IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2401.11345.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fake Google restaurant reviews and the implications for consumers and restaurants

Author

Listed:
  • Shawn Berry

Abstract

The use of online reviews to aid with purchase decisions is popular among consumers as it is a simple heuristic tool based on the reported experiences of other consumers. However, not all online reviews are written by real consumers or reflect actual experiences, and present implications for consumers and businesses. This study examines the effects of fake online reviews written by artificial intelligence (AI) on consumer decision making. Respondents were surveyed about their attitudes and habits concerning online reviews using an online questionnaire (n=351), and participated in a restaurant choice experiment using varying proportions of fake and real reviews. While the findings confirm prior studies, new insights are gained about the confusion for consumers and consequences for businesses when reviews written by AI are believed rather than real reviews. The study presents a fake review detection model using logistic regression modeling to score and flag reviews as a solution.

Suggested Citation

  • Shawn Berry, 2024. "Fake Google restaurant reviews and the implications for consumers and restaurants," Papers 2401.11345, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2401.11345
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2401.11345
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Salminen, Joni & Kandpal, Chandrashekhar & Kamel, Ahmed Mohamed & Jung, Soon-gyo & Jansen, Bernard J., 2022. "Creating and detecting fake reviews of online products," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    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. Kapoor, Payal S. & M S, Balaji & Maity, Moutusy & Jain, Nikunj Kumar, 2021. "Why consumers exaggerate in online reviews? Moral disengagement and dark personality traits," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    4. Purnawirawan, Nathalia & Eisend, Martin & De Pelsmacker, Patrick & Dens, Nathalie, 2015. "A Meta-analytic Investigation of the Role of Valence in Online Reviews," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 17-27.
    5. Xiangbin Yan & Jing Wang & Michael Chau, 2015. "Customer revisit intention to restaurants: Evidence from online reviews," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 645-657, June.
    6. Septianto, Felix & Kemper, Joya A. & Choi, Jinyoung (Jane), 2020. "The power of beauty? The interactive effects of awe and online reviews on purchase intentions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    7. Moon, Sangkil & Kim, Moon-Yong & Iacobucci, Dawn, 2021. "Content analysis of fake consumer reviews by survey-based text categorization," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 343-364.
    8. Michael Hair & Timucin Ozcan, 2018. "How reviewers’ use of profanity affects perceived usefulness of online reviews," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 151-163, June.
    9. Park, Sangwon & Nicolau, Juan L., 2015. "Asymmetric effects of online consumer reviews," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 67-83.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Colmekcioglu, Nazan & Marvi, Reza & Foroudi, Pantea & Okumus, Fevzi, 2022. "Generation, susceptibility, and response regarding negativity: An in-depth analysis on negative online reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 235-250.
    2. Román, Sergio & Riquelme, Isabel P. & Iacobucci, Dawn, 2023. "Fake or credible? Antecedents and consequences of perceived credibility in exaggerated online reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    3. Wen Zhang & Qiang Wang & Jian Li & Zhenzhong Ma & Gokul Bhandari & Rui Peng, 2023. "What makes deceptive online reviews? A linguistic analysis perspective," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.
    4. Zaman, Mustafeed & Vo-Thanh, Tan & Nguyen, Chi T.K. & Hasan, Rajibul & Akter, Shahriar & Mariani, Marcello & Hikkerova, Lubica, 2023. "Motives for posting fake reviews: Evidence from a cross-cultural comparison," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    5. Zheng, Lili, 2021. "The classification of online consumer reviews: A systematic literature review and integrative framework," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 226-251.
    6. Costa Filho, Murilo & Nogueira Rafael, Diego & Salmonson Guimarães Barros, Lucia & Mesquita, Eduardo, 2023. "Mind the fake reviews! Protecting consumers from deception through persuasion knowledge acquisition," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    7. Shan, Wei & Qiao, Tong & Zhang, Mingli, 2020. "Getting more resources for better performance: The effect of user-owned resources on the value of user-generated content," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    8. Angela Aerry Choi & Daegon Cho & Dobin Yim & Jae Yun Moon & Wonseok Oh, 2019. "When Seeing Helps Believing: The Interactive Effects of Previews and Reviews on E-Book Purchases," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 1164-1183, December.
    9. Sunyoung Hlee & Hanna Lee & Chulmo Koo, 2018. "Hospitality and Tourism Online Review Research: A Systematic Analysis and Heuristic-Systematic Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-27, April.
    10. 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.
    11. Elvira Ismagilova & Emma L. Slade & Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi, 2020. "The Effect of Electronic Word of Mouth Communications on Intention to Buy: A Meta-Analysis," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 1203-1226, October.
    12. Young Joon Park & Jaewoo Joo & Charin Polpanumas & Yeujun Yoon, 2021. "“Worse Than What I Read?” The External Effect of Review Ratings on the Online Review Generation Process: An Empirical Analysis of Multiple Product Categories Using Amazon.com Review Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-22, September.
    13. Mardumyan, Anna & Siret, Iris, 2023. "When review verification does more harm than good: How certified reviews determine customer–brand relationship quality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    14. Zhu, Yongmin & Liu, Miaomiao & Zeng, Xiaohua & Huang, Pei, 2020. "The effects of prior reviews on perceived review helpfulness: A configuration perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 484-494.
    15. Hajek, Petr & Hikkerova, Lubica & Sahut, Jean-Michel, 2023. "Fake review detection in e-Commerce platforms using aspect-based sentiment analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    16. Birim, Şule Öztürk & Kazancoglu, Ipek & Kumar Mangla, Sachin & Kahraman, Aysun & Kumar, Satish & Kazancoglu, Yigit, 2022. "Detecting fake reviews through topic modelling," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 884-900.
    17. Ben Jabeur, Sami & Ballouk, Hossein & Ben Arfi, Wissal & Sahut, Jean-Michel, 2023. "Artificial intelligence applications in fake review detection: Bibliometric analysis and future avenues for research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    18. Elvira Ismagilova & Emma L. Slade & Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi, 0. "The Effect of Electronic Word of Mouth Communications on Intention to Buy: A Meta-Analysis," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    19. Könsgen, Raoul & Schaarschmidt, Mario & Ivens, Stefan & Munzel, Andreas, 2018. "Finding Meaning in Contradiction on Employee Review Sites — Effects of Discrepant Online Reviews on Job Application Intentions," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 165-177.
    20. Perez, Dikla & Stockheim, Inbal & Baratz, Guy, 2022. "Complimentary competition: The impact of positive competitor reviews on review credibility and consumer purchase intentions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2401.11345. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.