: Cues and consequences," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).

    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. Foster, Joshua, 2022. "How rating mechanisms shape user search, quality inference and engagement in online platforms: Experimental evidence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 791-807.
    2. Guo, Qiaozhen & Chen, Ying-Ju & Huang, Wei, 2022. "Dynamic pricing of new experience products with dual-channel social learning and online review manipulations," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Cheng Zhao & Chong Alex Wang, 2023. "A cross-site comparison of online review manipulation using Benford’s law," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 365-406, March.
    5. Harrison-Walker, L. Jean & Jiang, Ying, 2023. "Suspicion of online product reviews as fake: Cues and consequences," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    6. Li Yimeng & Franco Mariuzzo & Nikolaos Korfiatis & Yu Xiong, 2017. "Information Strategies of new Product Introduction in Vertical Markets," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2017-03, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    7. Khim-Yong Goh & Cheng-Suang Heng & Zhijie Lin, 2013. "Social Media Brand Community and Consumer Behavior: Quantifying the Relative Impact of User- and Marketer-Generated Content," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 88-107, March.
    8. Sungsik Park & Woochoel Shin & Jinhong Xie, 2021. "The Fateful First Consumer Review," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 481-507, May.
    9. Lingfang (Ivy) Li & Steven Tadelis & Xiaolan Zhou, 2020. "Buying reputation as a signal of quality: Evidence from an online marketplace," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(4), pages 965-988, December.
    10. Thaís L. D. Souza & Marislei Nishijima & Ana C. P. Fava, 2019. "Do consumer and expert reviews affect the length of time a film is kept on screens in the USA?," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 43(1), pages 145-171, March.
    11. Dipankar Das, 2022. "Measurement of Trustworthiness of the Online Reviews," Papers 2210.00815, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    12. Yang, Wenjuan & Zhang, Jiantong & Yan, Hong, 2022. "Promotions of online reviews from a channel perspective," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    13. Zibo Liu & Zhijie Lin & Ying Zhang & Yong Tan, 2022. "The Signaling Effect of Sampling Size in Physical Goods Sampling Via Online Channels," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(2), pages 529-546, February.
    14. Sinan Aral & Chrysanthos Dellarocas & David Godes, 2013. "Introduction to the Special Issue ---Social Media and Business Transformation: A Framework for Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 3-13, March.
    15. Yabing Jiang & Hong Guo, 2015. "Design of Consumer Review Systems and Product Pricing," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 714-730, December.
    16. Ginger Zhe Jin & Michael Luca & Daniel Martin, 2022. "Complex Disclosure," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(5), pages 3236-3261, May.
    17. Andrey Fradkin & David Holtz, 2023. "Do Incentives to Review Help the Market? Evidence from a Field Experiment on Airbnb," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(5), pages 853-865, September.
    18. Koukova, Nevena T. & Wang, Rebecca Jen-Hui & Isaac, Mathew S., 2023. "“If you loved our product”: Do conditional review requests harm retailer loyalty?," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 85-101.
    19. Ishita Chakraborty & Joyee Deb & Aniko Oery, 2020. "When Do Consumers Talk?," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2254R2, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Jun 2022.
    20. 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.

    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:eee:jbrese:v:141:y:2022:i:c:p:633-645. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    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.