Consumer Awareness and Use of Product Review Websites

8/3/2019 Consumer Awareness and Use of Product Review Websites

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/consumer-awareness-and-use-of-product-review-websites 1/14

CONSUMER AWARENESS AND USE OF PRODUCT REVIEW WEBSITES

Ainsworth Anthony Bailey

ABSTRACT: This paper reports on a study that was undertaken to assess consumer awareness, and use, of product review

websites. Factors included the impact of e-opinion leadership, consumer susceptibility to informational influence, and gender onawareness and use of these websites. Participants completed a survey that solicited information on awareness of product review

websites, extent of usage, the aforementioned individual difference factors, as well as demographic information. Results indicated

that consumers, generally, are aware of the existence of product review websites and there is moderate usage of, and varied uses

for, these types of websites. Gender and certain individual difference factors, in particular e-opinion leadership, have an impact

on usage and perceptions of these types of websites. Limitations of the study and future research issues are presented.

"The result is a magnificent flowering of interest communities,

including those centered around product information. The most

intriguing of these is Epinions.com (http://www.epinions.com),

a vast and endlessly fascinating collection of member-supplied

reviews on an enormous amount of consumer products. Among a number of product-review sites, Epinions has best applied

those two major interest-community trends. It's a giant

community with thousands of adept reviewers and millions of

visitors. Furthermore, it uses clever technologies to maintain its

appealing site and to generate several revenue streams,

including one for the reviewers" (O'Leary 2002)

One of the major developments on the Internet, from a

consumer behavior perspective, is the growth in the number of

websites where consumers can provide and read product

reviews, and voice their complaints and opinions about

various goods and services (Armstrong and Hagel 1996; Bailey

2004; Boush and Kahle 2001; Chatterjee 2001; O'Leary 2002;

Perry 2000). A number of consumer-developed and marketer-

developed websites allow consumers to provide reviews of,

and feedback on, various brands that are available in the

marketplace. This paper refers to these types of websites as

product review websites.

Among some of the more well-known product review websites

are: (a) e-pinions (http://www.epinions.com), which bills itself

as "a premier consumer reviews platform on the Web and a

reliable source for valuable consumer insight, unbiased advice,

in-depth product evaluations and personalized

recommendations" (http://www.epinions.com/about/); (b)

Consumer Search's productopia

(http://www.productopia.com), which had its genesis in its

founder's need to access multiple sources of product

information prior to purchasing a desktop publishing system

for a new business (http://www.productopia.com/); (c)

Consumerreview.com (http://www.consumerreview.com),

which "consumers visit to learn, interact, and buy or sell the

products showcased within...network of web communities

(http://www.consumerreview.com/channels/consumerreview/

data/main/about_us.html); and (d) Cnet.com

(http://www.cnet.com), where one can find a number ofreviews of electronic and technology products.

As a result of the proliferation of these kinds of websites

consumers have access to a wealth of information, prior to

and even after, making various shopping decisions. The exten

to which consumers rely on these websites for information ha

been the subject of previous research (Chatterjee 2001

Dholakia and Soltysinski 2001; Dholakia, Basuroy, and

Soltysinski 2002). Chatterjee (2001) contended that word-of

mouth information available online is far more voluminous in

quantity, compared to information that may be available

offline; can be negative or positive in valence; and comes froma variety of sources (p. 129). This voluminous quantity of

information has been shown to impact consumer behavior

(see, e.g., Bickart and Schindler 2001; Dholakia and Soltysinsk

2001; Ratchford, Lee, and Talukdar 2003). The stream of

research on word-of-mouth communication also would

suggest that consumers are likely to utilize information found

on online product review websites. However, much of these

studies have been experimental in nature, where participants

have been deliberately exposed to product review websites and

then asked to provide their feedback.

The aim of this paper is to add to the discussion on the use o

product reviews by consumers. Previous assessments o

consumer use of product review websites have used

experimental studies where consumers were forcibly exposed

to information about these types of websites and then asked

about their attitudes and perceptions (see, e.g., Chatterjee

2001; Chiou and Cheng 2003; Senecal and Nantel 2004). This

study was, therefore, more interested in using survey research

Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol 6 No 1 (Fall 2005), pp. 68‐81

© 2010 American Academy of Advertising, All rights reserved

ISSN 1525‐2019



69 Journal of Interactive Advertising Fall 2005

to glean information from consumers regarding their

awareness of product review websites and their usage of these

types of websites in consumer decision making. In addition,

we investigated the impact of two individual difference factors,

consumer susceptibility to informational influence and

consumer e-opinion leadership, and an oft-explored

demographic factor, gender, on awareness and usage.

The paper is organized as follows: First, there is a review of the

relevant literature, which leads to certain research questions.

Then, there is the report on the development of the

questionnaire, the sample, as well as the measures used in the

survey. Data collection and analysis, as well as the results, are

also discussed. Finally, there is a general discussion of the

research findings, as well as a presentation of the limitations of

the study and avenues for future research.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Social Influence, Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal

Influence, and Online Product Reviews

There is a large body of research in social psychology that has

pointed to the impact that social influence can have on

people's behavior (Apanovitch, Hobfoll, and Salovey 2002;

Asch 1955; Dolinski, Nawrat, and Rudak 2001). Social

information processing theory (Salancik and Pfeffer 1978)

addresses mechanisms by which peers influence individuals'

behavior and attitudes. According to this theory, social

information consists of comments and observations made by

people whose views an individual considers relevant.Researchers have shown the effects of social influence in

different spheres (see, e.g., Dolinski, Nawrat, and Rudak 2001).

