Digital and Mobile Commerce
Loading...
Paper Number
1047
Paper Type
Completed
Description
This paper focuses on inconsistency among a set of reviews and explores how, why, and when the presence of cross-review incoherence influences consumers’ purchase deferral—their likelihood of making a “buy/not buy” decision immediately after consulting the reviews or deferring it until after obtaining more information. Based on the cognitive dissonance theory, we hypothesize that (a) the presence of cross-review incoherence or attribute-level contradictions among a set of reviews leads to lower certainty in consumer attitudes and a higher likelihood of purchase deferral, (b) this effect transpires through consumers’ helpfulness and credibility evaluations of the review set, and (c) the effect of cross-review incoherence on review set evaluations is weakened when the specificity of the context behind reviewers’ opinions is high. We conducted two experiments and found support for these predictions.
Recommended Citation
Yin, Dezhi; de Vreede, Triparna; Steele, Logan Macray; and de Vreede, Gert-Jan, "Cross-Review Incoherence and Purchase Deferral" (2021). ICIS 2021 Proceedings. 2.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2021/digital_commerce/digital_commerce/2
Cross-Review Incoherence and Purchase Deferral
This paper focuses on inconsistency among a set of reviews and explores how, why, and when the presence of cross-review incoherence influences consumers’ purchase deferral—their likelihood of making a “buy/not buy” decision immediately after consulting the reviews or deferring it until after obtaining more information. Based on the cognitive dissonance theory, we hypothesize that (a) the presence of cross-review incoherence or attribute-level contradictions among a set of reviews leads to lower certainty in consumer attitudes and a higher likelihood of purchase deferral, (b) this effect transpires through consumers’ helpfulness and credibility evaluations of the review set, and (c) the effect of cross-review incoherence on review set evaluations is weakened when the specificity of the context behind reviewers’ opinions is high. We conducted two experiments and found support for these predictions.
When commenting on articles, please be friendly, welcoming, respectful and abide by the AIS eLibrary Discussion Thread Code of Conduct posted here.
Comments
22-Digital