IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joepsy/v72y2019icp99-116.html

Reaching for the star ratings: A Bayesian-inspired account of how people use consumer ratings

Author

Listed:
  • Hoffart, Janine Christin
  • Olschewski, Sebastian
  • Rieskamp, Jörg

Abstract

Online consumer ratings provide information about the average evaluation but also about the number of people who provided a rating (i.e., the sample size) and thus the rating’s reliability. Using aggregated data, previous research has provided mixed results with regards to whether people pay attention to the sample size of statistical information. In our experiment, people choose between two competing hotels based on previous visitors’ ratings. For each individual participant, we quantitatively estimated different strategies of how sample size and average ratings are processed. Results indicate substantial individual differences and show that people higher in statistical numeracy were better described by the Bayesian model. In addition, Bayesian strategies were used more when cues were incongruent (higher average rating has lower sample size) compared to when they were congruent. To account for these findings, we developed a Bayesian decision tree that describes in which situations behavior accords to Bayesian principles. Moving away from the debate about whether people are Bayesian or not, we explain who integrates sample size and average rating in a Bayesian way in which situation.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoffart, Janine Christin & Olschewski, Sebastian & Rieskamp, Jörg, 2019. "Reaching for the star ratings: A Bayesian-inspired account of how people use consumer ratings," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 99-116.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:72:y:2019:i:c:p:99-116
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2019.02.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487018303854
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joep.2019.02.008?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Graham Loomes & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2003. "Do Anomalies Disappear in Repeated Markets?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(486), pages 153-166, March.
    2. Edward T. Cokely & Mirta Galesic & Eric Schulz & Saima Ghazal & Rocio Garcia-Retamero, 2012. "Measuring risk literacy: The Berlin Numeracy Test," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(1), pages 25-47, January.
    3. Khare, Adwait & Labrecque, Lauren I. & Asare, Anthony K., 2011. "The Assimilative and Contrastive Effects of Word-of-Mouth Volume: An Experimental Examination of Online Consumer Ratings," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 111-126.
    4. Gretchen B. Chapman & Jingjing Liu, 2009. "Numeracy, frequency, and Bayesian reasoning," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(1), pages 34-40, February.
    5. Fiedler, Klaus & Walther, Eva & Freytag, Peter & Plessner, Henning, 2002. "Judgment Biases in a Simulated Classroom--A Cognitive-Environmental Approach," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 527-561, May.
    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. Yigit Oezcelik & Michel Tolksdorf, 2025. "Visual and Social Anchoring in a Framed Online Rating Experiment," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 556, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    2. Yigit Oezcelik & Michel Tolksdorf, 2023. "Non-numerical and social anchoring in consumer-generated ratings," Working Papers 202319, University of Liverpool, Department of Economics.

    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. Garcia-Retamero, Rocio & Hoffrage, Ulrich, 2013. "Visual representation of statistical information improves diagnostic inferences in doctors and their patients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 27-33.
    2. Fiedler, Klaus & Wöllert, Franz & Tauber, Benjamin & Hess, Philipp, 2013. "Applying sampling theories to attitude learning in a virtual school class environment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 222-231.
    3. Maik Hesse & Timm Teubner & Marc T. P. Adam, 2022. "In Stars We Trust – A Note on Reputation Portability Between Digital Platforms," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 64(3), pages 349-358, June.
    4. Minnema, Alec & Bijmolt, Tammo H.A. & Gensler, Sonja & Wiesel, Thorsten, 2016. "To Keep or Not to Keep: Effects of Online Customer Reviews on Product Returns," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 253-267.
    5. Firth, Chris & Stewart, Neil & Antoniou, Constantinos & Leake, David, 2023. "The effects of personality and IQ on portfolio outcomes," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    6. Ulrich Schmidt & Stefan Traub, 2009. "An Experimental Investigation of the Disparity Between WTA and WTP for Lotteries," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 229-262, March.
    7. Arunachalam Narayanan & Brent B. Moritz, 2015. "Decision Making and Cognition in Multi-Echelon Supply Chains: An Experimental Study," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 24(8), pages 1216-1234, August.
    8. Hsiang-Ming Lee & Tsai Chen & Ya-Hui Hsu & Yu-Chi Wu, 2018. "Effect Of Complementary Product Fit And Brand Awareness On Brand Attitude After M&As: Word Of Mouth As A Moderator," Global Journal of Business Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 12(1), pages 51-67.
    9. Irina Gemmo & Pierre-Carl Michaud & Olivia S. Mitchell, 2023. "Selection into Financial Education and Effects on Portfolio Choice," NBER Working Papers 31682, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Sugden, Robert & Zheng, Jiwei & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2013. "Not all anchors are created equal," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 21-31.
    11. Meub, Lukas & Proeger, Till E., 2015. "Anchoring in social context," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 29-39.
    12. Ray Saadaoui Mallek & Mohamed Albaity, 2019. "Individual differences and cognitive reflection across gender and nationality the case of the United Arab Emirates," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 1567965-156, January.
    13. Emmanuel Flachaire & Guillaume Hollard & Jason Shogren, 2013. "On the origin of the WTA–WTP divergence in public good valuation," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 431-437, March.
    14. Fiedler, Klaus, 2007. "The ultimate sampling dilemma in experience-based decision making," Papers 07-51, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    15. Lambrecht, Marco & Oechssler, Jörg & Weidenholzer, Simon, 2023. "On the benefits of robo-advice in financial markets," Working Papers 0734, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    16. Wang, Feng & Liu, Xuefeng & Fang, Eric (Er), 2015. "User Reviews Variance, Critic Reviews Variance, and Product Sales: An Exploration of Customer Breadth and Depth Effects," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 372-389.
    17. Christine Laudenbach & Michael Ungeheuer & Martin Weber, 2023. "How to Alleviate Correlation Neglect in Investment Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3400-3414, June.
    18. Yani Wang & Jun Wang & Tang Yao, 2019. "What makes a helpful online review? A meta-analysis of review characteristics," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 257-284, June.
    19. Dong, Lu & Huang, Lingbo & Lien, Jaimie W. & Zheng, Jie, 2024. "How alliances form and conflict ensues," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 255-276.
    20. Mark A. Andor & Thomas K. Bauer & Jana Eßer & Christoph M. Schmidt & Lukas Tomberg, 2025. "Who Gets Vaccinated? Cognitive and Non‐Cognitive Predictors of Individual Behaviour in Pandemics," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 87(3), pages 562-585, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:joepsy:v:72:y:2019:i:c:p:99-116. 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/joep .

    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.