[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i4p2024-d498792.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer Adoption of Consumer-Created vs. Expert-Created Information: Moderating Role of Prior Product Attitude

Author

Listed:
  • Do-Hyung Park

    (Graduate School of Business IT, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, Korea)

Abstract
Today, consumer-created information such as online consumer reviews have become important and popular, playing a key role in consumer decision making. Compared with expert-created information, each piece of information is less powerful or persuasive, but their aggregation can be more credible and acceptable. This concept is called collective intelligence knowledge. This study focuses on the persuasive effect on consumer product attitudes of consumer-created information compared to expert-created information. Using source credibility and familiarity theory, the study reveals how prior brand attitudes can play a moderating role in the persuasive effect of consumer-created information and expert-created information. Specifically, this study shows how consumer-created information is more persuasive when consumers have more favorable prior brand attitudes, while expert-created information is more persuasive when consumers have less favorable prior brand attitudes. Based on the results, this study proposes practical strategies for information structure, curation, and presentation. If a company has a good-quality brand evaluation of its products, it should increase the weight of consumer-created information such as online consumer reviews. Otherwise, the company needs to first improve brand evaluation through expert-created information such as third-parties or power-blogger reviews.

Suggested Citation

  • Do-Hyung Park, 2021. "Consumer Adoption of Consumer-Created vs. Expert-Created Information: Moderating Role of Prior Product Attitude," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-12, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:2024-:d:498792
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/2024/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/2024/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bong-Goon Seo & Do-Hyung Park, 2020. "The Effective Type of Information Categorization in Online Curation Service Depending on Psychological Ownership," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-13, April.
    2. Yubo Chen & Jinhong Xie, 2005. "Third-Party Product Review and Firm Marketing Strategy," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 218-240, February.
    3. Dholakia, Ruby Roy & Sternthal, Brian, 1977. "Highly Credible," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 3(4), pages 223-232, March.
    4. Paul Resnick & Christopher Avery & Richard Zeckhauser, 1999. "The Market for Evaluations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 564-584, June.
    5. Do-Hyung Park, 2019. "Virtuality Changes Consumer Preference: The Effect of Transaction Virtuality as Psychological Distance on Consumer Purchase Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-16, November.
    6. Price, Linda L. & Feick, Lawrence F. & Higie, Robin A., 1989. "Preference heterogeneity and coorientation as determinants of perceived informational influence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 227-242, November.
    7. Dellarocas, Chrysanthos, 2003. "The Digitization of Word-of-mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms," Working papers 4296-03, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    8. Chrysanthos Dellarocas, 2003. "The Digitization of Word of Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(10), pages 1407-1424, October.
    9. Steven M. Shugan, 2003. "Editorial: Compartmentalized Reviews and Other Initiatives: Should Marketing Scientists Review Manuscripts in Consumer Behavior?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 151-160.
    10. Bong-Goon Seo & Do-Hyung Park, 2020. "Did You Invest Less Than Me? The Effect of Other’s Share of Investment on Psychological Ownership of Crowdfunding Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-13, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Do-Hyung Park & Sungwook Lee, 2021. "UGC Sharing Motives and Their Effects on UGC Sharing Intention from Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives: Focusing on Content Creators in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-13, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yubo Chen & Jinhong Xie, 2008. "Online Consumer Review: Word-of-Mouth as a New Element of Marketing Communication Mix," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(3), pages 477-491, March.
    2. Edgardo Arturo Ayala Gaytán, 2009. "Social network externalities and price dispersion in online markets," Ensayos Revista de Economia, Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon, Facultad de Economia, vol. 0(2), pages 1-28, November.
    3. Gary E. Bolton & Elena Katok & Axel Ockenfels, 2004. "How Effective Are Electronic Reputation Mechanisms? An Experimental Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1587-1602, November.
    4. Rockenbach, Bettina & Sadrieh, Abdolkarim, 2012. "Sharing information," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 689-698.
    5. Britta Hoyer & Dirk van Straaten, 2021. "Anonymity and Self-Expression in Online Rating Systems - An Experimental Analysis," Working Papers Dissertations 70, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    6. Gesche, Tobias, 2018. "Reference Price Shifts and Customer Antagonism: Evidence from Reviews for Online Auctions," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181650, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    7. Dominik Gutt & Jürgen Neumann & Steffen Zimmermann & Dennis Kundisch & Jianqing Chen, 2018. "Design of Review Systems - A Strategic Instrument to shape Online Review Behavior and Economic Outcomes," Working Papers Dissertations 42, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    8. Yang Liu & Juan Feng & Xiuwu Liao, 2017. "When Online Reviews Meet Sales Volume Information: Is More or Accurate Information Always Better?," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 723-743, December.
    9. Jinhong Xie & Eitan Gerstner, 2007. "Service Escape: Profiting from Customer Cancellations," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 18-30, 01-02.
    10. Mellinas, Juan Pedro & Martínez María-Dolores, Soledad-María & Bernal García, Juan Jesús, 2016. "Effects of the Booking.com scoring system," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 80-83.
    11. Yogesh V. Joshi & Andres Musalem, 2021. "When Consumers Learn, Money Burns: Signaling Quality via Advertising with Observational Learning and Word of Mouth," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(1), pages 168-188, January.
    12. Chen, Liyun, 2009. "What do we pay for asymmetric information? The evolution of mechanisms in online markets," MPRA Paper 22506, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Luís Cabral & Lingfang (Ivy) Li, 2015. "A Dollar for Your Thoughts: Feedback-Conditional Rebates on eBay," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(9), pages 2052-2063, September.
    14. Li, Lingfang (Ivy) & Xiao, Erte, 2010. "Money Talks? An Experimental Study of Rebate in Reputation System Design," MPRA Paper 22401, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Christoph Schneider & Markus Weinmann & Peter N.C. Mohr & Jan vom Brocke, 2021. "When the Stars Shine Too Bright: The Influence of Multidimensional Ratings on Online Consumer Ratings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 3871-3898, June.
    16. Tingting Nian & Arun Sundararajan, 2022. "Social Media Marketing, Quality Signaling, and the Goldilocks Principle," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 540-556, June.
    17. Do-Hyung Park & Sungwook Lee, 2021. "UGC Sharing Motives and Their Effects on UGC Sharing Intention from Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives: Focusing on Content Creators in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-13, August.
    18. Jansen, Thomas & Moura, Francisco Tigre, 2024. "WOM, eWOM and WOMachine: The evolution of consumer recommendations through a systematic review of 194 studies," IU Discussion Papers - Marketing & Communication 3 (Juni 2024), IU International University of Applied Sciences.
    19. Yabing Jiang & Hong Guo, 2015. "Design of Consumer Review Systems and Product Pricing," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 714-730, December.
    20. Ni Huang & Yili Hong & Gordon Burtch, 2015. "Digital Social Visibility, Anonymity and User Content Generation: Evidence from Natural Experiments," Working Papers 15-04, NET Institute.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:2024-:d:498792. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.