Product Review Users' Perceptions of Review Quality: The Role of Credibility, Informativeness, and Readability

摘要

Research problem: Gauging the quality of product reviews through helpfulness votes is problematic for a variety of reasons. We examine potential characteristics of review quality that span review credibility, informativeness, and readability to contribute to better ways of assessing review quality. Research question: Do specific review characteristics improve reviewer users' perceptions of review quality? Literature review: Studies from information systems, electronic marketing and commerce, and technical and professional communication suggest that characteristics of reviews fall into three areas, each with specific characteristics of quality. Findings from these studies suggest the 11 characteristics of review quality within those three areas as potential contributors to review quality. The first area is credibility, a construct consisting (in part) of expertise; we tested these potential specific characteristics of credibility: an assertion of a relevant role, of use of a prior model, of other products in the brand, of a similar product, of having conducted research on the product, and of having tested the product. The second area is informativeness, which is a review's diagnosticity. We tested these potential specific characteristics: a general recommendation, a specific recommendation, a statement about the product's value, and a statement about the extent to which the product met expectations. The third area is readability, which is (in part) comfort of reading, and has this specific characteristic: the use of headings. Methodology: We conducted a quantitative study using a survey distributed though SurveyMonkey Audience, a service that samples from a pool of 30 million respondents. Using control and experimental versions of 11 product reviews, we gauged participants' perceptions of review quality on a five-point scale. We looked for significant differences in participants' perceptions of quality using Pearson's chi square. Results and conclusions: We re- eived 829 responses to include in the analysis. We found the following significant at the 0.05 level: a statement about reviewer's prior experience with a similar product (credibility). We found the following significant at the 0.01 level: A statement about researching the product, for example, online research (credibility), a general recommendation about the product (informativeness), and formatting with headings (readability). We found the following significant at the 0.001 level: a statement about the extent to which the product met expectations (informativeness) and a specific recommendation about the product (informativeness). Using these results, companies can better locate quality reviews; reviewers can increase the quality and, therefore, salience of their reviews; and communication specialists can help reviewers write and revise reviews for improved quality. Future research on review quality could investigate other potential characteristics of credibility, informativeness, and readability.