Consumer researchers have also investigated the role of social

influence and its impact on consumer behavior (Burnkrant

and Cousineau 1975; Calder and Burnkrant 1977; Park and

Lessig 1977; for recent examples, see Butcher, Sparks, and

O'Callaghan 2002; Schlosser and Shavitt 2002). Word-of-

mouth communication is one type of social influence that has

received extensive attention in the consumer behavior

literature, though much focus has been on negative word-of-

mouth communication, as opposed to positive word-of-mouthcommunication (Laczniak, DeCarlo, and Ramaswami 2001;

Richins 1982, 1983, 1984; Singh 1990). Researchers have

shown that word of mouth communication has an impact on

consumer attitudes (Bickart and Schindler 2001); consumer

risk-taking (Woodside and Delozier 1976); short-term and

long-term product judgments (Bone 1995); purchase decisions

and choice behavior (Lau and Ng 2001); and is related to such

variables as consumer complaining behavior (Blodge

Granbois, and Walters 1993). The research on word-of-mouth

is particularly relevant in the discourse on consumer use of

online product review websites, since the information found

on these websites represents electronic word-of-mouth

communication.

The Internet has facilitated more connections among

consumers and is a forum for the exchange of information

among consumers (Armstrong and Hagel 1996; Chatterjee

2001; Hennig-Thurau et al. 2004). Prior research has shown

the impact of the Internet as a medium for consumer feedback

and information, and its influence on consumer behavior

Bickart and Schndler (2001), for example, investigated how

discussions within online communities impacted consumer

behavior. Results from their study pointed to the efficacy of

online forums in generating product interest. There was more

focus, however, on how this information can be used to assistwebsite developers with the development of better websites

Ratchford, Lee, and Talukdar (2003), in a study using data on

automobile purchases collected in 1990 and 2000, found that

the use of the Internet as an information source limited the

amount of search in which consumers engaged. This suggests

reliance on the Internet as a source of information.

Hanson and Putler (1996) conducted a study on herd behavior

and online product popularity in which they manipulated the

perceived popularity of programs on a large commercia

online system. The download counts of software, defined by

them as how many previous users had obtained a copy of thesoftware program, were artificially increased by repeated

downloading. Then they recorded subsequent downloads o

the programs made by an online service's subscribers, to assess

whether a difference in relative download levels would

influence future downloads for two products that were

essentially the same. They found that the manipulation

increased downloads of the treated program.

The possible impact of the virtual environment on consumer

behavior was further underscored by Dholakia and his

colleagues. Dholakia and Soltysinski (2001) provided evidence

for the herding bias in online auctions. This herding biasrepresents the tendency of many buyers to "gravitate toward

and bid for, auction listings with one or more existing bids

ignoring comparable or even more attractive unbid-for

auction listings within the same product category and available

at the same time" (Dholakia and Soltysinski 2001, p. 226). One

factor that increased the herding bias, according to their study

was the difficulty to evaluate quality within a product category




They suggested that consumers in these online auctions

observed and used others' behavior as a guide to their own.

Dholakia, Basuroy, and Soltysinski (2002) indicated that

psychologists have found that the observable behaviors of

others exert strong influences on individuals, since observed

behavior may guide goal-directed behaviors by benefiting the

informational and social motives of the decision maker (p.

117).

Chatterjee (2001) investigated whether negative word-of-

mouth information or reviews of online retailers affected

evaluations and patronage intentions. In this study, online

word-of-mouth information was operationalized as retailer

reviews provided by comparison shopping engines, along with

purchase information. The study focused on the effects of

negative reviews on consumers' decisions to patronize the

retailer, given that consumers needed to purchase a particular

product. Their results showed that a majority of participantswanted to access product reviews when they were told that

these reviews were available. Overall, they found that the effect

of negative consumer reviews on consumers' perceptions of

the reliability of a retailer and patronage intentions was

moderated by the level of familiarity with the retailer.

Chiou and Cheng (2003) manipulated message favorableness,

message number, and brand image to assess their impact on

online consumers' perceptions and attitudes. They concluded

that message favorableness and message number in the online

discussion forum impacted consumers' brand evaluations and

attitudes toward the Web owner. More recently, Senecal andNantel (2004) investigated consumers' usage of online

recommendation sources and found that those participants in

their study who consulted product recommendations selected

recommended products twice as often as those who did not

consult recommendations, with some differences across

recommendation source and product category.

Prior research has shown that there are a number of individual

difference variables that are likely to impact consumers'

response to the Internet (Bagozzi and Dholakia 2002; Hennig-

Thurau et al. 2004). To date, no study of which we are aware

has looked at the extent to which susceptibility tointerpersonal influence might impact how consumers respond

to websites such as product review websites. Consumer's

susceptibility to interpersonal influence (CSII) has been a

source of interest for marketing researchers. This construct

relates to the extent to which consumers are amenable to

influence from different sources of information. Researchers

opine that this is a general trait that varies across people

(Bearden, Netemeyer, and Teel 1989; McGuire 1968). Bearden

Netemeyer, and Teel (1989) and Deutsch and Gerard (1955)

point to the different dimensions of CSII: (a) normative

influence, that is, the tendency to conform to the expectation

of others; and (b) informational influence, that is, the tendency

to accept information from others as evidence about reality

(Deutsch and Gerard 1955, p. 474).

In the current study, the interest was in susceptibility to

informational influence, given the nature of product review

websites as sources of information for consumers. Park and

Lessig (1977) suggest that in the case of informationa

influence, consumers may search for information from other

consumers whom they regard as knowledgeable, or they form

their judgments and decisions by observing others. Previous

research has also shown an impact of informational influence

on consumer behavior (see, e.g., Burnkrant and Cousineau

1975; LaTour and Manrai 1989; Lord, Lee, Choong 2001; Parkand Lessig 1977).

Opinion Leadership and Product Review Websites

Consumer opinion leadership has been of interest to

marketers for a long time. It is based on the idea that there are

"certain people who are most concerned about the issues and

as well as most articulate..." (Lazarsfeld, Berelson, and Gaudet

1948). Lazarsfeld, Berelson, and Gaudet (1948) referred to

these people as opinion leaders, and they exert interpersona

influence. Corey (1971) posited that they were "models of

opinion" who could be influencers on marketing efforts by

word-of-mouth communication to people around themMerton (1957) made a distinction between those opinion

leaders that influence opinions in limited spheres and those

opinion leaders who exert interpersonal influence in severa

different spheres. Most of the literature on opinion leadership

relates to interpersonal communication in an off-line sphere

(see, e.g., Bloch 1986; Corey 1971; Flynn, Goldsmith, and

Eastman 1996), with a few recent studies investigating opinion

leadership in an online sphere (Eastman, Eastman, and

Eastman 2002; O'Cass and Fenech 2003).

Eastman, Eastman, and Eastman (2002) focused primarily on

insurance sales agents and their use of, and attitudes toward

the Internet. Using the Flynn, Goldsmith, and Eastman (1996

opinion leadership scale, they developed opinion leadership

scores, as well as subjective knowledge scores, for these sales

agents. They then compared these scores to attitudes toward

the Internet. They found that agents with a higher level o

subjective knowledge about the Internet were more likely to be

opinion leaders about the Internet. In addition, opinion




leaders and agents with higher levels of subjective knowledge

had a more favorable attitude about the Internet. However,

they found significance only for the relationship with opinion

leadership. Sales agents who were younger than the mean age

of 46 years old were more likely to be opinion leaders, and

they had a higher level of subjective knowledge of the Internet.

A primary conclusion of these researchers was that that

perceived knowledge and the willingness to discuss the

Internet with others impacted the agents' attitude toward the

Internet. They also concluded that younger agents would play

a major role in how the Internet would be used.

O'Cass and Fenech (2003) utilized the Technology Acceptance

Model (TAM) and applied it in an assessment of adoption of

the Internet for retail usage among a convenience sample of

Australian Web users. Among the constructs in which they

were interested was opinion leadership and its role in

impacting Web usage. They found that it was one of theantecedents that impacted users' perceptions of the usefulness

and ease of use of the Web for retail purchases.

The foregoing leads us to expect that in the online domain,

opinion leadership will have an impact on consumers' use of

product review websites. We refer to opinion leadership in the

online domain as E-opinion leadership and adapt the offline

definition of the construct for the online domain: consumers'

ability to influence other online consumers' opinions (e.g.,

Flynn, Goldsmith, and Eastman 1996; Reynolds and Darden

1971). E-opinion leaders are more likely than non-E-opinion

leaders to give their opinions and the Internet provides aforum for them to dispense these opinions.

Gender

Prior research on men's and women's use of the Internet has

revealed gender differences in online communication (Savicki,

Lingenfekter, and Kelly 1997). This stream of research has

investigated the link between gender and online behavior, with

some of these focusing on the use of information in the online

context (Garbarino and Strahilevitz 2004; Ha and Stoel 2004;

Sheehan 1999). Sheehan (1999) conducted a study to assess

gender differences in attitudes and behaviors towards

marketing communications involving the gathering of online

information. They also explored attitudes toward online

privacy. They surveyed a group of Internet users regarding

fifteen advertising and marketing situations. Their study

established gender differences in concerns for online privacy.

Women were more concerned than men about the type of

information that they shared online. There were also gender

differences in certain online behaviors, such as taking steps to

protect one's privacy, with women taking fewer steps than

men to safeguard their online privacy.

Ha and Stoel (2004) found, for example, gender differences in

the use of the Internet for information search for apparel

products. They found that female consumers were more likely

to use the Internet for this purpose than male consumersGarbarino and Strahilevitz (2004) investigated gender

differences in the perceptions of risks associated with

shopping online. In one study, using a survey, they looked a

how men's and women's online shopping risk perceptions

changed when they received a recommendation from a friend

In a follow-up experimental study they examined whether

there were differences between men and women in their

willingness to make an online purchase, based on a friend's

recommendation. They found gender differences, with women

perceiving a higher level of risk in online purchasing than

men. They also found that when a site was recommended by afriend that led to both a greater reduction in perceived risk

and a stronger increase in willingness to buy online among

women than among men.

RESEARCH ISSUES

In view of the foregoing discussion, the main purpose of this

research study was to try to answer the following questions:

R1: What is the level of awareness among consumers of

product review websites?

R2: To what extent do consumers use these websites in

their decision making?

R3: Do individual difference factors such as consumer

susceptibility to informational influence and e-opinion

leadership impact consumer use of product review

websites?

R4: Are there differences between men and women in the

use of product review websites, given prior research that

has shown gender differences in other areas of Internet

usage?

Answers to these questions will aid marketing communicator

who are interested in using vehicles such as product reviewwebsites in their efforts to reach consumers. The

characteristics of the consumers who use these websites in

their decision-making could be used as segmentation

variables, in order to distinguish those consumers for whom

this vehicle is an effective medium of communication and

those for whom it is not.




METHOD

Questionnaire design

A survey was conducted in order to answer the above research

questions. The questionnaire used in the study contained

items that asked whether respondents had ever made

purchases online and their purchase histories, and about the

respondents' level of awareness of product review websites and

how they had become aware of them. The response to whether

they had ever purchased items online was used as a screening

question, since the interest was primarily in consumers who

had made purchases online. Respondents were also asked

about their visits to product review websites and whether they

had ever provided feedback at these sites. They also completed

the 4-item consumer susceptibility to informational influence

scale, which is a part of the longer CSII scale (Bearden,

Netemeyer, and Teel 1989) and a 5-item e-opinion leadership

scale, which represented an adaptation of the Reynolds andDarden (1971) opinion leadership scale, but with the focus on

online behavior. The items on the two scales referred to above

are in Appendix A. Demographic information such as

respondents' age, gender, race, income and employment levels,

as well as level of education was also gathered.

Sample

Data were collected using students enrolled in marketing

classes at a Midwestern metropolitan university in the US.

These students were asked to administer the survey to an adult

respondent other than themselves in the city where theUniversity is located (see, e.g., Goldsmith, Lafferty, and Newell

2000; Lau and Ng 2001). They received extra course credit for

their participation in data collection. Lau and Ng (2001)

justified this data collection approach, citing the relatively

inexpensive cost and reduction of non-useable questionnaires

as one of its principal advantages. A total of 250 useable

questionnaires were returned. The first question asked

respondents whether they had ever made any online

purchases. Those who responded no to this question were not

included in the analysis, since the interest was in consumers

who used the Internet to make purchases. As a result, 30

questionnaires were excluded from the data analysis stage.

There were 115 men and 103 women (gender information for

two respondents was missing). Most of the respondents

(57.7%) fell into the 18-24 age range. The majority were

Caucasian (80.5%), and were either college graduates (30%) or

had some college experience (about 58%). A majority had

incomes below $15,000 (35%), although there were a number

of respondents who earned in excess of $50,000 (26.4%). Mos

were full-time (41.8%) or part-time (36.4%) employees. Refer

to Table 1 for the profile of the sample used in this study.

Table 1. Demographic Profile of Respondents

Construct

The results of a principal components factor analysis involving

the items on the susceptibility to informational influence scale

and the e-opinion leadership scale using varimax rotation are

reproduced in Table 2. This shows that the items loaded on the

"appropriate" factors. Assessment of the scales' reliabilities wa

conducted using Cronbach alphas. The reliabilities were 0.75

for the SII scale and 0.89 for the E-opinion leadership scale, in

both cases above the 0.70 level recommended by Nunnally and

Bernstein (1994). Accordingly, the items on each scale were

summed to form composite scales that measured the twoconstructs. The mean score on the susceptibility to

informational influence scale was 17.46 (SD = 8.03), while the

median score was 17.0. The mean score on the e-opinion

leadership scale was 16.95 (SD = 5.03), while the median score

was 17.0. In both cases, higher scores on the scales represented

higher levels of the construct.




Table 2. Factor Analysis Results, Alphas, and Descriptive

Statistics for Individual Difference Constructs

Data Analysis

After obtaining various descriptive statistics, a number of Mann-Whitney U-tests were performed, alternately using

susceptibility to informational influence, e-opinion leadership,

and gender as grouping variables. The analyses were

performed using SPSS 12.0 for Windows.

RESULTS

Awareness of Product Review Websites and Sources

Creating Awareness

After obtaining various descriptive statistics, a number of

Mann-Whitney U-tests were performed, alternately using

susceptibility to informational influence, e-opinion leadership,and gender as grouping variables. The analyses were

performed using SPSS 12.0 for Windows.

Participants' awareness of the existence of product review

websites was measured using a single Likert-type scale item.

We provided a description to the participants and asked them

to indicate how aware they were of product review websites

prior to reading the description. The description read: When

consumers have to shop online, they have access to websites

where companies and consumers provide product reviews and

feedback about consumers' experiences with purchasing and

using certain types of products. For example, Amazon.com hasa link on its website where consumers can provide reviews on

books that they have purchased from that company. These

websites can be classified as product review websites. Four

options were provided: not at all; somewhat aware; aware; very

aware. Of the participants in the sample, 13.6% indicated that

they were not at all aware of the existence of product review

websites. About 21% of the sample regarded themselves as

being very aware of the existence of product review websites

with the majority being somewhat aware (38%) or aware

(28%).

Figure 1: Awareness of product review websites

To determine what sources created awareness of product

review websites, participants were asked to indicate from

among several options how they became aware of these types

of websites. The options were: word-of-mouth from friend

family member, other person; surfing the Internet; Internet

search; news report/story; chatrooms/discussion forums

company communication; and other. Participants could check

more than one source of information. The primary source

creating awareness was Internet surfing. Of those who

indicated that they were aware of the existence of product

review websites, about 66% of them reported that they became

aware of them while surfing the Internet. Off-line word-of-

mouth communication was ranked as the second most

influential source of awareness, with 34% reporting that they

became aware of product review websites through this means

Company communication and online communication via

chatrooms and discussion forums did not play a major role in

creating awareness, as only 9.5% and 2.6%, respectively, of the

sample reported these as sources of information.

Visits to Product Review Websites and Factors Influencing

Visits

The current research was interested in the extent to which

consumers visited product review websites and used

information at these websites in their decision making. So

participants in this survey were asked (a) whether they had

ever visited a product review website; (b) whether they had

visited a product review website prior to purchasing a product




reviewed at that website; and (c) whether they had visited a

product review website after they had made a product

purchase. They were provided with options from which they

selected the main reason for visiting a product review website

prior to a product purchase. In the case of visits after a product

purchase, an open-ended question solicited their reasons for

visiting the site after a product purchase. The data from

participants who indicated that they were unaware of the

existence of product review websites were not included in the

analyses related to items b and c.

Of the total sample, 123 respondents indicated that they had

visited a product review website before (56% of all participants

who met the screening criterion; 65% of those who were aware

of product review websites). Hence, participants in this study

were more likely to have visited a product review website, but

more so when they were aware of their existence. Seventy six

(76) participants indicated that they had visited a productreview website prior to making a product purchase. This was

62% of those who said that they had ever visited a product

review website. There were significant differences in the

reasons posited for these visits (x2[6] = 55.16, p < .00). The

principal motivating factor was to use it as an additional

source of information (35.5%; refer to Table 3). The next

major motivating factor was the need for assurance or

reassurance that they were making a good (correct) choice

(27.6%). About 17% of the sample wanted to know what other

consumers were thinking. Few used the website as a primary

source of information prior to a product purchase (10.5%).

