Advertisement

The Effect of Service Cost, Quality, and Location on the Length of Online Reviews

  • Antonio D. SirianniEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11186)

Abstract

The use of costly sanctioning by individuals has been found to enhance cooperation and pro-social behavior, especially when a centralized system of authority is either non-existent or unable to sanction anti-social behavior. Online review systems have offered a centralized location for decentralized social control: individuals who are unhappy with a service provided can offer negative feedback, harming the reputation of the service provider. The cost of services provided and the quality of service received may determine the level of motivation individuals have to compose a detailed online review. Furthermore, differences between markets and cultural norms regarding sanctioning behavior may also affect how much effort individuals will spend on online sanctioning. These relationships are tested using a corpus of reviews pulled from an online review system for various home, auto, and medical services.

Keywords

Online reviews E-commerce Social control 

References

  1. 1.
    Rapoport, A., Chammah, A.: Prisoner’s Dilemma: A Study in Conflict and Cooperation, vol. 165. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor (1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hardin, G.: The tragedy of the commons. Science 211, 1390–1396 (1968)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Axelrod, R., Hamilton, W.: The evolution of cooperation. Science 162, 1243–1248 (1981)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heckathorn, D.: Collective action and the second-order free-rider problem. Ration. Soc. 1, 78–100 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McGlohon, M., Glance, N., Reiter, Z.: Star quality: aggregating review to rank products and merchants. In: ICWSM, pp. 114–121 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fei, G., Mukherjee, A., Liu, B., Hsu, M., Castellanos, M., Ghosh, R.: Exploiting burstiness in review for review spammer detection. In: ICWSM, pp. 175–184 (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mukherjee, A., Venkataraman, V., Liu, B., Glance, N.: What yelp fake review filter might be doing? In: ICWSM, pp. 409–418 (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Akoglu, L., Chandy, R., Faloutsos, C.: Opinion fraud detection in online review by network effects. In: ICWSM, pp. 2–11 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pavlou, P., Dimoka, A.: The nature and role of feedback text comments in online marketplaces: implications for trust building, price premiums, and seller differentiation. Inf. Syst. Res. 17, 392–414 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Archak, N., Ghose A., Ipeirotis, G.: Show me the money! Deriving the pricing power of product features by mining customer reviews. In: SIGKDD, pp. 56–65 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K.P., Walsh, G., Gremler, D.D.: Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: what motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the Internet. J. Interact. Market. 18, 38–52 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bakashi, S, Kanuparthy, P., Gilbert, E.: Demographics, weather and online review: a study of restaurant recommendations. In: WWW, pp. 443–454 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Oosterbeek, H., Sloof, R., Van De Kuilen, G.: Cultural differences in ultimatum game experiments: evidence from a meta-analysis. Exp. Econ. 7, 171–188 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Henrich, J., et al.: Costly punishment in human societies. Science 312, 1767–1770 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cohen, D., Nisbett, R.E.: Pers. Soc. Psychol. 20, 551–567 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations