07026579

1

Ewom-How do consumers evaluate online

product reviews when making a purchase

decision?

07026579

2

Acknowledgements

Firstly I would like to thank my family, boyfriend and best friend for all their

support and guidance in times of struggle. Secondly I would like to thank

my participants for their time and completing my questionnaire. And finally

I would like to thank my dissertation supervisor Richard Gay for his

support and David Hart for his additional help in Richard‟s absence

07026579

3

Abstract

Electronic word of mouth (ewom) is an online extension of traditional wom that offers greater scope and speed of information diffusion. It is a com-munication medium that has seen a sudden increase in popularity. There-fore, it is of particular interest to marketers to further understand consumer buyer behaviour. This dissertation explores to what extent consumers are influenced by online product reviews when making their purchase deci-sions.

Recent academic research suggests that ewom in the form of online prod-uct reviews can influence sales of a product and or service. Factors such as source credibility, argument strength and community trust within the online context are all key influencers over a consumers decision to pur-chase. This study aims to explore the influence of these factors further in order to understand how the consumer evaluates electronic word of mouth in the form of an online product review and to what degree it influences a con-sumers product purchase decision. The research followed a quantative design method by using online survey questionnaires. The primary findings from this study showed how: consumers are less like-ly to trust brand sites when conducting information seeking behaviour, product information is the primary motive for information seeking and the credibility of the product review itself is more influential than the source when making purchase decisions and finally that a consumers evaluation of an online product review will strongly influence a consumers purchase decision. Key words: Ewom, Motivations, Purchase decisions, Source credibility The study also showed how more research needs to be conducted into source and information credibility as well as the motivations for posting online reviews and that using a multi-methods approach in future research to further understand motivations would benefit this topic area.

07026579

4

Contents Page

Title Page ................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Declarations................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Acknowledgements .................................................................................... 2

Abstract ...................................................................................................... 3

Contents Page ............................................................................................ 4

Chapter 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................. 8

1.1 Introduction to study .......................................................................... 9

1.2 Research Objectives ......................................................................... 9

Chapter 2.0 Literature Review .................................................................. 11

2.1 Introduction to chapter ..................................................................... 12

2.2 From traditional to electronic wom................................................... 12

2.3 The growing popularity of ewom ..................................................... 13

2.4 How does ewom influence sales? ................................................... 13

2.5 Motivations for seeking .................................................................... 15

2.6 Electronic word of mouth platforms ................................................. 15

2.6.1 Independent product review sites ............................................. 15

2.6.2 Independent Retailer sites ........................................................ 16

2.6.3 Brand website ........................................................................... 16

2.6.4 Personal blogs, Message boards and Social networking sites .. 17

2.7 Virtual communities (VC‟s) .............................................................. 17

2.7.1 Perceived trust in a virtual community .......................................... 17

2.8 Source credibility ............................................................................. 19

2.9 Online consumer reviews ................................................................ 20

2.10 Consumer review and purchase decision ...................................... 21

2.11 Valence of views ........................................................................... 22

2.12 Information Adoption Model .......................................................... 23

2.13 Hypotheses ................................................................................... 23

Figure 2.1 Table of hypotheses .......................................................... 24

2.13 Summary of chapter ...................................................................... 25

Chapter 3.0 Methodology ......................................................................... 26

Figure 3.1: Methodology map ............................................................ 27

07026579

5

3.1 Introduction to chapter ..................................................................... 28

3.2 Secondary Research ....................................................................... 28

3.4 Primary Research ............................................................................ 29

3.4.1 Philosophical paradigms: .......................................................... 30

3.4.2 Positivism as a paradigm .......................................................... 30

3.4.3 Research Approach .................................................................. 31

3.4.4 Deductive .................................................................................. 31

3.5 Primary Research Strategy ............................................................. 32

3.5.1 Quantative versus Qualitative ................................................... 32

3.5.2 Research Method ...................................................................... 32

3.5.3 Questionnaire design ................................................................ 33

3.6 Pilot Study ....................................................................................... 33

3.7 Sampling ......................................................................................... 34

3.8 Location ........................................................................................... 35

3.9 Participants ..................................................................................... 35

3.10 Data analysis techniques .............................................................. 35

3.11 Survey Limitations ......................................................................... 36

3.12 Ethical considerations ................................................................... 36

3.13 Summary of chapter ...................................................................... 37

Chapter 4.0 Findings and Analysis ........................................................... 38

4:1 Introduction to chapter ..................................................................... 39

Figure 4.1: Age demographics of respondents .................................. 39

4.2 Descriptive findings ......................................................................... 40

4.2.1 What is your motivation for posting an online product review? ..... 40

Figure 4.2 Motivations for posting ...................................................... 40

4.2.2 How do you rate the quality of a review based on the amount of

content available? ................................................................................. 41

Figure 4.3: Rating a review based on information content ................. 41

4.3 Hypotheses ..................................................................................... 42

4.3.1 H1: Respondents are less likely to trust social networking and

brand websites when seeking online product reviews ........................... 43

07026579

6

4.3.2 H2: Respondents primary motivation for information seeking is to

find out more information about the product .......................................... 44

Figure 4.5: Primary motivations for information seeking .................... 44

4.3.3 H3: The credibility of the product review itself is more important to

the respondents than the site it is hosted on or the individual reviewer. 46

Figure 4.6: Credibility of the information and the source .................... 46

4.3.4 H4: A consumer‟s evaluation of online product reviews will strongly

influence their decision to purchase ...................................................... 47