A small portion of our sample (n = 43; 35% of all respondents

who had visited a product review website before) had visited a

website after they made a product purchase. The principal

motivating factor was to see what other consumers thought

about the product (28%), while the need for reassurance (21%)

also figured prominently. A number of respondents gave one-

word responses such as "curiosity" and "dissatisfaction," which

were classified as Other reasons. About 19% wanted to provide

feedback (see Table 4).

Table 3. Factors influencing visit to product review

website prior to product purchase (n = 76)

Table 4. Factors influencing visit to product review

website after product purchase (n = 43)

Provision of Feedback at Product Review Websites

The likelihood of participants providing feedback at producreview websites was also explored. Since product review

websites owe their existence to consumer willingness to pos

feedback regarding their experiences with various brands and

companies, it was important to determine what percentage of

the sample had engaged in this activity. Of the 123 participant

that had ever visited a product review website, only 28% had

provided feedback at one of these sites. Among those who had

visited a product review website after a product purchase, this

percentage increased to 44%. In general, the participants

reported that extreme dissatisfaction or extreme satisfaction

with a product purchase experience would be the main factorsthat would influence them to provide feedback at a product

review website. This was the case also among those

respondents who had visited a product review website after a

product purchase (extreme dissatisfaction was ranked number

1 by 41% of these respondents; extreme satisfaction was

ranked number 1 by 25% of these respondents).




E-opinion Leadership, Consumer Susceptibility to

Informational Influence, Gender, and Product Review

Websites

The impact of two individual difference factors as well as

gender on consumers' awareness of and use of product review

websites was also investigated. On the basis of median splits of scores on the susceptibility to informational influence scale

and the e-opinion leadership scale (refer to Table 2),

respondents were divided into groups (high and low in

susceptibility to interpersonal influence; high and low e-

opinion leadership). Several Mann-Whitney U tests were

conducted, alternately using these three variables. The results

of the Mann-Whitney U tests are reported in Tables 5 through

7.

Table 5. Mann-Whitney U test Results: E-opinion

leadership

Table 6. Mann-Whitney U test results: Susceptibility to

Informational Influence

Table 7. Mann-Whitney U test results: Gender

As indicated in Table 5, the tests showed that e-opinion

leadership had a significant impact on all the dependen

variables of interest, with the exceptions of perceptions of the

importance of product review websites to consumers (z = -

1.68, p = 0.09) and whether they had visited a product review

website after a product purchase (z = -1.05, p = 0.29). E-

opinion leadership significantly affected (a) awareness of




product review websites (z = -3.25, p = 0.00), with high e-

opinion leadership respondents being more likely to be aware

of these websites than low e-opinion leadership respondents;

(b) whether respondents had ever visited a product review

website (z = -3.15, p = 0.00); (c) whether respondents had ever

visited a product review website prior to a product purchase (z

= -3.12, p = 0.00); (d) perceptions of these sites' influence on

consumer decision making (z = -3.26, p = 0.00); and (e)

provision of feedback at product review websites (z = -3.49, p

= 0.00). In all these cases, mean ranks for high e-opinion

leadership respondents were significantly higher than those for

low e-opinion leadership respondents. However, regardless of

whether they were low e-opinion leaders or high e-opinion

leaders, respondents perceived product review websites as

important to consumers but were not likely to have visited one

after a product purchase.

Unlike the pattern with e-opinion leadership, the pattern forsusceptibility of informational influence indicated that this

construct had a significant impact only on perceptions of the

importance of product review websites to consumers (z = -

2.51, p = 0.01), with the mean rank for high SII respondents

exceeding that of low SII respondents. There were no

significant differences in mean ranks across the other

variables.

The results indicated gender differences in the cases of

awareness of product review websites (z = -3.15, p = 0.00);

whether respondents had ever visited a product review website

(z = -3.12, p = 0.00); and whether they had visited one prior toa product purchase (z = -2.58, p = 0.01). In all cases, the mean

ranks for male respondents exceeded those of female

respondents. None of the other variables was susceptible to

gender differences.

DISCUSSION

A principal aim of this study was to glean information on

consumers' awareness and use of product review websites in

their decision making. This was against the background that

consumers now have at their disposal, in the online

environment, a rich array of comments and opinions, from

myriad sources, regarding experiences with various products

and brands. The Internet has fostered this consumer-to-

consumer articulation, and, as is the case with off-line word-

of-mouth communication, these online consumer-to-

consumer articulations are likely to have implications for

consumer behavior. In addition, the impact of two individual

difference factors, consumer susceptibility to informational

influence and e-opinion leadership, and gender on consumer

use of these product review websites, was investigated.

From a theoretical point of view, this study indicates that there

are a number of individual difference factors that ought to be

incorporated in any investigation or discussion of the effects

on online consumer-to-consumer articulations. It was seenfrom this study that consumers' perceptions of their level of e-

opinion leadership was one variable that impacted their

awareness and use of product review websites. It had an

impact on all but two of the seven variables that were assessed

Hence, this is an important construct in the discourse on

online consumer articulations. Even though susceptibility to

informational influence was not as overarching in its effects

there was still evidence that this construct impacted

perceptions of the importance of product review websites to

consumers. Consumers who are susceptible to informationa

influence attach more importance to these types of websitesthan do consumers who are less susceptible to informationa

influence. The results also lend support to the various studies

that have found gender differences in online communication

and consumer behavior. Men were more likely to be aware of

product review websites and to have visited them before and

also before a product purchase. Both groups felt that these

sites were important and had an impact on consumer decision

making. In addition, there were no gender differences in

posting feedback at product review websites. Hence, any

model that purports to explain how consumers respond to

online consumer-to-consumer articulations needs to take into

account the role of gender.

These results also hold managerial implications. Generally

consumers are aware of the existence of product review

websites and are likely to visit them when they are aware o

them. Consumers use them primarily for reassurance and as

source of additional information. It means, therefore, tha

marketers have to strive to minimize negative online

consumer articulations, given the reasons that consumers use

product review websites. This warrants additional attention, a

respondents in this survey indicated that it was the level of

dissatisfaction or satisfaction with a marketer that would

prompt them to provide feedback on one of these websites.

