IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joepsy/v72y2019icp99-116.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:34-40 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:1:p:25-47 is not listed on IDEAS
    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, 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Oben K Bayrak & Bengt Kriström, 2016. "Is there a valuation gap? The case of interval valuations," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 36(1), pages 218-236.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Olschewski, Sebastian & Diao, Linan & Rieskamp, Jörg, 2021. "Reinforcement learning about asset variability and correlation in repeated portfolio decisions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    7. Gijs Kuilen & Peter Wakker, 2006. "Learning in the Allais paradox," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 155-164, December.
    8. Becky R. Ford & Cynthia Stohl, 2019. "Does CSR Matter? A longitudinal analysis of product reviews for CSR-associated brands," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(1), pages 60-70, January.
    9. Yingtao Shen & Shenyu Li & Michelle DeMoss, 2012. "The Effect Of Quantitative Electronic Word Of Mouth On Consumer Perceived Product Quality," International Journal of Management and Marketing Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 5(2), pages 19-29.
    10. Ben McQuillin & Robert Sugden, 2012. "Reconciling normative and behavioural economics: the problems to be solved," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(4), pages 553-567, April.
    11. Agnieszka Zablocki & Bodo Schlegelmilch & Michael J. Houston, 2019. "How valence, volume and variance of online reviews influence brand attitudes," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 9(1), pages 61-77, June.
    12. Friedel Bolle & Jonathan H. W. Tan & Daniel John Zizzo, 2014. "Vendettas," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(2), pages 93-130, May.
    13. Carmelo J. León & Jorge E. Araña & Matías González & Javier de León, 2014. "Tourists' Evaluation of Climate Change Risks in the Canary Islands: A Heterogeneous Response Modelling Approach," Tourism Economics, , vol. 20(4), pages 849-868, August.
    14. Kingsley, David C. & Brown, Thomas C., 2013. "Value learning and the willingness to accept–willingness to pay disparity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(3), pages 473-476.
    15. Astrid Matthey, 2005. "Getting Used to Risks: Reference Dependence and Risk Inclusion," SFB 649 Discussion Papers SFB649DP2005-036, Sonderforschungsbereich 649, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany.
    16. Stefania Sitzia & Daniel John Zizzo, 2010. "Price low and then price high or price high and then price low?," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2010-08, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    17. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Lazaridis, Panagiotis & Nayga Jr., Rodolfo M., 2008. "The role of reference prices in experimental auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 446-448, June.
    18. Lukas Menkhoff & Maik Schmeling & Ulrich Schmidt, 2010. "Are All Professional Investors Sophisticated?," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 11(4), pages 418-440, November.
    19. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2013. "Reconciling behavioural and neoclassical economics," Working Papers hal-00819763, HAL.
    20. Golmohammadi, Alireza & Mattila, Anna S. & Gauri, Dinesh K., 2020. "Negative online reviews and consumers’ service consumption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 27-36.

    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.