Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of membership tier on user content generation behaviors: evidence from online reviews

  • Published:
Electronic Commerce Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Online shopping websites typically classify customers into different membership tiers in their customer relationship management systems. This study investigates the effects of membership tiers on user content generation behaviors in the context of an electronic commerce marketplace that has a membership tier program and an online review system. Grounded in theories related to status, our study hypothesizes the effects of membership tiers on user content generation behaviors as well as the helpfulness of the content they generated in the context of online reviews. We collected online data from a world-leading shopping website. The results from our empirical analyses indicate that membership tier has a positive effect on review rating and review delay, whereas it has a negative effect on review depth. Additionally, we tested mediation effects of review rating, depth and delay between membership tiers and review helpfulness, and found that membership tier negatively affected review helpfulness indirectly. Interestingly, reviews posted by high-status customers are perceived as more helpful than those of others when we controlled for review characteristics. This study contributes to research on online product reviews and customer relationship management.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Information source: http://www.jd.com/intro/about.aspx.

  2. In October 15, 2013, the category of membership tiers was adjusted and classified into five grades. Sample data were extracted before the date and are not affected by the adjustment of membership tiers. Detailed information can be found at http://help.jd.com/help/question-57.html.

  3. The detailed rules for the growth of membership tiers can be found at http://help.jd.com/user/issue/163-368.html.

  4. With the development of the Internet and multiple new forms of media, traditional differences between search and experience goods have become blurred in the online environment [4, 87, 90]. To address this problem, a classification principle for search and experience products, depending on whether the dominant quality attributes are objective or subjective, has been proposed and applied [4, 13, 87, 90].

  5. At the time of the data collection, we were able to observe the same reviewers with multi-level membership tiers in this data set. That is to say, JD website used to record the level of membership tier of the reviewer at that time for each online review. However, the current version of the website only shows the current status of reviewers.

References

  1. Lacey, R., & Sneath, J. Z. (2006). Customer loyalty programs: Are they fair to consumers? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(7), 458–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Meyer-Waarden, L. (2008). The influence of loyalty programme membership on customer purchase behaviour. European Journal of Marketing, 42(1/2), 87–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lacey, R. (2009). Limited influence of loyalty program membership on relational outcomes. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 26(6), 392–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Klein, L. R. (1998). Evaluating the potential of interactive media through a new lens: Search versus experience goods. Journal of Business Research, 41(3), 195–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kwark, Y., Chen, J., & Raghunathan, S. (2014). Online product reviews: Implications for retailers and competing manufacturers. Information Systems Research, 25(1), 93–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Olshavsky, R. W., & Granbois, D. H. (1979). Consumer decision making-fact or fiction? Journal of Consumer Research, 6(2), 93–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Park, D. H., & Lee, J. (2009). eWOM overload and its effect on consumer behavioral intention depending on consumer involvement. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 7(4), 386–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pavlou, P. A., & Dimoka, A. (2006). The nature and role of feedback text comments in online marketplaces: Implications for trust building, price premiums, and seller differentiation. Information Systems Research, 17(4), 392–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang, J. Q., Craciun, G., & Shin, D. (2010). When does electronic word-of-mouth matter? A study of consumer product reviews. Journal of Business Research, 63(12), 1336–1341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Berger, J., Sorensen, A. T., & Rasmussen, S. J. (2010). Positive effects of negative publicity: When negative reviews increase sales. Marketing Science, 29(5), 815–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Clemons, E. K., Gao, G. G., & Hitt, L. M. (2006). When online reviews meet hyperdifferentiation: A study of the craft beer industry. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(2), 149–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mudambi, S. M., & Schuff, D. (2010). What makes a helpful online review? A study of customer reviews on Amazon. com. MIS Quarterly, 34(1), 185–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Schindler, R. M., & Bickart, B. (2012). Perceived helpfulness of online consumer reviews: The role of message content and style. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 11(3), 234–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Wu, P. F., Van der Heijden, H. & Korfiatis, N. (2011). The influences of negativity and review quality on the helpfulness of online reviews, Shanghai: ICIS 2011 Proceedings.