A task that marketing communications managers and brand

managers have to undertake is the identification of low and

high e-opinion leadership consumers. If companies want to

improve their offerings to consumers they could target high e

opinion leaders for their feedback and recommendations

since these consumers are more likely than low e-opinion




leaders to generate feedback to companies. Obviously, any

online feedback that these consumers provide would be

available to other interested consumers. Results also indicated

that consumers who are highly susceptible to informational

influence differ from lowly susceptible to informational

influence consumers in their perceptions of the importance of

product review websites. So, marketing communications

managers and brand managers could develop review websites

and target these consumers with them.

There are also implications from a public policy point of view.

Some companies may manipulate website information in

order to influence and obtain consumers, aware that various

consumers use product review websites prior to decision

making. So, for example, a company official who enters a

forum where a company's products are reviewed and posts

recommendations or positive feedback under the guise of

being an ordinary forum user would be doing somethingunethical. However, with the anonymity that the Internet

provides, one is not always certain who is posting what

information in cyberspace. Hence, it is important that there be

some mechanism in place to monitor the extent to which

companies associated with different websites manipulate

consumer feedback on these websites. The caveat "buyer

beware" is also applicable to consumers who are reliant on

these types of websites for their decision making.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

As with many research projects, this project suffered from

some limitations. A main concern is that students enrolled in

marketing classes at a Midwestern university in the United

States administered the survey to adults in the city in which

the university is located. Hence, this sample was not a

probability sample. So, there are limits on the extent to which

findings from this study can be generalized to the entire

population of Internet users. However, given the exploratory

nature of this study, it does contribute to an appreciation of

the importance of taking into account the possible impact of

product review websites on consumer decision making. Efforts

should be made to replicate this study with other groups of

consumers and across cultures, since it is likely that cross-cultural differences in consumer response to product review

websites also exist.

A screening criterion was used that excluded participants that

had never purchased items online, since the principal focus

was on those consumers who make online purchases.

However, it is very possible that there are consumers who may

rely on online product review websites when they make

purchases in traditional brick-and-mortar retai

establishments. These consumers, even though they use

product review websites, were excluded from our study

Future research should incorporate these consumers in

investigating the use of product review websites. Differences in

reasons for usage between online and offline purchasers could

be explored. Some respondents in this study also indicated

that they use these websites for reassurance. It would

therefore, be worthwhile to investigate the extent to which

these websites could play a role in fostering or minimizing

such negative consumer emotions as cognitive dissonance.

The role of two individual difference factors and how they

related to consumer use of product review websites was

explored. There are a number of other individual difference

factors that could be considered to determine the extent to

which they impact consumer use of product review websites

A factor closely related to e-opinion leadership is e-mavenism(see, e.g., Walsh & Mitchell 2001). The extent to which

consumers regard themselves as e-mavens is likely to impact

their visits to product review websites and their provision o

feedback at these websites. Consumers' perceptions of their

general expertise with using the Internet might also impact

whether they rely on product review websites. This is an issue

that is open to exploration. In addition, it is likely tha

demographic factors such as age and levels of education migh

have an impact on consumers' perceptions of these types o

websites. This, too, can be investigated, so that marketers can

better profile consumers who use these websites in their

decision-making.

Credibility of the websites will likely impact the extent to

which consumers rely on these types of websites in their

decision making. For example, consumers might perceive

consumer-operated websites differently from company

operated websites. In addition, at some websites, consumers

are paid to encourage their feedback. Some consumers might

discount the feedback provided at these "pay-for-feedback

websites. Future research should investigate the factors that

enhance product review website credibility. Also, across

cultures, there are likely to be differences in consumers

reliance on sources of information such as product review

websites. Cross-cultural studies that seek to identify these

differences should be undertaken.

The issue of consumer use of product review websites will

continue to attract attention from both researchers and

marketing communications managers and brand managers

given the impact that the Internet continues to have on




consumer behavior. The growth in these websites means that

much exchange of information can take place in virtual

communities, some of which marketers can control and some

of which they cannot control. Hence, it is necessary for them

to be able to establish profiles of consumers that are likely to

use these websites, as well as determine what factors will likely

influence how consumers perceive the information available at

these websites.

REFERENCE

Apanovitch, Anne Marie, Stevan E. Hobfoll, and Peter Salovey

(2002), "The Effects of Social Influence on Perceptual and

Affective Reactions to Scenes of Sexual Violence," Journal of

Applied Social Psychology, 32 (March), 443-464.

Armstrong, Arthur and John Hagel III (1996), "The Real Value

of On-line Communities," Harvard Business Review, 74

(May/June), 134-141.

Asch, Solomon E. (1955), "Opinions and Social Pressure,"

Scientific American, 193, 31-35.

Bagozzi, Richard P. and Utpal M. Dholakia (2002),

"Intentional Social Action in Virtual Communities," Journal of

Interactive Marketing , 16 (Spring), 2-21.

Bailey, Ainsworth A. (2004). Thiscompanysucks.com: The use

of the Internet in negative consumer-to-consumer

articulations. Journal of Marketing Communications, 10 (3),

169-182.

Bearden, William O., Richard G. Netemeyer, and Jesse E. Teel(1989), "Measurement of Consumer Susceptibility to

Interpersonal Influence," Journal of Consumer Research, 15

(March), 473-481.

Bickart, Barbara and Robert M. Schindler (2001), "Internet

Forums as Influential Sources of Consumer Information,"

Journal of Interactive Marketing , 15 (Summer), 31-40.

Bloch, Peter H. (1986). The Product Enthusiast: Implications

for Marketing Strategy. Journal of Consumer Marketing , 3 (3),

51-62.

Blodgett, Jeffrey G., Donald H. Granbois, and Rockney G.Walters (1993), "The Effects of Perceived Justice on

Complainants' Negative Word-of-Mouth Behavior and

Repatronage Intentions," Journal of Retailing , 69 (Winter),

399-328.

Bone, Paula Fitzgerald (1995), "Word-of-Mouth Effects on

Short-term and Long-term Product Judgments," Journal o

Business Research, 32 (March), 213-223.

Boush, David M. and Lynn Kahle (2001), "Evaluating Negative

Information in Online Consumer Discussions: From

Qualitative Analysis to Signal Detection," Journal ofEuromarketing , 11 (2), 89-105.

Burnkrant, Robert E. and Alain Cousineau (1975)

"Informational and Normative Social Influence on Buyer

Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, 2 (December), 206

215.

Butcher, Ken, Beverly Sparks, and Frances O'Callaghan (2002)

"Effect of Social Influence on Repurchase Intentions," Journa

of Services Marketing , 16 (6), 503-512.

Calder, Bobby J. and Robert E. Burnkrant (1977)

"Interpersonal Influence on Consumer Behavior: AnAttribution Theory Approach," Journal of Consumer Research

4 (June), 29-38.

Chatterjee, Patrali (2001), "Online Reviews: Do Consumers

Use Them?" in Advances in Consumer Research, M. C. Gilly

and J. Myers-Levy, eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer

Research, 129-134.

Chiou, Jyh-Shen and Cathy Cheng (2003), "Should a Company

have Message Boards on its Web Site?" Journal of Interactiv

Marketing , 17 (Summer), 50-61.

Corey, Lawrence G. (1971), "People Who Claim to be OpinionLeaders: Identifying Their Characteristics by Self-report,

Journal of Marketing , 35 (October), 48-53.

Deutsch, Morton and Harold B. Gerard (1955), "A Study of

Normative and Informational Influence upon Individua

Judgment," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 7

(November), 1-15.

Dholakia, Utpal M., Suman Basuroy, and Kerry Soltysinsk

(2002), "Auction or Agent (or Both?) A Study of Moderators

of the Herding Bias in Digital Auctions," International Journa

of Research in Marketing , 19 (June), 115-130.Dholakia, Utpal M. and Kerry Soltysinski (2001), "Coveted or

Overlooked? The Psychology of Bidding for Comparable

Listings in Digital Auctions," Marketing Letters, 12 (August)

225-237.




Dolinski, N., M Nawrat, and I. Rudak (2001), "Dialogue

Involvement as a Social Influence Technique," Personality and

Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1395-1406.

Eastman, Jacqueline K., Alan D. Eastman, and Kevin L.

Eastman (2002), "Insurance Sales Agents and the Internet: The

Relationship between Opinion Leadership, SubjectiveKnowledge, and Internet Attitudes," Journal of Marketing

Management , 18 (April), 259-285.

Flynn, Leisa Reinecke, Ron E. Goldsmith, and Jacqueline K.

Eastman (1996), "Opinion Leaders and Opinion Seekers: Two

New Measurement Scales," Journal of the Academy of

Marketing Science, 24 (Spring), 137-147.

Garbarino, Ellen and Michal Strahilevitz (2004), "Gender

Differences in the Perceived Risk of Buying Online and the

Effects of Receiving a Site Recommendation," Journal of

Business Research, 57 (July), 768-775.

Goldsmith, Ron E., Barabra A. Lafferty, and Stephen J. Newell

(2000), "The Impact of Corporate Credibility and Celebrity

Credibility on Consumer Reaction to Advertisements and

Brands," Journal of Advertising , 29 (Fall), 43-54

Ha, Young and Leslie Stoel (2004), "Internet Apparel Shopping

Behaviors: The Influence of General Innovativeness,"

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management , 32

(8/9), 377-385.

Hanson, Ward A. and Daniel S. Putler (1996), "Hits and

Misses: Herd Behavior and Online Product Popularity," Marketing Letters , 7 (October), 297-305.

Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, Kevin P. Gwinner, Gianfranco

Walsh, and Dwayne D. Gremler (2004), "Electronic Word-of-

Mouth via Consumer-Opinion Platforms: What Motivates

Consumers to Articulate Themselves on the Internet," Journal

of Interactive Marketing , 18 (Winter), 38-52.

Laczniak, Russell N., Thomas E. DeCarlo, and Sridhar N.

Ramaswami (2001), "Consumers' Responses to Negative

Word-of-Mouth Communication: An Attribution Theory

Perspective," Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11(1), 57-73.

LaTour, Stephen A. and Ajay K. Manrai (1989), "Interactive

Impact of Informational and Normative Influence on

Donations," Journal of Marketing Research, 26 (August), 327-

335

Lau, Geok Theng and Sophia Ng (2001), "Individual and

Situational Factors Influencing Negative Word-of-Mouth

Behaviour," Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 18

(September), 163-178.

Lazarsfeld, Paul F., Bernard Berelson, and Hazel Gaudet

(1948), The People's Choice: How the Voter Makes up His Mind

in a Presidential Campaign, New York, N.Y.: Columbia

University Press.

Lord, Kenneth R., Myung-Soo Lee, and Peggy Choong (2001)

"Differences in Normative and Informational Socia

Influence," in Advances in Consumer Research, Joan Meyers

Levy and Mary Gilly, eds., Salt Lake City, UT: Association for

Consumer Research, 280-285.

McGuire, William J. (1968), "Personality and Susceptibility to

Social Influence," in Handbook of Personality Theory and

Research, E. F. Borgatta & W. W. Lambert, eds., Chicago, IL

Rand McNally, 1130-1187.

Merton, Robert K. (1968), Social Theory and Social StructureGlencoe, IL: Free Press

Nunnally, Jim C. and Ira H. Bernstein (1994), Psychometri

Theory, New York, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill.

