专家评论、排名和评论聚合器:中介性质的变化和多重中介市场的兴起

IF 14.3 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Academy of Management Annals Pub Date : 2022-04-15 DOI:10.5465/annals.2021.0025
A. Sharkey, Balázs Kovács, Greta Hsu
{"title":"专家评论、排名和评论聚合器:中介性质的变化和多重中介市场的兴起","authors":"A. Sharkey, Balázs Kovács, Greta Hsu","doi":"10.5465/annals.2021.0025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":". In this review, we integrate insights from the extensive but fragmented literature on information intermediaries. Tracing the evolution of this research, we observe a shift from a world dominated by expert critics, to one where these traditional intermediaries sit alongside newer forms, such as media rankings and ratings, as well as online review aggregators. As a result of this proliferation, producers are often subject to simultaneous public evaluation by multiple intermediaries. To understand the potential impact of these changes, we build a framework that specifies the central characteristics of intermediaries and their evaluations and use this framework to compare and contrast three ideal types of intermediaries. This structured comparison reveals important differences in the nature of intermediation by distinct types of intermediaries. We discuss implications for key producer outcomes and highlight important new questions for future research. manuscript Gokhan Pantelis Pipergias Analytis. Güler","PeriodicalId":48333,"journal":{"name":"Academy of Management Annals","volume":"88 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":14.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Expert Critics, Rankings, and Review Aggregators: The Changing Nature of Intermediation and the Rise of Markets with Multiple Intermediaries\",\"authors\":\"A. Sharkey, Balázs Kovács, Greta Hsu\",\"doi\":\"10.5465/annals.2021.0025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\". In this review, we integrate insights from the extensive but fragmented literature on information intermediaries. Tracing the evolution of this research, we observe a shift from a world dominated by expert critics, to one where these traditional intermediaries sit alongside newer forms, such as media rankings and ratings, as well as online review aggregators. As a result of this proliferation, producers are often subject to simultaneous public evaluation by multiple intermediaries. To understand the potential impact of these changes, we build a framework that specifies the central characteristics of intermediaries and their evaluations and use this framework to compare and contrast three ideal types of intermediaries. This structured comparison reveals important differences in the nature of intermediation by distinct types of intermediaries. We discuss implications for key producer outcomes and highlight important new questions for future research. manuscript Gokhan Pantelis Pipergias Analytis. Güler\",\"PeriodicalId\":48333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academy of Management Annals\",\"volume\":\"88 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":14.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academy of Management Annals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2021.0025\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"Academy of Management Annals","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2021.0025","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: 13

摘要

. 在这篇综述中,我们整合了来自大量但零散的信息中介文献的见解。追溯这一研究的演变过程,我们观察到一个转变,从一个由专家评论主导的世界,到一个这些传统中介与新形式(如媒体排名和评级)以及在线评论聚合器并列的世界。由于这种扩散,生产者往往同时受到多个中介机构的公开评价。为了理解这些变化的潜在影响,我们构建了一个框架,该框架指定了中介机构的核心特征及其评估,并使用该框架对三种理想类型的中介机构进行了比较和对比。这种结构化的比较揭示了不同类型的中介在中介性质上的重要差异。我们讨论了对关键生产者结果的影响,并强调了未来研究的重要新问题。手稿Gokhan Pantelis胡椒分析。居尔
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
Expert Critics, Rankings, and Review Aggregators: The Changing Nature of Intermediation and the Rise of Markets with Multiple Intermediaries
. In this review, we integrate insights from the extensive but fragmented literature on information intermediaries. Tracing the evolution of this research, we observe a shift from a world dominated by expert critics, to one where these traditional intermediaries sit alongside newer forms, such as media rankings and ratings, as well as online review aggregators. As a result of this proliferation, producers are often subject to simultaneous public evaluation by multiple intermediaries. To understand the potential impact of these changes, we build a framework that specifies the central characteristics of intermediaries and their evaluations and use this framework to compare and contrast three ideal types of intermediaries. This structured comparison reveals important differences in the nature of intermediation by distinct types of intermediaries. We discuss implications for key producer outcomes and highlight important new questions for future research. manuscript Gokhan Pantelis Pipergias Analytis. Güler
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
36.00
自引率
1.40%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: The mission of the Academy of Management Annals (Annals) is to publish up-to-date, in-depth and integrative reviews of research advances in management. Often called "reviews with an attitude," Annals papers summarize and/or challenge established assumptions and concepts, pinpoint problems and factual errors, inspire discussions, and illuminate possible avenues for further study. Reviews published in Annals move above and beyond descriptions of the field–they motivate conceptual integration and set agendas for future research.
期刊最新文献
Categorizing Concepts and Phenomena in Management Research: A Four-Phase Integrative Review and Recommendations Standardization: Research Trends, Current Debates, and Interdisciplinarity Purpose in Management Research: Navigating a Complex and Fragmented Area of Study Heuristics in Organizations: Toward an Integrative Process Model Understanding How People React to Change: A Domain of Uncertainty Approach
×
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