  16. Driskell, J. E., & Mullen, B. (1990). Status, expectations, and behavior a meta-analytic review and test of the theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16(3), 541–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Frank, R. H. (1985). Choosing the right pond: Human behavior and the quest for status. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kemper, T. D. (1991). Predicting emotions from social relations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54(4), 330–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Loch, C. H., Huberman, B. A., & Stout, S. (2000). Status competition and performance in work groups. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 43(1), 35–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Tanford, S. (2013). The impact of tier level on attitudinal and behavioral loyalty of hotel reward program members. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 34(September), 285–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Tanford, S., Raab, C., & Kim, Y. (2011). The influence of reward program membership and commitment on hotel loyalty. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 35(3), 279–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Li, M., Huang, L., Tan, C., & Wei, K. (2013). Helpfulness of online product reviews as seen by consumers: Source and content features. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 17(4), 101–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Luo, C., Luo, X. R., Xu, Y., Warkentin, M., & Sia, C. L. (2014). Examining the moderating role of sense of membership in online review evaluation. Information & Management, 52(3), 305–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Liu, Z., & Park, S. (2015). What makes a useful online review? Implication for travel product websites. Tourism Management, 47(4), 140–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Goes, P. B., Lin, M., & Au Yeung, C. (2014). “Popularity effect” in user-generated content: Evidence from online product reviews. Information Systems Research, 25(2), 222–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hong, Y., Huang, N., Burtch, G., & Li, C. (2016). Culture, conformity, and emotional suppression in online reviews. Journal of the Association of Information Systems, 17(11), 737–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Huang, N., Burtch, G., Hong, Y., & Polman, E. (2016). Effects of multiple psychological distances on construal and consumer evaluation: A field study of online reviews. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(4), 474–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim, W. G., Han, J. S., & Lee, E. (2001). Effects of relationship marketing on repeat purchase and word of mouth. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 25(3), 272–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gremler, D. D., Gwinner, K. P., & Brown, S. W. (2001). Generating positive word-of-mouth communication through customer-employee relationships. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(1), 44–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Dellarocas, C. (2003). The digitization of word of mouth: Promise and challenges of online feedback mechanisms. Management Science, 54(3), 460–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Duan, W., Gu, B., & Whinston, A. B. (2008). The dynamics of online word-of-mouth and product sales—An empirical investigation of the movie industry. Journal of Retailing, 84(2), 233–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Gopinath, S., Thomas, J. S., & Krishnamurthi, L. (2014). Investigating the relationship between the content of online word of mouth, advertising, and brand performance. Marketing Science, 33(2), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Hu, N., Koh, N. S., & Reddy, S. K. (2014). Ratings lead you to the product, reviews help you clinch it? The mediating role of online review sentiments on product sales. Decision Support Systems, 57(1), 42–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Cheung, C. M., & Lee, M. K. (2012). What drives consumers to spread electronic word of mouth in online consumer-opinion platforms. Decision Support Systems, 53(1), 218–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Qiu, L., Pang, J., & Lim, K. H. (2012). Effects of conflicting aggregated rating on eWOM review credibility and diagnosticity: The moderating role of review valence. Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 631–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Jiang, Z., & Benbasat, I. (2004). Virtual product experience: Effects of visual and functional control of products on perceived diagnosticity and flow in electronic shopping. Journal of Management Information Systems, 21(3), 111–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Pavlou, P. A., Liang, H., & Xue, Y. (2007). Understanding and mitigating uncertainty in online exchange relationships: A principal-agent perspective. MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 105–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Cao, Q., Duan, W., & Gan, Q. (2011). Exploring determinants of voting for the “helpfulness” of online user reviews: A text mining approach. Decision Support Systems, 50(2), 511–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ghose, A., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2011). Estimating the helpfulness and economic impact of product reviews: Mining text and reviewer characteristics. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 23(10), 1498–1512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Korfiatis, N., García-Bariocanal, E., & Sánchez-Alonso, S. (2012). Evaluating content quality and helpfulness of online product reviews: The interplay of review helpfulness vs. review content. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 11(3), 205–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Sweeney, J. C., Soutar, G. N., & Mazzarol, T. (2012). Word of mouth: measuring the power of individual messages. European Journal of Marketing, 46(1/2), 237–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lin, T. M., Lu, K., & Wu, J. (2012). The effects of visual information in eWOM communication. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 6(1), 7–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Chevalier, J. A., & 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 

