EXPRESS:回顾过去:受众异质性与市场信号的不一致

IF 5.2 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Strategic Organization Pub Date : 2022-11-11 DOI:10.1177/14761270221139760
Pengfei Wang
{"title":"EXPRESS:回顾过去:受众异质性与市场信号的不一致","authors":"Pengfei Wang","doi":"10.1177/14761270221139760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Prior literature has emphasized that inconsistency of market signals leads to evaluation penalty. However, limited attention has been paid to the heterogeneity of audiences who deal with inconsistency. I argue that audiences differ in the extent to which they process different market signals, which may largely shape the effect of signal inconsistency. When audiences fail to process all signals, they may not perceive signal inconsistency, thereby weakening its effect on product evaluation. It is hence important to investigate audience heterogeneity in theorizing signal inconsistency. In this study, I focus on the distinction between two important audience groups: professional critics and end consumers. Specifically, I argue that signal inconsistency exerts a stronger effect on critics’ evaluations than on consumers’ evaluations, because critics are more likely than consumers to process various market signals. I argue further that critics can act as an important intermediary to bridge the effect of signal inconsistency on consumers, even though consumers may not process all signals themselves. I test these ideas in a sample of video games released between 2001 and 2016 and find general support.","PeriodicalId":22087,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EXPRESS: Looking into the Past: Audience Heterogeneity and the Inconsistency of Market Signals\",\"authors\":\"Pengfei Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14761270221139760\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Prior literature has emphasized that inconsistency of market signals leads to evaluation penalty. However, limited attention has been paid to the heterogeneity of audiences who deal with inconsistency. I argue that audiences differ in the extent to which they process different market signals, which may largely shape the effect of signal inconsistency. When audiences fail to process all signals, they may not perceive signal inconsistency, thereby weakening its effect on product evaluation. It is hence important to investigate audience heterogeneity in theorizing signal inconsistency. In this study, I focus on the distinction between two important audience groups: professional critics and end consumers. Specifically, I argue that signal inconsistency exerts a stronger effect on critics’ evaluations than on consumers’ evaluations, because critics are more likely than consumers to process various market signals. I argue further that critics can act as an important intermediary to bridge the effect of signal inconsistency on consumers, even though consumers may not process all signals themselves. I test these ideas in a sample of video games released between 2001 and 2016 and find general support.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22087,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Strategic Organization\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Strategic Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14761270221139760\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Strategic Organization","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14761270221139760","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要

先前的文献强调,市场信号的不一致会导致评估惩罚。然而,人们对处理不一致性的观众的异质性关注有限。我认为,受众处理不同市场信号的程度不同,这可能在很大程度上影响信号不一致的影响。当受众无法处理所有信号时,他们可能不会感知到信号的不一致性,从而削弱其对产品评估的影响。因此,在对信号不一致性进行理论化时,研究受众异质性是很重要的。在这项研究中,我关注两个重要受众群体之间的区别:专业评论家和最终消费者。具体而言,我认为信号不一致对批评者的评价比对消费者的评价影响更大,因为批评者比消费者更有可能处理各种市场信号。我进一步认为,批评者可以作为一个重要的中介,弥合信号不一致对消费者的影响,尽管消费者可能不会自己处理所有信号。我在2001年至2016年间发布的视频游戏样本中测试了这些想法,并获得了普遍支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
EXPRESS: Looking into the Past: Audience Heterogeneity and the Inconsistency of Market Signals
Prior literature has emphasized that inconsistency of market signals leads to evaluation penalty. However, limited attention has been paid to the heterogeneity of audiences who deal with inconsistency. I argue that audiences differ in the extent to which they process different market signals, which may largely shape the effect of signal inconsistency. When audiences fail to process all signals, they may not perceive signal inconsistency, thereby weakening its effect on product evaluation. It is hence important to investigate audience heterogeneity in theorizing signal inconsistency. In this study, I focus on the distinction between two important audience groups: professional critics and end consumers. Specifically, I argue that signal inconsistency exerts a stronger effect on critics’ evaluations than on consumers’ evaluations, because critics are more likely than consumers to process various market signals. I argue further that critics can act as an important intermediary to bridge the effect of signal inconsistency on consumers, even though consumers may not process all signals themselves. I test these ideas in a sample of video games released between 2001 and 2016 and find general support.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
8.20%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Strategic Organization is devoted to publishing high-quality, peer-reviewed, discipline-grounded conceptual and empirical research of interest to researchers, teachers, students, and practitioners of strategic management and organization. The journal also aims to be of considerable interest to senior managers in government, industry, and particularly the growing management consulting industry. Strategic Organization provides an international, interdisciplinary forum designed to improve our understanding of the interrelated dynamics of strategic and organizational processes and outcomes.
期刊最新文献
EXPRESS: To See, or Not to Sea: Differing Performance Outcomes from Visible and Private Health Inspections in the U.S. Cruise Travel Industry EXPRESS: A Behavioral Theory of Leviathan Inc: State-Firm Responses to Performance Shortfalls EXPRESS: The Distinctiveness Effect: How Cross-Country Dissimilarities Influence Governance Decisions Themed issue: Learning—postcards from epistemological, empirical, and organizational perspectives EXPRESS: Hybrid governance of digital platforms: Exploring complementarities and tensions in the governance of peer relationships
×
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