Figure 4.7: How consumers evaluate the credibility of review content

........................................................................................................... 48

Figure 4.8: How do respondents rate the influence of online product

reviews on their purchase decisions .................................................. 49

4.4 Hypotheses Confirmation ................................................................ 50

Figure 4.9: Hypotheses ...................................................................... 50

4.5 Summary of chapter ........................................................................ 51

Chapter 5.0 Discussion and Conclusion ................................................... 52

5.1 Introduction to chapter ..................................................................... 53

5.2 H1: Respondents are less likely to trust social networking and brand

websites when seeking online product reviews. .................................... 53

5.3 H2: Respondents Primary motivation for information seeking is to

find out more information about the product. ......................................... 54

5.4 H3: The credibility of the product review itself is more important to

respondents than the site it is hosted on or the individual reviewer ...... 55

5.5 H4: A consumer‟s evaluation of online product reviews will strongly

influence their decision to purchase. ..................................................... 56

5.6 Limitations ....................................................................................... 57

5.7 Further Research Recommendations .............................................. 57

5.8 Summary of chapter ........................................................................ 58

References ............................................................................................ 58

Bibliography .......................................................................................... 65

Bibliography ................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Appendix A- Reflective statement ............................................................. 66

Appendix B: Cheung et al (2008) Information Adoption Model ................. 68

Appendix C- Pilot Questionnaire ............................................................... 69

07026579

7

Appendix D: Pilot Questionnaire- Changes made ................................. 74

Appendix E: Final Questionnaire ........................................................... 87

Appendix F: Questionnaire Justifications .............................................. 92

Appendix G: Ethics Forms ........................................................................ 99

07026579

8

Chapter 1.0 Introduction

07026579

9

1.1 Introduction to study

Traditionally “Word of mouth is a consumer dominated channel of

marketing communication where the sender is independent of the market”.

Brown et al (2007) since the advent of the internet, this method has

evolved and now has an additional element in the form of electronic word

of mouth (ewom).Key ewom thinkers Hennig-Thurau et al (2010) refer to

ewom as “any positive or negative statement made by potential, actual

and former customers about a product or a company via the internet”.

ewom as a communication method has opened up a world of opinions by

introducing avenues that were not readily available in the past including

“social networking sites, blogs, wikis, recommendation sites and online

communities” Hennig-Thurau et al (2010) ,Wuyts et al (2010). This is a

current area of interest in the marketing field as marketers begin to

develop their knowledge of consumer information exchange online, in

order to further understand motivations for seeking and posting ewom and

how this information contributes to purchase decision behaviour. The topic

is also of particular interest to the researcher to understand how

consumers share and adopt information posted online.

The researcher will conduct a quantitative study to find out how consumers

share information online. Areas that will be addressed include: Platform

preference, motivations for information seeking, how they evaluate the

credibility of a product review and how this influences a product purchase

decision. By researching these interactions the author hopes to discover

how perceptions are developed, how and why consumers purchase their

particular products and what is their motivation for sharing their

experiences with others using ewom communication.

1.2 Research Objectives

The researcher has formulated a set of research objectives in order to

identify areas of exploration and assist in structuring this report. Saunders

07026579

10

et al (2003) define these as “are clear specific statements that identify

what the researcher wishes to accomplish as a result of doing the

research”.

The research objectives for this study were:

To explore the concepts and theories surrounding the topic of

electronic word of mouth

To find out what factors of electronic word of mouth help shape a

person‟s perspective of a product

To gather information from a sample of 100+ participants from

various age groups who already engaged in electronic word of

mouth and are part of a virtual community

To find out what sites these participants use and their reasoning

To find out what participants motivations for information seeking

To find out how consumers evaluate the credibility of a product

review

To find out how consumers evaluation of an online product review

influences their purchase decisions.

07026579

11

Chapter 2.0 Literature Review

07026579

12

2.1 Introduction to chapter

In this chapter the researcher will detail and critically analyse a wide range

of literature surrounding electronic word of mouth and its effects on a

consumers purchase decision. In particular it will cover: traditional wom

and ewom, influence on sales, platforms, virtual communities, valence of

views, individual reviewers, online product reviews and Cheung et al

(2008) information adoption model. The chapter will conclude with a set of

hypotheses the author wishes to test.

2.2 From traditional to electronic wom

Word of mouth (wom) has a “strong influence on product and service

perceptions, leading to changes in judgements, value ratings and the

likelihood of purchase” Arndt (1967) Fitzgerald Bone (1995). It is viewed

by Cheung et al (2007) as one of the” most powerful communication tools

we use today, due to its influence on product and service judgement”.

However since the advent of the internet providing “online interaction and

uncapped sharing benefits”, wom has expanded into the online context in

the form of electronic word of mouth Bikhart and Schindler (2001). This

gives consumers the “chance to share information on a series of platforms

online” Brown et al (2007). This revolution has extended the traditional

word of mouth medium (an informal conversation with trusted

acquaintances) to “an online archived directory available to over 1.6 billion

internet users” Internet world stats (2010). One of key ewom thinkers

Hennig Thurau et al (2004) defines ewom as a communication that;

“refers to any positive or negative statement made by potential, actual or

former customers about a product service or company which is made

available to a multitude of people via the internet”. Litvin et al, (2005)

further updates this definition by saying that ewom is “the informal

communications through internet based technology concerning the usage

or characteristics or particular goods and services, or their sellers or

providers”. This illustrates how the definition has evolved over a 4 year

period, and has further established the importance of viewer perceptions

07026579

13

to particular characteristics and people involved. Ewom as an online tool

enables users to “discuss and share opinions on a variety of topics in real

time anonymously”, in what Litvin et al, (2005) defines as a “virtual reality”.

