Estimating the Effect of Social Influence on Subsequent Reviews

  • Saram HanEmail author
  • Chris K. Anderson
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)


This study proposes an effective way of using retailer-prompted review data from TripAdvisor to measure the social network effect in self-motivated online reviews by overcoming the reflection problem. After applying the network effect model, we find that self-motivated review ratings are positively associated with previous corresponding peer reviews. We further show that the size of this peer effect attenuates as the peer reviews are located further away from the first page. This study suggests that reviewer ratings are more strongly influenced by peer ratings located on the visible page.


Peer effect eWOM on-line review 


  1. 1.
    Anderson M, Magruder J. Learning from the crowd: regression discontinuity estimates of the effects of an online review database*. Econ J. 2012;122(563):957–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Askalidis G, Kim SJ, Malthouse EC. Understanding and overcoming biases in online review systems. Decis Support Syst. 2017;97:23–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bramoull´e Y, Djebbari H, Fortin B. Identification of peer effects through social networks. J Econ. 2009; 150(1):41–55.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brock WA, Durlauf SN. Identification of binary choice models with social interactions. J Econ. 2007;140(1):52–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen Y, Xie J. Online consumer review: word-of-mouth as a new element of marketing communication mix. Manage Sci. 2008;54(3):477–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dellarocas C, Zhang X, Awad NF. Exploring the value of online product reviews in forecasting sales: the case of motion pictures. J Interact Market. 2007;21(4):23–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eryarsoy E, Piramuthu S. Experimental evaluation of sequential bias in online customer reviews. Inf Manag. 2014;51(8):964–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghose A, Ipeirotis PG. Estimating the helpfulness and economic impact of product reviews: mining text and reviewer characteristics. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 2011;23(10):1498–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Glaeser EL, Kim H, Luca M. Nowcasting gentrification: using yelp data to quantify neighborhood change. AEA Papers Proc. 2018;108:77–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Godes D, Silva JC. Sequential and temporal dynamics of online opinion. Market Sci. 2012;31(3):448–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goldsmith-Pinkham P, Imbens GW. Social networks and the identification of peer effects. J Bus Econ Stat. 2013;31(3):253–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li X, Hitt LM. Self-selection and information role of online product reviews. Inf Syst Res. 2008;19(4):456–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Manski CF. Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem. Rev Econ Stud. 1993;60(3):531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Muchnik L, Aral S, Taylor SJ. Social influence bias: a randomized experiment. Science. 2013;341(6146):647–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Oliver RL. Effect of expectation and disconfirmation on postexposure product evaluations: an alternative interpretation. J Appl Psychol. 1976;62(4):480–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sikora RT, Chauhan K. Estimating sequential bias in online reviews: a Kalman filtering approach. Knowl Based Syst. 2012;27:314–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tiwari A, Richards TJ. Social networks and restaurant ratings. Agribusiness, 2016;32(2):153–74. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Hotel AdministrationCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations