评分不一致性对在线评论有用性的影响——归因理论的视角

doi:10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2018.05.018

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 哪些因素会影响在线评论的有用性一直是理论界和实践界都十分关心的问题，但现有研究对在线评论的星级评分是如何影响评论有用性这一问题仍未形成统一的结论。基于此，本文以归因理论为分析框架，构建了在线评论的星级评分与产品的平均星级间的不一致性对评论有用性的影响的研究模型，并重点探讨产品的评论总量以及评论的星级评分和平均星级间差异的方向对这一影响的调节作用。本文以携程网上832233条酒店评论为样本，采用零膨胀负二项回归方法对理论模型进行了实证检验，研究结果表明，评分不一致性对评论的有用性有显著的负向影响，而某种产品的评论总量以及星级评分和平均星级间差异的方向对评分不一致性和评论有用性间的关系起到调节作用。当产品的评论总量越高或评论的星级评分与产品的平均星级间的差异为正向差异时，评分不一致性对评论有用性的负向影响越强。本文的研究成果既为理解在线评论有用性提供了理论贡献，也有助于电子商务或第三方评论网站管理和应用在线评论。

关键词: 在线评论, 有用性, 评分不一致性, 归因理论

Abstract: Helpful online reviews can decrease information overload, help customers make better decisions and increase customers' satisfaction about the websites. Therefore, so what makes a helpful online review has become an important topic for scholars and practitioners. Individual review rating has been investigated to be an import factor impacting the review helpfulness by the extant literature, but the literature provides inconsistent views on the direction of the impact. From the perspective of attribution theory, the inconsistent findings are reconciled by proposing the inconsistency between the individual review rating and the average rating as a factor influencing review helpfulness and taking the number of product reviews and the direction of rating inconstitency as moderators. 832233 online hotel reviews are collected from Ctrip.com using a Web data crawler and analyzed by zero-inflated negative binomial regression model. The empirical results show that rating inconsistency has a significant negative impact on review helpfulness. The high rating inconsistency will lead consumers' non-product-related attributions of the review and decrease the review helpfulness. The number of product reviews and the direction of rating inconsistency moderate the impact of rating inconsistency on review helpfulness. The impacts are more salient for the reviews with high product review volumns and for the reviews whose rating is bigger than the average rating. Our findings provide new perspective for understanding the review helpfulness and for online market owners on how to design online review systems and manage reviews on their websites.

Key words: online review, helpfulness, rating inconsistency, attribution theory

中图分类号:

C931.6

苗蕊, 徐健. 评分不一致性对在线评论有用性的影响——归因理论的视角[J]. 中国管理科学, 2018, 26(5): 178-186.

MIAO Rui, XU Jian. The Impact of Rating Inconsistency on Online Review Helpfulness: A Perspective on Attribution Theory[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2018, 26(5): 178-186.

参考文献

[1] Anderson E W. Customer satisfaction and word of mouth[J]. Journal of Service Research, 1998, 1(1):5-17.

[2] Duan Wenjin, Gu Bin, Whinston A B. Do online reviews matter?-An empirical investigation of panel data[J]. Decision Support Systems, 2008, 45(4):1007-1016.

[3] 史伟, 王洪伟, 何绍义. 网络口碑对市场销售分布的影响:基于不同产品评价标准[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2016,36(7):1744-1752.

[4] Chen Yubo, Xie Jinhong. Online consumer review:Word-of-mouth as a new element of marketing communication mix[J]. Management Science, 2008, 54(3):477-491.

[5] Cao Qing, Duan Wenjing, Gan Qiwei. Exploring determinants of voting for the "helpfulness" of online user reviews:A text mining approach[J]. Decision Support Systems, 2011, 50(2):511-521.

[6] Ghose A, Ipeirotis P G. The EconoMining project at NYU:Studying the economic value of user-generated content on the internet[J]. Journal of Revenue & Pricing Management, 2009, 8(2-3):241-246.

[7] Chen Peiyu, Dhanasobhon S, Smith M D. All reviews are not created equal:The disaggregate impact of reviews and reviewers at Amazon.Com[J]. Ssrn Electronic Journal, 2008, 10(11):396-401.

[8] Connors L, Mudambi S M, Schuff D. Is it the review or the reviewer? A multi-method approach to determine the antecedents of online review helpfulness[C]//Proceedings of 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Kauai, HI, USA,4-7 January, 2011.

[9] Mudambi S M, Schuff D. Research note:What makes a helpful online review? A study of customer reviews on amazon.com[J]. MIS Quarterly, 2010, 34(1):185-200.