  45. Wilson, E. J., & Sherrell, D. L. (1993). Source effects in communication and persuasion research: A meta-analysis of effect size. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21(2), 101–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Filieri, R., & McLeay, F. (2014). E-WOM and accommodation: An analysis of the factors that influence travelers’ adoption of information from online reviews. Journal of Travel Research, 53(1), 44–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Dichter, E. (1966). How word-of-mouth advertising works? Harvard Business Review, 44(6), 147–166.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Balasubramanian, S., & Mahajan, V. (2001). The economic leverage of the virtual community. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 5(3), 103–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Sundaram, D. S., Mitra, K., & Webster, C. (1998). Word-of-mouth communications: A motivational analysis. Advances in Consumer Research, 25(1), 527–531.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Picazo-Vela, S., Chou, S. Y., Melcher, A. J., & Pearson, J. M. (2010). Why provide an online review? An extended theory of planned behavior and the role of big-five personality traits. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 685–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Ridgeway, C. L., & Walker, H. A. (1995). Status structures. In K. S. Cook, G. A. Fine, & J. S. House (Eds.), Sociological perspectives on social psychology (pp. 281–310). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

  52. Lampel, J., & Bhalla, A. (2007). The role of status seeking in online communities: Giving the gift of experience. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 434–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. New York: Bedminister Press.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Frank, R. H. (1984). Interdependent preferences and the competitive wage structure. The Rand Journal of Economics, 15(4), 510–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Berger, J., Cohen, B. P., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1972). Status characteristics and social interaction. American Sociological Review, 37(3), 241–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Thye, S. R. (2000). A status value theory of power in exchange relations. American Sociological Review, 65(3), 407–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Washington, M., & Zajac, E. J. (2005). Status evolution and competition: Theory and evidence. Academy of Management Journal, 48(2), 282–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Ball, S. B., & Eckel, C. C. (1996). Buying status: Experimental evidence on status in negotiation. Psychology & Marketing, 13(4), 381–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Gerber, G. L. (1996). Status in same-gender and mixed-gender police dyads: Effects on personality attributions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59(4), 350–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Huberman, B. A., Loch, C. H., & Önçüler, A. (2004). Status as a valued resource. Social Psychology Quarterly, 67(1), 103–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Fisek, M. H., Conner, T. L., & Berger, J. (1983). Expectation states theory: A theoretical research program. Lanham: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Tobias, M., & Dennis, K. (2014). Don’t take away my status!—Evidence from the restructuring of a virtual reward system. Computer Networks, 75(12), 477–490.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Zhang, X., & Wang, C. (2012). Network positions and contributions to online public goods: The case of Chinese Wikipedia. Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(2), 11–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Heyman, J., & Ariely, D. (2004). Effort for payment a tale of two markets. Psychological Science, 15(11), 787–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Ariely, D., Bracha, A., & Meier, S. (2009). Doing good or doing well? Image motivation and monetary incentives in behaving prosocially. American Economic Review, 99(1), 544–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Zhang, X., & Zhu, F. (2011). Group size and incentives to contribute: A natural experiment at Chinese Wikipedia. American Economic Review, 101(4), 1601–1615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Burtch, G., Hong, Y., Bapna, R., & Griskevicius, V. (2016). Stimulating online reviews by combining financial incentives and social norms. Management Science. doi:10.1287/mnsc.2016.2715.

