IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tbitxx/v45y2026i4p694-710.html

A grounded theory of how consumers determine the veracity of online user reviews

Author

Listed:
  • Michelle Walther
  • Steven Watson
  • Alexander Boden
  • Marielle Stel

Abstract

Consumers use online reviews to decide which products to purchase. Cybercriminals produce fake reviews to influence unknowing consumers into buying products of lower quality, which can lead to financial, emotional and physical damage. However, there is still limited understanding of how consumers assess the veracity of online reviews, or incorporate online reviews into purchasing decisions, especially outside of laboratory settings. Therefore, this study uses a grounded theory approach to explore how consumers determine the veracity and trustworthiness of online user reviews. Twenty-five interviews with consumers were held to identify veracity cues, thought processes and other markers of online shopping behaviour. The results show that consumers use online reviews differently depending on context (e.g. product value, consumer knowledge). Our findings support the development of a theory suggesting that consumers evaluate reviews through a two-step process. First, consumers scan the review for relevance and then subsequently evaluate trustworthiness, credibility, and veracity. The different deception cues that are used by consumers are also identified and classified. These findings offer new insights of how consumers identify fake reviews online.

Suggested Citation

  • Michelle Walther & Steven Watson & Alexander Boden & Marielle Stel, 2026. "A grounded theory of how consumers determine the veracity of online user reviews," Behaviour and Information Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(4), pages 694-710, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tbitxx:v:45:y:2026:i:4:p:694-710
    DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2025.2528764
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0144929X.2025.2528764
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0144929X.2025.2528764?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.

    More about this item

    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:taf:tbitxx:v:45:y:2026:i:4:p:694-710. 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 Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tbit .

    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.