Why and How Consumers Perform Online Reviewing Differently

IF 5.7 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Consumer Research Pub Date : 2024-07-04 DOI:10.1093/jcr/ucae040
Gwarlann de Kerviler, Catherine Demangeot, Pierre-Yann Dolbec
{"title":"Why and How Consumers Perform Online Reviewing Differently","authors":"Gwarlann de Kerviler, Catherine Demangeot, Pierre-Yann Dolbec","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucae040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reviewing products and services is a widespread consumer activity in which millions engage. Why and how do consumers review differently from one another? Prior work assumes that consumers commonly understand what reviewing is. Consequently, it attributes differences in reviewing to individual variations in psychological, motivational, and sociodemographic characteristics, consumption experiences, and expertise. This central assumption is problematic because it fails to consider that differences in how consumers understand reviewing may explain why they approach and perform reviewing differently. To address this gap, we analyze a large qualitative data set composed of reviews and interviews with their authors. Our insights complement prior work by theorizing the sociocultural shaping of reviewing. We answer why consumers review differently by inductively theorizing the concept of reviewing orientation—a cultural model comprising a set of interconnected characteristics that shapes how consumers review and translates into a distinct reviewer voice—a reviewer’s standpoint expressed within a review. We answer how consumers review differently by developing three reviewing orientations: communal sharing, systemic evaluation, and competitive punditry. Finally, we discuss the transferability of the findings, the role of institutional dynamics in reviewing, and recommendations for online review platforms and marketers.","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Consumer Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucae040","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Reviewing products and services is a widespread consumer activity in which millions engage. Why and how do consumers review differently from one another? Prior work assumes that consumers commonly understand what reviewing is. Consequently, it attributes differences in reviewing to individual variations in psychological, motivational, and sociodemographic characteristics, consumption experiences, and expertise. This central assumption is problematic because it fails to consider that differences in how consumers understand reviewing may explain why they approach and perform reviewing differently. To address this gap, we analyze a large qualitative data set composed of reviews and interviews with their authors. Our insights complement prior work by theorizing the sociocultural shaping of reviewing. We answer why consumers review differently by inductively theorizing the concept of reviewing orientation—a cultural model comprising a set of interconnected characteristics that shapes how consumers review and translates into a distinct reviewer voice—a reviewer’s standpoint expressed within a review. We answer how consumers review differently by developing three reviewing orientations: communal sharing, systemic evaluation, and competitive punditry. Finally, we discuss the transferability of the findings, the role of institutional dynamics in reviewing, and recommendations for online review platforms and marketers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
消费者为何以及如何以不同方式进行在线评论
对产品和服务进行评论是一项广泛的消费活动,数百万人参与其中。为什么消费者之间的评论会有所不同?先前的研究假定消费者普遍理解什么是评论。因此,它将评论中的差异归因于个体在心理、动机、社会人口特征、消费经验和专业知识方面的差异。这一核心假设是有问题的,因为它没有考虑到消费者在理解评论方面的差异可能会解释为什么他们会以不同的方式进行评论。为了弥补这一不足,我们分析了由评论和对评论作者的访谈组成的大型定性数据集。通过对评论的社会文化塑造进行理论分析,我们的见解对之前的工作进行了补充。我们通过归纳出 "评论取向 "这一概念,回答了为什么消费者会以不同的方式发表评论。"评论取向 "是一个文化模型,由一系列相互关联的特征组成,这些特征塑造了消费者发表评论的方式,并转化为独特的评论者声音--评论者在评论中表达的立场。我们通过提出三种评论取向来回答消费者如何进行不同的评论:公共分享、系统评价和竞争性评论。最后,我们讨论了研究结果的可移植性、制度动态在评论中的作用以及对在线评论平台和营销人员的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
9.70%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: Journal of Consumer Research, established in 1974, is a reputable journal that publishes high-quality empirical, theoretical, and methodological papers on a wide range of consumer research topics. The primary objective of JCR is to contribute to the advancement of understanding consumer behavior and the practice of consumer research. To be considered for publication in JCR, a paper must make a significant contribution to the existing body of knowledge in consumer research. It should aim to build upon, deepen, or challenge previous studies in the field of consumption, while providing both conceptual and empirical evidence to support its findings. JCR prioritizes multidisciplinary perspectives, encouraging contributions from various disciplines, methodological approaches, theoretical frameworks, and substantive problem areas. The journal aims to cater to a diverse readership base by welcoming articles derived from different orientations and paradigms. Overall, JCR is a valuable platform for scholars and researchers to share their work and contribute to the advancement of consumer research.
期刊最新文献
Moralizing Everyday Consumption: The Case of Self-Care People Believe If 90% Prefer A over B, A Must Be Much Better than B When Is Digital Censorship Permissible? A Conversation Norms Account Brand Teasing: How Brands Build Strong Relationships by Making Fun of Their Consumers Positive Contrast Scope-Insensitivity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1