Understanding and Overcoming Biases in Customer Reviews

April 01, 2016 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› arXiv.org

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Georgios Askalidis, Edward C. Malthouse arXiv ID 1604.00417 Category cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction Cross-listed cs.CY, cs.SI Citations 3 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Our paper contributes to the literature recommending approaches to make online reviews more credible and representative. We analyze data from four diverse major online retailers and find that verified customers who are prompted (by an email) to write a review, submit, on average, up to 0.5 star higher ratings than self-motivated web reviewers. Moreover, these email-prompted reviews remain stable over time, whereas web reviews exhibit a downward trend. This finding provides support for the existence of social influence and selection biases during the submission of a web review, when social signals are being displayed. In contrast, no information about the current state of the reviews is displayed in the email promptings. Moreover, we find that when a retailer decides to start sending email promptings, the existing population of web reviewers is unaffected both in their volume as well as the characteristics of their submitted reviews. We explore how our combined findings can suggest ways to mitigate various biases that govern online review submissions and help practitioners provide more credible, representative and higher ratings to their customers.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Human-Computer Interaction

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted