Skip to main content
Log in

Double learning or double blinding: an investigation of vendor private information acquisition and consumer learning via online reviews

  • Big Data Analytics in Operations & Supply Chain Management
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, building upon information acquisition theory and using portfolio methods and system equations, we made an empirical investigation into how online vendors and consumers are learning from each other, and how online reviews, prices, and sales interact among each other. First, this study shows that vendors acquire information from both private and public channels to learn the quality of their products to make price adjustment. Second, for the more popular products and newly released products, vendors are more motivated to acquire private information that is more precise than the average precision to adjust their price. Third, we document a full demand-mediation model between rating and price. In other words, there is no direct linkage between price and rating, and the impact of rating on price (the vendor learning) as well as the impact of price on rating (the consumer learning) are all through demand. Our results show that there is no fundamental difference between the pricing decisions with and without the consumer generated contents. The price is still driven by the supply and demand relationship and vendors only adjust their price in response to review change when those reviews impact sales. We proposed either the impact of reviews has been incorporated into sales or reviews are less truth worthy due to potential review manipulation. Given the complicate situation, we call for further study to unveil this double learning process with double blinding results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In this paper, we use sales rank instead of sales because Amazon does not provide the actual sales number. For sales rank, that information is public available.

  2. This estimation is available through SYSLIN procedure in SAS. Qualitatively, the results do not change when we use 2SLS.

References

  • Amrouche, N., & Yan, R., (2015). A manufacturer distribution issue: How to manage an online and a traditional retailer. Annals of Operations Research. doi:10.1007/s10479-015-1982-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ancarani, F., & Shankar, V. (2002). Price levels and price dispersion: A comparison of pure play vs. bricks-and-mortar vs. bricks-and-clicks e-tailers. Working Paper, SDA Bocconi, Milan.

  • Anderson, T. W. (2005). Origins of the limited information maximum likelihood and two-stage least squares estimators. Journal of Econometrics, 127(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atiase, R. (1980). Predisclosure informational asymmetries, firm capitalization, financial reports, and security price behavior. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

  • Bailey, J. P. (1998). Electronic commerce: Prices and consumer issues for three products: Books, compact discs, and software, Organization for economic co-operation and development. OCDE/GD, 98, 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baltagi, B. H. (2001). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data (2nd ed.). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergen, M. E., Kauffman, R. J., & Lee, D. (2005). Beyond the hype of frictionless markets: Evidence of heterogeneity in price rigidity on the Internet. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(2), 57–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boulding, W. (1990). Unobservable effects and business performance: Do fixed effects matter? Marketing Science, 9(1), 88–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brynjolfsson, E., & Smith, M. (2000). Frictionless commerce? A comparison of Internet and conventional firms. Management Science, 46(4), 563–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cortese, A. E., & Stepanek, M. (1998). Good-bye to fixed pricing? How electronic commerce could create the most efficient market of them all. Business Week (May 4), pp. 71–84.

  • Chevalier, J., & Mayzlin, D. (2006). The effect of Word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(3), 345–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, P.-Y., Wu, S.-Y., & Yoon, J. (2004). The impact of online recommendations and consumer feedback on sales. In Proceeding of the international conference on information systems (pp. 711-724). Washington, DC.

  • Chong, A. Y. L., Li, B., Ngai, E. W., Ch’ng, E., & Lee, F. (2016). Predicting online product sales via online reviews, sentiments, and promotion strategies: A big data architecture and neural network approach. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 36(4), 358–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dellarocas, C., Awad, N. F., & Zhang, X. (2004). Exploring the value of online reviews to Organizations: Implications for revenue forecasting and planning. In Proceedings of the 25th international conference on information systems (ICIS), Dec 2004. Washington, DC.

  • Dellarocas, C. (2006). Strategic manipulation of internet opinion forums: Implications for consumers and firms. Management Science, 52(10), 1577–1593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erevelles, S., Rolland, E., & Srinivasan, S. (2001). Are prices really lower on the Internet? An analysis of the vitamin industry. Working Paper, AGSM.

  • Gaikar, D. D., Marakarkandy, B., & Dasgupta, C. (2015). Using Twitter data to predict the performance of Bollywood movies. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 115(9), 1604–1621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godes, D., & Mayzlin, D. (2004). Using online conversations to study word of mouth communication. Marketing Science, 23(4), 545–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu, B., & Ye, Q. (2014). First step in social media: Measuring the influence of online management responses on customer satisfaction. Production and Operations Management, 23, 570–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, N., Liu, L., & Zhang, J. J. (2008). Do online reviews affect product sales? The role of reviewer characteristics and temporal effects. Information Technology and Management, 9(3), 201–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, Y., & Zhao, J. (2014). Co-creating business value of information technology. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 114(1), 53–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, O., & Verrecchia, R. (1991). Trading volume and price reactions to public announcements. Journal of Accounting Research, 29, 302–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, O., & Verrecchia, R. (1994). Market liquidity and volume around earnings announcements. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 17(1), 41–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, O., & Verrecchia, R. (1997). Pre-announcement and event-period private information. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24, 395–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Ho Geun, Lee, Seung Chang, Kim, Hae Young, & Lee, Ran Hui. (2003). Is the internet making retail transactions more efficient? Comparison of online and offline CD retail markets. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 2(3), 266–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, X., & Hitt, L. M. (2008). Self-selection and information role of online product reviews. Information Systems Research, 19(4), 456–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., Li, H., Peng, G., Lv, B., & Zhang, C. (2015). Online purchaser segmentation and promotion strategy selection: Evidence from Chinese E-commerce market. Annals of Operations Research, 233(1), 263–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, F. S., Zettelmeyer, F., & Risso, J. S. (2001). Internet car retailing. Journal of Industrial Economics, 49(4), 501–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ngai, E. W., Moon, K. L. K., Lam, S. S., Chin, E. S., & Tao, S. S. (2015). Social media models, technologies, and applications: An academic review and case study. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 115(5), 769–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneible, Jr. R. A., & Stevens, Douglas E. (2005). Pre-announcement and event-period private information: A trading volume analysis of firm size and institutional ownership effects (Sep 30). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=817565.

  • Shen, W., Hu, Y. J., & Rees, J. (2015). Competing for attention: An empirical study of online reviewers’ strategic behaviors. MIS Quarterly, 39(3), 683–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological Methodology (pp. 290–312). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alain Yee Loong Chong.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hu, N., Dow, K.E., Chong, A.Y.L. et al. Double learning or double blinding: an investigation of vendor private information acquisition and consumer learning via online reviews. Ann Oper Res 270, 213–234 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-016-2243-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-016-2243-z

Keywords

Navigation