Wen-Yau Liang, Chun-Che Huang, Tzu-Liang (Bill) Tseng and Jia-Chi Chen
Up to 89.1% of consumers have changed their decisions due to the influence of online reviews. In order to increase the number of reviews, some websites and platforms have adopted…
Abstract
Purpose
Up to 89.1% of consumers have changed their decisions due to the influence of online reviews. In order to increase the number of reviews, some websites and platforms have adopted feedback incentives. Research shows that offering review incentives does increase the likelihood of consumers writing reviews. However, the review reward system also brings some problems. Consumers may doubt the authenticity of product reviews that are incentivized by rewards, believing that reviewers are only writing reviews for personal gain, which has a negative impact on the credibility of the reviews. To address this issue, this study proposes a mechanism for mandatory disclosure of review incentives as research demonstrates that transparent online communication of a platform’s efforts can substantially boost review helpfulness restore trust in online platforms, and even improve purchase intentions.
Design/methodology/approach
This study applies the S-O-R (Stimulus-Organism-Response) theoretical framework and utilizes a simulated situational questionnaire to investigate the impact of online reviews on consumers' emotional and behavioral responses within the context of a mandatory disclosure review reward system. The model identifies four key constructs: review quality as the Stimulus, review credibility and review usefulness as the Organism, and purchase intention as the Response. Data were collected through the questionnaire and subsequently analyzed to understand these relationships.
Findings
The results show that review quality has a significant positive impact on review credibility, review usefulness and purchase intention. Similarly, review credibility and review usefulness also have significant positive impacts on purchase intention.
Originality/value
To mitigate the potential negative effects of review reward systems, this study introduces a mandatory disclosure of the review reward and examines its impact using a simulated situational questionnaire. The study hypothesizes that mandatory disclosure of rewarded reviews enables consumers to identify these reviews, which may, in turn, enhance their purchase intentions.
Details
Keywords
A decision to terminate a project can demoralize project managers and team members, and increase concerns about job security. For these reasons, managers tend to delay project…
Abstract
A decision to terminate a project can demoralize project managers and team members, and increase concerns about job security. For these reasons, managers tend to delay project termination decisions. However, such delays can put a damper on the normal operation of a company. Therefore, corporations have been seeking to develop a number of methods and techniques to assist with decision making in project evaluation. Benchmarking has gained increasing acceptance as a technique that enhances business processes. This paper is concerned with the development of a model using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for the evaluation of project termination or continuation, which is based on the benchmarking method. The benchmarking of project evaluation, the operation of AHP, is presented along with a case study. A R&D case study in Taiwan is used to illustrate the approach, the framework of which was entered on an Excel spreadsheet. This approach has provided the decision maker with an alternative for evaluating the status of a project and making the right call.