  68. Krosnick, J. A., Boninger, D. S., Chuang, Y. C., Berent, M. K., & Carnot, C. G. (1993). Attitude strength: One construct or many related constructs? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(6), 1132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Casaló, L. V., Flavián, C., & Guinalíu, M. (2008). The role of satisfaction and website usability in developing customer loyalty and positive word-of-mouth in the e-banking services. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 26(6), 399–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. de Matos, C. A., & Rossi, C. A. V. (2008). Word-of-mouth communications in marketing: A meta-analytic review of the antecedents and moderators. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(4), 578–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Zeelenberg, M., & Pieters, R. (2004). Beyond valence in customer dissatisfaction: A review and new findings on behavioral responses to regret and disappointment in failed services. Journal of Business Research, 57(4), 445–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Pan, Y., & Zhang, J. Q. (2011). Born unequal: A study of the helpfulness of user-generated product reviews. Journal of Retailing, 87(4), 598–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Bazerman, M. H., Loewenstein, G. F., & White, S. B. (1992). Reversals of preference in allocation decisions: Judging an alternative versus choosing among alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(2), 220–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Skowronski, J. J., & Carlston, D. E. (1989). Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of explanations. Psychological Bulletin, 105(1), 131–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Herr, P. M., Kardes, F. R., & Kim, J. (1991). Effects of word-of-mouth and product-attribute information on persuasion: An accessibility-diagnosticity perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(4), 454–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Ballou, D. P., & Pazer, H. L. (1985). Modeling data and process quality in multi-input, multi-output information systems. Management Science, 31(2), 150–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Nelson, R. R., Todd, P. A., & Wixom, B. H. (2005). Antecedents of information and system quality: An empirical examination within the context of data warehousing. Journal of Management Information Systems, 21(4), 199–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion; psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven, CT, US: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 15(4), 635–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Connors, L., Mudambi, S. M., & Schuff, D. (2011). Is it the review or the reviewer? A multi-method approach to determine the antecedents of online review helpfulness. Hawaii: IEEE.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  81. Bailey, A. A. (2005). Consumer awareness and use of product review websites. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 6(1), 90–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. 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 

  83. Weathers, D., Sharma, S., & Wood, S. L. (2007). Effects of online communication practices on consumer perceptions of performance uncertainty for search and experience goods. Journal of Retailing, 83(4), 393–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Nelson, P. (1970). Information and consumer behavior. The Journal of Political Economy, 78(2), 311–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Nelson, P. (1974). Advertising as information. The Journal of Political Economy, 82(4), 729–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Huang, P., Lurie, N. H., & Mitra, S. (2009). Searching for experience on the web: An empirical examination of consumer behavior for search and experience goods. Journal of Marketing, 73(2), 55–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Bei, L. T., Chen, E. Y. I., & Widdows, R. (2004). Consumers’ online information search behavior and the phenomenon of search vs. experience products. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 25(4), 449–467.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Jiang, P. (2004). The role of brand name in customization decisions: A search vs experience perspective. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 13(2), 73–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Cao, Y., Gruca, T. S., & Klemz, B. R. (2003). Internet pricing, price satisfaction, and customer satisfaction. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8(2), 31–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Duan, W., Gu, B., & Whinston, A. B. (2008). Do online reviews matter?—An empirical investigation of panel data. Decision Support Systems, 45(4), 1007–1016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Sun, M. (2012). How does the variance of product ratings matter? Management Science, 58(4), 696–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf.

  94. Hong, Y., & Pavlou, P. A. (2014). Product fit uncertainty in online markets: Nature effects, and antecedents. Information Systems Research, 25(2), 328–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Diehl, K., & Poynor, C. (2010). Great expectations?! Assortment size, expectations, and satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(2), 312–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding was provided by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71331007), Capital University of Economics and Business (Grant No. 00791554410262) and National Planning Office of Philosophy and Social Science (Grant No. 15AGL001).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information, Capital University of Economics and Business, 121 Zhangjialukou, Huaxiang Fengtai District, Beijing, 100070, People’s Republic of China

    Dongpu Fu

  2. Department of Information Systems, W.P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University, Main Campus, PO BOX 874606, Tempe, AZ, 85287-4606, USA

    Yili Hong

  3. Department of Management Science and Engineering, School of Business, Renmin University of China, No. 59 Zhongguancun Street, Haidian District, Beijing, 100872, People’s Republic of China

    Kanliang Wang

  4. Department of Accounting and Information Systems, Pamplin College of Business, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Pamplin Hall, Suite 3007, Virginia Tech 880 West Campus Drive, Blacksburg, VA, 24061, USA

    Weiguo Fan

Authors
  1. Dongpu Fu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yili Hong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kanliang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Weiguo Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kanliang Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fu, D., Hong, Y., Wang, K. et al. Effects of membership tier on user content generation behaviors: evidence from online reviews. Electron Commer Res 18, 457–483 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-017-9266-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-017-9266-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation