IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orserv/v15y2023i3p172-187.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Firm Strategies Affect Consumer Biases in Online Reviews

Author

Listed:
  • Frances Xinhua Wang

    (SC Johnson College of Business, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853)

  • Chris Anderson

    (SC Johnson College of Business, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853)

Abstract

Online reviews have become increasingly important to both consumers and businesses and, as a result, have attracted considerable research attention. However, all reviews are not created equal as consumers may differ in their propensities to leave reviews, often as a function of their satisfaction. To ensure a more representative customer voice, companies often utilize different strategies to moderate the biases in online reviews. The strategies deployed by many hospitality firms differ dramatically in both how reviews are collected and where they are posted. This study investigates four review-collection strategies of major hospitality companies and analyzes how each strategy affects review ratings and length. We find that the effort required to post a review impacts review characteristics. We show that reviews collected through self-motivation methods tend to be lower rated and longer, whereas reviews solicited from companies through poststay emails tend to exhibit different characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • Frances Xinhua Wang & Chris Anderson, 2023. "How Firm Strategies Affect Consumer Biases in Online Reviews," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 172-187, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orserv:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:172-187
    DOI: 10.1287/serv.2023.0316
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/serv.2023.0316
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/serv.2023.0316?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
    ---><---

    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:inm:orserv:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:172-187. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.