[10] Liu Yang, Huang Xiangji, An Xiaohui, et al. Modeling and predicting the helpfulness of online reviews[C]//Proceedings of Eighth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, Pisa, Italy, 15-19 December, 2008:443-452.

[11] Forman C, Ghose A, Wiesenfeld B. Examining the relationship between reviews and sales:The role of reviewer identity disclosure in electronic markets[J]. Information Systems Research, 2008, 19(3):291-313.

[12] Ghose A, Ipeirtis P G. Estimating the helpfulness and economic impact of product reviews:Mining text and reviewer characteristics[J]. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge & Data Engineering, 2011, 23(10):1498-1512.

[13] Pan Yue, Zhang J Q. Born unequal:A study of the helpfulness of user-generated product reviews[J]. Journal of Retailing, 2011, 87(4):598-612.

[14] Korfiatis N, Garcia-Bariocanal E, Sanchez-Alonso S. Evaluating content quality and helpfulness of online product reviews:The interplay of review helpfulness vs. review content[J]. Electronic Commerce Research & Applications, 2012, 11(3):205-217.

[15] Racherla P, Friske W. Perceived ‘usefulness’ of online consumer reviews:An exploratory investigation across three services categories[J]. Electronic Commerce Research & Applications, 2013, 11(6):548-559.

[16] Schindler R M, Bickart B. Perceived helpfulness of online consumer reviews:The role of message content and style[J]. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 2012, 11(3):234-342.

[17] Baek H, Ahn J, Choi Y. Helpfulness of online consumer reviews:Readers' objectives and review cues[J]. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2012, 17(2):99-126.

[18] Peng C H, Yin Dezhi, Wei C P, et al. How and when review length and emotional intensity influence review helpfulness:Empirical evidence from Epinions.com[C]//Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Information Systems, Auckland, 2014.

[19] Yin Dezhi, Bond S D, Zhang Han. Anxious or angry? Effects of discrete emotions on the perceived helpfulness of online reviews[J]. Mis Quarterly, 2014, 38(2):539-560.

[20] Huang A H, Chen K, Yen D C, et al. A study of factors that contribute to online review helpfulness[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2015, 48(C):17-27.

[21] 郝媛媛, 叶强, 李一军. 基于影评数据的在线评论有用性影响因素研究[J]. 管理科学学报, 2010, 13(8):78-88, 96.

[22] 殷国鹏, 刘雯雯, 祝珊. 网络社区在线评论有用性影响模型研究——基于信息采纳与社会网络视角[J]. 图书情报工作, 2012, 56(16):140-147.

[23] 殷国鹏. 消费者认为怎样的在线评论更有用?——社会性因素的影响效应[J]. 管理世界, 2012, (12):115-124.

[24] 严建援, 张丽, 张蕾. 电子商务中在线评论内容对评论有用性影响的实证研究[J]. 情报科学, 2012, 30(5):713-716.

[25] 闫强,孟跃. 在线评论的感知有用性影响因素——基于在线影评的实证研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2013,21(S1):126-131.

[26] 刘伟, 徐鹏涛. O2O电商平台在线点评有用性影响因素的识别研究——以餐饮行业O2O模式为例[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016, 24(5):168-176.

[27] Pornpitakpan C. The persuasiveness of source credibility:A critical review of five decades' evidence[J]. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2004, 34(2):243-281.

[28] Laczniak R N, Decarlo T E, Ramaswami S N. Consumers' responses to negative word-of-mouth communication:An attribution theory perspective[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2001, 11(1):57-73.

[29] Sen S, Lerman D. Why are you telling me this? An examination into negative consumer reviews on the Web[J]. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 2007, 21(4):76-94.

[30] Goldsmith R E, Horowitz D. Measuring motivations for online opinion seeking[J]. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 2006, 6(2):1-16.

[31] Lee M, Youn S. Electronic word of mouth (eWOM):How eWOM platforms influence consumer product judgement[J]. International Journal of Advertising, 2009, 28(3):473-499.

[32] 李巍, 王志章. 网络口碑发布平台对消费者产品判断的影响研究——归因理论的视角[J]. 管理学报, 2011, 08(9):1345-1352.

[33] Sun Wenjun, Zhang Lei, Ye Qiang. How the interaction of product type and online review valence affects online review usefulness:An empirical study based on amazon.com[C]//Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Information Engineering and Electronic Commerce, 2011.

[34] Qiu Lingyun, Pang Jun, Lim K H. Effects of conflicting aggregated rating on eWOM review credibility and diagnosticity:The moderating role of review valence[J]. Decision Support Systems, 2012, 54(1):631-643.

[35] Kelley H H. The processes of causal attribution[J]. American Psychologist, 1973, 28(2):107-128.