O'Cass, Aron and Tino Fenech (2003), "Web Retailing

Adoption: Exploring the Nature of Internet Users Web

Retailing Behavior," Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services

10 (March), 81-94.

O'Leary, Mick (2002), "Epinions Creates top Product

Community," Information Today, 19 (July/August), 14-16.

Park, C. W. and Lessig, P.V. (1977), "Students and

Housewives: Differences in Susceptibility to Reference Group

Influence," Journal of Consumer Research, 4 (September), 102

110.

Perry, Joellen (2000), "Online Reviews are Giving Consumers a

Bigger Voice," US News & World Report , February 7, 2000, p

61.

Ratchford, Brian, Myung-Soo Lee, and Debabrata Talukdar

(2003), "The Impact of the Internet on Information Search for

Automobiles," Journal of Marketing Research, 40 (May), 193-

209.

Reynolds, Fred D. and William R. Darden (1971), "Mutually

Adaptive Effects of Interpersonal Communication," Journal of

Marketing Research , 8 (November), 449-454.

Richins, Marsha L. (1982), "An Investigation of Consumers

Attitudes toward Complaining," in Advances in Consume




Research, A. A. Mitchell, ed., St. Louis, MO: Association for

Consumer Research, 502-506.

--- (1983), "Negative Word-of-Mouth by Dissatisfied

Consumers: A Pilot Study," Journal of Marketing , 47 (Winter),

68-78.

--- (1984), "Word of Mouth Communication as Negative

Information," in Advances in Consumer Research, T. Kinnear,

ed., St. Louis, MO: Association for Consumer Research, 697-

702.

Salancik, Gerald R. and Jeffrey Pfeffer (1978), "A Social

Information Processing Approach to Job Attitudes and Task

Design," Administrative Science Quarterly , 23 (June), 224-253.

Savicki, Victor, Dawn Lingenfekter, and Merle Kelly (1997),

"Gender Language Style and Group Composition in Internet

Discussion Groups," Journal of Computer-Mediated

Communications , http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol2/issue3.

Schlosser, Ann E. and Sharon Shavitt (2002), "Anticipating

Discussion about a Product: Rehearsing What to Say Can

Affect Your Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research, 29

(June), 101-115,

Senecal, Sylvain and Jacques Nantel (2004), "The Influence of

Online Product Recommendations on Consumers' Online

Choices," Journal of Retailing , 80 (Summer), 159-169.

Sheehan, Kim Bartel (1999), "An Investigation of Gender

Differences in On-line Privacy Concerns and Resultant

Behaviors," Journal of Interactive Marketing , 13(Autumn), 24-38.

Singh, Jagdip (1990), "Voice, Exit, and Negative Word-of-

Mouth Behaviors: An Investigation across Three Service

Categories," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 18

(Winter), 1-15.

Walsh, Gianfranco and Vincent-Wayne Mitchell (2001),

"German Market Mavens' Decision Making Styles," Journal of

Euromarketing , 10 (4), 195-212.

Woodside, Arch G. and M. Wayne Delozier (1976), "Effects of

Word of Mouth Advertising on Consumer Risk Taking," Journal of Advertising , 5 (Fall), 12-19.

APPENDIX A: Questionnaire Items used in Survey

A. Consumer Susceptibility to Informational Influence

Scale

1. I often consult other people to help choose the best

alternative available from a product class (INF1).

2. To make sure I buy the right product or brand, I often

observe what others are buying and using (INF2).

3. If I have little experience with a product, I often ask my

friends about the product (INF3).

4. I frequently gather information from friends and family

about a product before I buy (INF4).

B. Online Opinion Leadership*

1. My friends, family, and neighbors often ask me my advice

about shopping online (EOL1).

2. I sometimes influence my friends to shop online (EOL2).

3. People are more likely to come to me more often than I go

to them for information about online shopping (EOL3).

4. I feel that I am generally regarded by others as a good source

of advice about online shopping (EOL4).

5. I can think of at least one person whom I have told about

online shopping in the last six months (EOL5).

*All items were measured on 7-point scales anchored by

Strongly disagree and Strongly agree

C. Awareness of Product Review Websites

Description: When consumers have to shop online, they have

access to websites where companies and consumers provide

product reviews and feedback about consumers' experience

with purchasing and using certain types of products. For

example, Amazon.com has a link on its website where

consumers can provide reviews on books that they have

purchased from that company. These websites can be classified

as product review websites.

Prior to reading the above, were you aware of the existence of

product review websites? Please check one

(Not at all _____ Somewhat aware _____Aware _____ Very

aware ______)

D. Visit to Product Review Websites

Have you ever visited one of these product review websites?

(Yes ____ No ____)

E. Visit to Product Review Website Prior to Product

Purchase

Have you ever visited any product review websites prior to

making an online purchase? (Yes ___No ___)

http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol2/issue3

http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol2/issue3




F. Visit to Product Review Website After Product Purchase

Have you ever visited a product review website after you made

a product purchase? (Yes ___No ___)

G. Perceptions of Influence of Product Review Websites

To what extent do product review websites influence youronline purchase decisions?

(Not at all______A little _____ A lot _____ It depends on

product _____)

H. Perceptions of Importance of Product Review Websites

How important do you think product review websites are for

consumers? Please circle a number.

Not very important 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Very Important

I. Provision of Feedback at Product Review Website

I have provided feedback/review at a product review website.

(True _____ False ____)

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Ainsworth Anthony Bailey (Ph. D, University of Iowa) is an

assistant professor of marketing in the College of Business

Administration, University of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio, USA. His

research focuses on the effects of different sources and various

marketing communications stimuli on consumption behavior.

He has had articles published or forthcoming in Journal of

Marketing Communications, Journal of Retailing and

Consumer Services, Psychology and Marketing, and Journal of

Advertising. E-mail: [email protected].

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

Consumer Awareness and Use of Product Review Websites