2.3 The growing popularity of ewom

The popularity ewom as a tool has increased to a dramatic extent over the

last 5 years with over “500 million internet users using social networking

sites alone” Internet world stats (2010).The introduction of ewom platforms

such as: “social networking, blogs, opinion forums and product review

websites has opened up endless possibilities with consumers to discuss a

range of interests, products and services” Bikhart and Schindler (2001).

The informal nature of ewom is unique in the way it draws consumers in by

giving them a voice and a choice of platforms tailored to their needs.

Whilst also eliminating more traditional physical barriers and “providing

more direct channels to experts in a variety of fields and utilizing search

functionality to do so” Buda and Zhang (2000). Using ewom platforms to

search for information on products and services has become the norm in

many respects as using the “specificity of discussion topics” and using the

“internet as an enabler” allows the users to “find opinions and review

variants on near enough any potential purchase decision in the world”

Fong and Burton (2010). Authors Sun et al (2006) also believe that ewom

has the potential to “influence the adoption and use of products and or

services due to the informal nature in which the information is delivered

and interpreted by the receiver” further verified by Cheung and Rabjohn

(2008). Therefore it a topic of interest to marketers to further understand

how consumers evaluate their purchase decisions using this

communication medium Goldsmith and Horowitz (2006).

2.4 How does ewom influence sales?

Traditionally ewom has had a “higher impact in the services context

primarily the travel and hospitality industry” due to the nature of a “service

experience” requirement Litvin et al, (2005). However, due to the increase

of the internet popularity with more emphasis on “search” with consumers

07026579

14

using popular search engines such as “Google and Yahoo” and

emphasising online marketplaces such as “Amazon and Ebay” this has

extended more recently to cover the product context also Jarvenpaa and

Tractinsky (1999). Key authors Godes and Mayzlin (2004) say there is an

“increasing need for marketers to better understand the relationship

between ewom and offline sales”. A study by Chevalier and Mayzlin (2006)

investigated the impact of ewom on product sales using existing

databases from amazon.com and Barnesandnoble.com. Its findings

suggested that positive review improvement for a book at each site leads

to increased sales of that book at the same site. Sorensen and Rasussen

(2004) also suggest that positive reviews can increase book sales. Ye et al

(2009) believe that this concept is applicable to both RPS and EPS

purchases. Research into the influence of online accommodation reviews

on hotel room sites in china provided results indicating how a 10%

increase of positive reviews reflected a 4.4% rise in sales. However, Davis

and Khazanchi (2008) discovered from their research into ewom attributes

and their effect on ecommerce sales that although “online product reviews

have potential to influence a consumer‟s purchase decision, they are not

the sole contributor for product sales”. Their findings dictate how the”

interaction between fellow consumers when posting ewom, is more

significant in a consumers purchase decision than the basic attributes”.

This can be made up by valence of views, volume of information and is

dependent on the product that is been discussed. Clemons (2008)

disagrees with Davis and Khazanchi (2008) and believes that online

reviews are the sole contributor for increased sales. His study into “how

information changes consumer behaviour” provides an example of a small

beer wholesaler in Pennsylvania “with 90% of its customer base within a

10 mile radius. Whose sales rose dramatically by a 2/3 after the

implementation of a website and exposure to rateabeer.com (online beer

review community) with 1/3 of demand coming from outside the state”.

Hence these results would indicate that there is a positive correlation

between an increase in positive reviews and increase in sales for a given

07026579

15

product and or service however Davis and Khazanchi (2008) believe that

there are other influences that still need to be considered.

2.5 Motivations for seeking

Wolfinbarger and GIlly (2001) say that when consumers have” an idea of a

product they require further product information to clarify their decision”.

Hennig-Thurau (2004) study into consumer motivations provided the

foundations to information seeking behaviour. This was further backed up

Goldsmith and Horowitz (2006) study into “scaling measurement

motivations” to measure consumer‟s motivations for information seeking.

Its findings concluded that there are 8 main motivations for information

seeking:” Risk, Other opinions, Price comparison, Ease of access, by

accident, it‟s cool, Product information, and to seek information to follow

up traditional advertising methods”. Bikhart and Schindler (2001) state that

the availability of uncapped product information is an attractive feature in

the information seekers decision making process the consumers seek

information to clarify their purchase decision and to interact with fellow

consumers who have a shared interest in the product in order to find out

more product information Sher (2009). Goldsmith and Horowitz (2006).

2.6 Electronic word of mouth platforms

Bikhart and Schindlers (2001) study into ewom provided the following

platforms as the most popular used in product information exchange:

“Product review websites (e.g. consumer review) retailer‟s sites

(e.g.amazon.com), brands websites (e.g. forum.us.dell), personal blogs,

message boards and social networking sites (e.g. Facebook, MySpace)”.

2.6.1 Independent product review sites

Independent product review sites are generally known to be free of

marketing ploys Xue & Phelps (2004). The goals of such websites are to

help consumers make informed buying decisions by providing a platform

to share their product experiences. Ewom posted on an independent

product review website may be more likely to be attributed to the

07026579

16

reviewer‟s “true feeling about the products actual performance making the

ewom on the product review website more persuasive than

recommendations posted on a more formal platform such as a brand

website” Senecal & Nantel (2004), Xue and Phelps (2004), Bikhart and

Schindler (2001).

2.6.2 Independent Retailer sites

Independent retailer sites such as amazon.com are independent sites that

sell a wide range of products Senecal & Nantel (2004), Bikhart and

Schindler (2001) however they differ from traditional brand websites as

they do not own the product names themselves. These sites offer the

consumers the chance to read product reviews and to also purchase the

product directly of the site is required. Bikhart and Schindler (2001) believe

that the “all in one site functionality” is attractive to a consumer when

seeking a product review evaluation because it offers them a variance of

views and a site to directly purchase products.

2.6.3 Brand website

When ewom is posted on a brands website, consumers may perceive a

possibility of the reviewer being “influenced by the marketer” Xue and

Phelps ( 2004).Therefore the persuasion of a consumer generated product

review is “decreased due to the extent that there is a high possibility of a

marketer involvement that would influence the reviewer to provide a

biased representation of the products actual performance” Senecal and

Nantel (2004) Xue and Phelps (2004) Schindler and Bikhart (2001).The

consumer may also attribute the ewom towards a certain circumstance

“(e.g. the communicator is compensated by the brand for reviewing the

product favourably)” Therefore the discounting principle in attributional

theory Kelley (1973) suggests that ,”consumers may discount the products

actual performance as a reason for writing the review and not be

persuaded by the reviewers product recommendation”.

07026579

17

2.6.4 Personal blogs, Message boards and Social networking sites

Bikhart and Schindler (2001) found that the subjects who gathered product

information from these types of online forums showed greater interest in

the product topic than those who acquired information on corporate

websites. However Xue and Phelps (2004) found that the superiority of an

online forum (versus a brands website) to influence brand attitudes

appeared only when participants had more experiences with offline wom

and less involvement with the product.

2.7 Virtual communities (VC’s)

In order for EWOM platforms to be effective they need to have followers.

Followers in the EWOM context are what we refer to as virtual

communities (VC‟s). Rheingold (1993) refers to virtual communities as a

“social aggregate that emerges when enough people carry on a public

discussion long enough with sufficient human feeling to form webs of

personal relationships in cyberspace” this is further backed up by Kollock

(1996). The awareness of VC‟s has grown considerably as Evans et al

(2001) makes reference to VC‟s as a “relatively unexplored source of

ewom”. However Godes and Mayzlin (2005) research conducted 5 years

later describe VC‟s as a “collection of likeminded people who come

together to discuss and share areas about a wide range of topics using

ewom platforms, for ease of access whilst also to read and post messages

for discussion”. Further thinking on VC‟s by authors Park and Lee (2008)

refer to them more as a “collective group focused on sharing information

on a many to many basis” and that their “online interactions are based

upon shared enthusiasm for and knowledge of a specific consumption

activity”.

2.7.1 Perceived trust in a virtual community

VC‟s within the consumers preferred platform offer “an inclusive mind-set

and shared group identity, around the consumers area of interest” Blanton

(2001). The difficulty that consumers face using these platforms is built in

the very nature of ewom in the form of anonominity Chatterjee (2001).

07026579

18

However, even though the identity of the communicators making up the

virtual community is unknown, the consumer indirectly believes that there

is a “greater likelihood of finding people with product expertise among

weak tie communicators and is therefore more likely to trust the

recommendations”. Duhan et al (1997). Moorman et al (1991) Further

defines trust within these communities as “the willingness to rely on an

exchange partner in whom one has confidence” further supported by

Granitz and Ward (1996). Without this trust there would be no basis for

virtual communities to exist Lifen (2010). In the VC context the” importance

of confidence and reliability” act as the “sole basis of the relationship

development between a trustor and trustee, due to the lack of control the

trustor has over the actions of a trustee”. Jarvenpaa et al (1999) Lyons

(2004)Therefore the VC provides a virtual space for consumers with

similar interests and” expert knowledge in a particular field to share this

information in an environment they trust” Goldsmith and Horowitz (2006).

The perception is that these members are “motivated to share honest

experiences of a product in the most beneficial way for both the credibility

of the consumer and the reliability of the VC as a whole” Goldsmith and

Horowitz (2006), Corritore et al (2003). Nelson and Otnes (2005) study

into” cross-cultural ambivalence” provides the perfect example of trust

within a virtual community. Their study investigated the element of trust in

„bridal virtual VC‟s‟. Their findings concluded that brides within these VC‟s

came together to discuss wedding related “marketing activities, personal

experiences and useful websites whilst also providing emotional support,

social comparison and camaraderie”. Indirectly they left a left a trail of

product service recommendations to archive their experiences for future

members. Gruen et al (2006) The members of this community were seen

by new members as “weak-tie” experts Pitta and Fowler (2005) as they

shared similar information and experiences focused on wedding planning.

Which a novice information seeker would see as a product or service

recommendation and providing they have the same interest would most

07026579

19

likely base their purchase decisions on the information provided by the

community.

2.8 Source credibility

Another interesting theme that appears in the literature surrounding online

consumer reviews is the motivation and “credibility of the source” providing

the individual reviews Rains (2007).Source credibility identifies the

“expertise and bias” as elements that determine the credibility of an

information source Buda and Zhang (2000), Birnbaum and Stegner (1979).

Chaiken (1980) furthers define it as the extent in which the information

source is perceived to be “believable, competent and trustworthy by

information recipients”. Bikhart and Schindler (2001) made the suggestion

that this information source may have greater credibility than traditional

marketing generated information, as the personal opinion and account of a

participant who has experienced the product first hand is judged to be a

trustworthy source Corritore (2003). Eagly and Chaiken (1975) believe that

the persuasiveness of a message depends on the “number of positive

attributes that the communicator posses. Authors Ko et al (2005) further

define this in an online context as an information source that is highly

credible, i.e. an expert in the field and the information provided by the

source will lead to the facilitation of knowledge transfer and reliability”

Grewal et al(1994). Consumers desire for “social interaction, economic

incentives, concern for other consumers and potential to enhance their

own self-worth are the primary factors leading to articulation behaviour”

Hennig Thurau et al (2004).

In the online context these evaluations must be made from the relatively

impersonal text-based resource exchange provided by actors on a

particular site network. Hung and Li (2007) Because of the lack of physical

cues this evaluation takes place in a reduced or altered cues environment.

If the individual possess greater awareness and knowledge about a

market and products within it Mitchell & Dacin, (1996), they are more likely

to be ranked highly in the expertise by other reviewers. The individuals are

07026579

20

referred to as experts or opinion leaders by Katz & Lazarfeld (1955) and

they assist in accelerating the diffusion of information Tadelis (2002) Some

sites request that a background of the reviewer, photograph, some history

and location must be provided in order to use it, this is not the case in all

consumer review websites Therefore other users must rely solely on the

professionalism of the reviews and whether or not the views are plausible

Schindler and Bikhart (2005). Authors Brown et al (2007) investigation into

online source credibility discovered that the website factors were more

predominant factors in an individual‟s evaluation of source credibility rather

than review contributor individuals themselves, therefore the website acts

as a mediator and actor in the social networking process.

2.9 Online consumer reviews

Online consumer reviews are defined by the Opinion Research

Corporation (2010) as the consultation of online reviews, blogs and other

sources of online customer feedback with 70% of respondents consulting

these before making a purchase decision. These reviews cover a majority

or products, services and experiences Chatterjee (2001). For the purpose

of this study the author will define and further explore online consumer

reviews in a product context and discuss how these are used by

consumers to assist them in evaluating ewom when making their product

purchase decisions. Online consumer product reviews as defined by

authors Park et al (2007) state that an “online consumer review has a dual

role; it provides information about products and services and also serves

as a recommendation of a particular product or service”. The researcher

believes that due to the popularity of ewom in recent years and supporting

evidence provided by the Opinion Research Corporation (2010) stating

that 61% of their research sample used online consumer reviews in their

evaluation of a product purchase. Therefore it is essential to further

research how and why these reviews influence product decision making.

Xiofen and Yiling‟s, (2009) study into the “most effective advertising

methods”, concluded that consumer opinions on the network in the form of

07026579

21

ewom are more effective than traditional advertising methods”. This could

be down to the scope and depth of information it provides without being

restricted to the consumers local social network. This is further supported

by authors Brown and Reigan (1987); Biyalogorsky et al (2003). This is

further supported by Nielsen‟s annual global online survey (2010) which

discovered that 70% of consumer trust opinions online.

2.10 Consumer review and purchase decision

Online consumer reviews are posted by users who have had a personal

interaction/experience with a particular product Park et al (2007). This

shows that how individuals personal usage and taste preferences are

more likely to affect this dependent on the consumers own product

preferences. I.e. if someone buys an apple ipod for use in a daily commute

situation without any outstanding loyalty to apple as a brand then their

review will differ to that of a Brand loyal apple consumer who uses the ipod

all day every day (www.apple.com). It is for this reason that the author

finds it appropriate to discuss that the product discussed in an online

consumer review differs depending on whether and how a product

specifically fulfils a consumers needs on a more individualistic basis

Goldsmith (2006). Rather than primarily focusing on the product attributes,

the online consumer review offers more context on how the usability,

adaptability and relevance differ between consumers Flavian (2005).

Authors Chen and Xie (2008) conducted further research investigating this

as part of the marketing mix and concluded that consumer reviews are

more “user orientated and able to find products matching specific

consumer‟s interests and needs which are more notably applicable when

applying to the unsophisticated novice consumer”. Senecal and Nantel

(2004). State how novice consumers are more likely to “disregard the

traditional 3rd party product reviews” as they perceive them as more biased

towards the needs of a company rather than them as an individual

consumer .Chen, xie This is further backed up by Doh (2009) who says

consumers also evaluate the ways in which the product value could

07026579

22

contribute to their daily lifestyle activities This study although limited to an

EPS product (digital camera) and using American review sites gives the

author some indication of how these reviews are viewed and provides a

basis for further research.

2.11 Valence of views

More out-dated studies by authors Adaval (2001) and Chatterjee (2001)

have provided a basis to examine the effects of ewom valence and to see

how both positive and negative reviews influence a consumer‟s purchase

decision Lerman and Sen (2007). Traditionally a negative review (nwom)

of a product would be valued more highly than a positive review (pwom) of

the same product Yang and Mai (2008). However, the ideals are more

focused around the consumers existing relationship with the product and

whether or not they already have a positive association with it. If this is the

case then consumers will seek out online reviews that put the product in a

positive light to confirm their decision Dargan (2008) These consumers are

more likely to disregard negative reviews as it goes against their product

perception. Ward and Ostrom (2001) In contrast Lerman and Sen (2007)

examination into negative reviews on the web hypothesised that

consumers are more likely to seek negative reviews than positive ones for

their purchase decisions, as in offline consumer behaviour. However their

findings depicted the opposite by concluding how consumers are actually

more likely to look for positivity review bias in reviews and „weigh up the

negativity options, due to the nature of the reviewer using the product and

how it was fit for that individual‟s purpose” . Lee et al (2008) furthers this

by saying that reviews that offer a variance of views influence a purchase

decision due to shared consumer interest, number of reviews and further

resonation with individual reviewers. Sun et al (2009) further backed this

up using findings from their investigation into “how consumers evaluate

ewom” which suggested that the presence of NWOM can actually increase

the credibility of ratings therefore gaining the trust of the consumer and

reducing marketer bias.

07026579

23

2.12 Information Adoption Model

The information adoption process is what Nonaka (1994) defines as the

“internalization phase of knowledge transfer, in which explicit information is

transformed into internalized knowledge and meaning”. This process has

evolved over the years and is a theory in which Cheung et al (2008)

believe to directly link to a consumers purchase intention. The” information

adoption model” Cheung et al (2008) was formulated from the foundations

of the elaboration likelihood model (ELM) devised by Sussman and Siegal

(2003). This model was created to explain how consumers are „influenced

to adopt information posted in “computer-mediated communication

contexts”. ELM depicts how consumers can be influenced by a message

that influences attitudes and behaviour both centrally and peripherally i.e.

the quality of an argument and external influences to that argument. Within

this model, these are broken up into information quality and source

credibility. Due to the ever-changing developments in technology this

model is now seen as out-dated. Cheung et al (2008) proposes the

information adoption model chosen to be adapted by the author to fulfil the

purchase decision objective. This model looks into receiver‟s behaviour

when evaluating the credibility of a source and a review. McKnight and

Kacmar (2002) discuss how information credibility is a vital predictor on

the online consumer‟s further action and how a consumer that „believes

the online information has no reason not to adopt it‟. (Model can be found

in Appendices B)

2.13 Hypotheses

The author has devised the following hypotheses based on the evaluation

of the literature that this study will aim to measure in order to see how

consumers evaluate reviews

07026579

24

Figure 2.1 Table of hypotheses

Hypotheses Supporting Authors

H1 Respondents are less

likely to trust social

networking and brand

websites when seeking

online product reviews

Bikhart and Schindler

(2001) Xue and Phelps

(2004) Senecal and Nantel

(2004) Gruen et al (2006)

Sen and Lerman (2007)

Dellocras (2003)

H2 Respondents primary

motivation for

information seeking is to

find out more

information about the

product

Bellman et al (1999)

Bikhart and Schindler

(2001) Park et al (2007)

Hodkinson et al (2000)

Wolfinbarger and Gilly

(2001)

H3 The credibility of the

product review itself is

more important to the

respondents than the

site it is hosted on or the

individual reviewer

Park et al (2007) Cheung

et al (2008) Brown et al

(2007) Bhatterjee and

Sanford (2006) Mcknight

and Kacmar (2002)

Grewal, (1994)

H4 A consumers evaluation

of online product

reviews will strongly

influence their decision

to purchase

Sun et al (2006) Jarvanpaa

et al (1999) Lee et al

(2008) Park and Lee

(2008) Litvin et al (2005)

Cheung et al (2008)

Goldsmith and Horowitz

(2006) Mcknight and

Kacmar (2002)

07026579

25

2.13 Summary of chapter

The author has discussed a wide range of literature focused around the

evaluation of electronic word of mouth and its possible influence on as

consumers purchase decision. The information adoption model has also

been discussed in order to see to what degree do consumer view the

information credible and decide to purchase as a result.

The next chapter will discuss the authors chosen research method in order

to explore this topic further and further discover to what extent online

product review influence purchase intention.

07026579

26

Chapter 3.0 Methodology

07026579

27

The researcher has chosen to put together this methodology map to

provide the reader with a more visual overview of the chosen research

method for this study.

Figure 3.1: Methodology map

07026579

28

3.1 Introduction to chapter

The literature review in chapter two provided a set of gaps in which the

researcher wanted to further explore, classed as hypotheses. In order to

do this it is imperative to distinguish, both the set process and rationale in

a methodological way, to ensure any replication or future study has a

credible background. Lewis, Saunders and Thornhill, 2003 state that this

allows the methodology to be re-tested in future studies. For the purposes

for this study the methodology aimed to explore the relationship between

particular attributes that influence electronic word of mouth adoption and

whether or not this has any influence over a consumers purchase

decision.

In this chapter the author considered the research scope, philosophy,

approach, strategy and method. The author then analysed the limitations

and ethical considerations of the primary research in this project to ensure

the data was obtained by correct ethical means and all limitations were

extensively justified.

3.2 Secondary Research

Saunders et al (2003) State that: „Secondary data can provide a useful

source from which to answer your research question (s)‟.In order to

effectively define the primary research question the researcher has

conducted a thorough analysis of secondary research with a direct link to

electronic word of mouth. It is from this that the researcher then

discovered gaps in the literature when determining its influence on a

consumers purchase decision. Initially, a variety of online journals and

statistical databases were consulted on the above. The researcher then

further consulted some of the more dated traditional word of mouth theory

in a variety of books to establish more credibility in the field. Websites and

online forums were also explored by the author to provide examples of the

reviews in action, therefore giving the author a feel for the online

07026579

29

environment and further understand how this information was

communicated, and whether or not this varied in different online situations.

From the secondary research findings the author found that most of the

literature around electronic word of mouth had a direct focus on its

evaluation with brief articles looking for links between this and a

consumers purchase decision. It is from this that the author decided on the

following key themes, providing the primary research with a more direct

focus of enquiry.

Electronic word of mouth platforms

Virtual Communities

Individual reviewers

Online opinions

Information adoption model as a means of product evaluation

According to Burns and Bush 2010 and further verified by Saunders et al

2003, there are both advantages and disadvantages when using

secondary data in your research project, although the information gained

from these sources are easy to obtain, inexpensive, readily available, and

hold the possibility to enhance primary data. Other elements such as the

information being: misinterpreted, outdated, differing measurement units

and false interpretation of the academic terminology when analysing these

could prove problematic. Therefore the researcher understands the

importance of being aware of these issues in order to overcome them.

3.4 Primary Research

Burns and Bush (2006) define primary research as the ‟process by which

data is developed and gathered by the researcher specifically for research

projects‟. The researcher will be conducting primary research in order to

further verify some of the secondary research mentioned above. The

author believes that the electronic word of mouth topic as a whole does

07026579

30

not offer a vast amount of secondary data that investigates the linkages

between electronic word of mouth evaluation and purchase decision and

therefore wishes to investigate this further.

3.4.1 Philosophical paradigms:

Research philosophy is the way that researchers look at the development

of knowledge. Without having a solid philosophical position the researcher

believes there would be problems when interpreting the research that will

be collated, as it „provides a basis to examine these assumptions,

challenge them and behave in a different way if there is a quantifiable

need to‟. Saunders et al (2003) Hussey and Hussey (1997) claim that

researchers basic beliefs about the world will be reflected in the way which

research is designed, collected, analysed and presented. Within this there

are two primary conflicting philosophies that determine the principles and

methods of the author‟s research. Positivism and Interpretivism. Positivism

takes a more scientific law-like generalizable approach in contrast to

Interpretivism which has a focus on understanding the more complex

issues that differ between situations Saunders et al (2003) However due to

the researchers scientific approach to the topic the researcher has decided

to use „Positivism‟ as a foundation research philosophy.

3.4.2 Positivism as a paradigm

The researcher believes that due to the core principles of positivism,

reflecting that of a „natural scientist‟ combined with the observation of

social reality and establishment of factual generalizability, will in effect

make the results from this research more succinct, credible and applicable

to answering the research question. Salkind (2009) Due to the nature of

the research question and the currency of ewom topic, the researcher

believes that the positivism approach will provide a solid ground for

replication of this study and that the highly structured method will also

provide a feasible foundation for further study into electronic word of

mouth as a new area of interest. The author relied heavily on the use of

quantitative data which is objective in nature and concentrates on

07026579

31

measuring phenomena. This involves collecting and analysing numerical

data and applying statistical tests.

3.4.3 Research Approach

When deciding on the research approaches there are two conflicting

views. Deductive and Inductive. The deductive approach focuses on

developing existing theory which can be verified by further testable

hypotheses. In contrast the inductive approach looks at the ways in which

to collect data and develop theory as a result of the data analysis in

contrast.

3.4.4 Deductive

Due to the scientific nature of this research paper, the researcher has

decided to take a deductive approach as it will be the most effective when

analysing the results. The deductive approach offers the researcher the

chance to test a particular theory, in this paper Cheung‟s 2008 Information

Adoption Theory, by developing a series of hypotheses to use as

quantifiable measures. Leedy and Omrod, (2010) It is then further

investigated using an effective research design tailored to this. This

approach tends to be the most widely used by researcher that also

instigates a Positivism research philosophy. Due to the nature and

currency of electronic word of mouth, the researcher wishes to test

existing theoretical research using deductive laws to provide the basis of

explanation, permit the anticipation of phenomena, predict their

occurrence and therefore allow them to be controlled. Hussey and Hussey

(1997) Leedy and Omrod, (2010) The literature utilised in this study to date

has assisted in the shaping of the research objectives required to study,

with all indication directed towards developing these perspectives for

future ewom marketing therefore the researcher believes that this is the

most effective approach to use.

07026579

32

3.5 Primary Research Strategy

3.5.1 Quantative versus Qualitative

Due to the nature of the paper with its focus on modern day technology

and the scope it offers, the researcher chose to take a quantative

approach. Quantative research provides the researcher with a set of

measurable data that is more resistant to bias. Saunders et al (2003)This

data is then measured using a number of statistical tests in order to depict

how effective a relationship is between two or more variables which in this

case is a.) How consumers assess the attributes of electronic word of

mouth and whether this assessment leads to a product purchase decision,

which is paramount in answering the research question.

3.5.2 Research Method

In order to do this the researcher has chosen to use the online survey

method in the form of a questionnaire posted on online survey site

www.surveymonkey.com. According to Zikmund et al, (2010), Surveys

provide a quick inexpensive, efficient and accurate means of assessing

information about a population. This research will benefit from the use of

questionnaires as it will form a basis for comparisons across electronic

word of mouth „attributes. According to Saunders et al (2003) Surveys

allow the collection of a large amount of data from a sizeable population in

a highly economical way. Hair, Bush and Ortinau (2009, p.235) build on

this by highlighting the advantages of using a survey method as it gives

the researcher the ability to accommodate large sample sizes at relatively

low costs, as well as the ability to collect data which can be manipulated

with a certain level of ease . The data from this method also uses

standardised questions that the researcher can be confident will be

interpreted in the same way by all respondents Robson, (2002) which

allows for easy comparisons, whilst also providing a visual aid to identify

patterns and tables in order to uncover trends. It also provides the ability to

tap into more individualistic factors which are not directly observable such

07026579

33

as attitudes, feelings and preferences, by using the „other‟ boxes

functionality.

3.5.3 Questionnaire design

Czaja and Blair (2005,p.21) states that „often the differences between a

good study and a poor one is that in the former, researchers look or

anticipate problems and in the latter, researchers assume that if the

questions are answered the data is valid‟. It is therefore of great

importance to ensure that each question is clearly written, easy to

understand and that the responses will add to the value of the overall

research. It is important to avoid bias questions in the design which

Chisnall (2005 p.139) explains how questions should be phrased carefully

in order to avoid suggesting that certain answers are more acceptable

than others. When designing the questionnaire the researcher decided to

take the approach stated by Bourque and Clark (1994) by adopting

questions used in Cheung‟s 2008 adoption study to help give clearer

measurements from the model. The researcher also devised additional

questions adapted from key themes within the literature such as: Product

review search, posting motivations, Influence of review and Product review

differentiation. In order to write these questions the author had to depict

which question styles would suit dependent on the question attribute and

therefore provide the most credible and reliable results when analysing

using statistical measures, in order to do this the author used a variation of

ranking, category, list and rating scales style questions. (Screen shots of

the questionnaire can be found in Appendix E and Breakdown of the

questions in Appendix F

3.6 Pilot Study

A pilot test was conducted to test „weakness in design and instrumentation

to ensure the research is able to run smoothly when the full survey is

conducted‟ Cooper and Schindler (2003) It involves posting a small

percentage of surveys relative to the total sample size, and receiving

feedback on which elements were difficult to understand and highlighting

07026579

34

any changes that should be made to gain optimum results. The researcher

posted a list of 20 questions on facebook.com site using a unique survey

link in which to fill out and to private message any difficulties,

recommended changes and formatting queries/ problems. The response

rate for this was 10 respondents a 10% mark-up of minimum survey

responses as stated by Saunders et al (2003) Some of the feedback

included that questions 15 and 16 were too confusing and did not correlate

with the previous measurement pattern, that questions were unable to be

skipped if the respondent thought they should be exempt based on their

experiences and that some of the wording of the questions needed to be

changed to be more understandable. Overall the comments were positive

which gave the researcher confidence when posting the final version.

(Screenshots of the pilot study can be found in Appendix C and

Justifications in Appendix D.)

3.7 Sampling

Sampling techniques provide a range of methods that enables the

researcher to reduce the amount of data that they need to collect by

narrowing it down to a subgroup rather than all possible cases or

elements. Saunders et al (2003) Due to the restrictions of a census

approach (sampling the entire population) and for the purpose of this

research it would be impractical and also carries time, budget and data

analysis constraints. By using a sampling technique this offers the

researcher a more manageable set of data to work with. Henry (1990)

argues that using a sampling technique actually increases the credibility of

the data by providing a higher overall accuracy than a census, and

enables the researcher to spend more time devising more effective

research questions. For the purpose of this study the researcher has

chosen a non-probability sampling technique in the form of judgement

sampling. Due to the constraints of the study when discussing electronic

word of mouth and the sample being made up of online product review

users, the researcher used purposive judgement in order to attract the

07026579

35

sample. Although usually used in smaller case study research (as depicted

by Saunders et al (2003) the targeting of informative samples does not

necessarily have to be small, as long as the researcher understands the

limitations of the method. In this studies case the lack of detail available

within the participant‟s answers. When attempting to target informative

samples this approach will allow the researcher a chance to target a larger

sample of 100+. This sample will answer set questions on their overall

online review experience based on the judgement that they have all had

some contact with online reviews.

3.8 Location

The researcher distributed this online survey using a unique link posted to

various social networking sites and independent product review sites, such

as: facebook.com , twitter.com , linkedin.com, and on forum threads within

the sites: Onlineproductreviews.com and independentproductreviews.com

in order to target those who had a previous experience or relationship with

online reviews. This location was used due to the electronic nature of the

topic and the researcher believed it would be more successful than other

„more traditional‟ quantative methods due to the participants being able to

complete the survey in their natural habitat, as they would when reading

or filling out a product review online.

3.9 Participants

The main criterion for participation eligibility is that all participants needed

to have had contact with an online product review from either a sender

and/ or receiver perspective. Age and gender was not an issue only that

the participants had to be over the age of 18. The participants remained

anonymous throughout the data collection and also had the chance to opt

of the survey at any stage.

3.10 Data analysis techniques

Data analysis techniques as quoted by Saunders et al (2003) are the way

in which data is analysed and interpreted. The way this can be done is

07026579

36

through the creation of simple tables, diagrams, charts and graphs to show

the frequency of occurrence through establishing statistical relationships

between variables to complex statistical modelling. The researcher has

decided for the purposes for this study to use the programs: SPSS and

Microsoft EXCEL Burns and Bush (2006) To provide a series of charts,

tables and graphs The researcher believes that statistical analysis is not

applicable to these findings and that presenting the data in a series of

tables, charts and graphs is the most effective method to analyse the data

3.11 Survey Limitations

However surveys are not without fault there are some limitations in the

case of this research project the nature of the survey strategy in the form

of a questionnaire and its distribution online means that the survey may be

subject to a low response rate especially with the sites it has been posted

on Saunders et al (2003). There is also a minimal chance that the

researcher will know the accurate age, gender of participants and whether

or not the information they provide is honest. (Due to the lack of face to

face contact) and the information gained using this method will also be

limited to the questions devised by the researcher. There is also some risk

of misinterpretation from the researcher‟s perspective in the analysis stage

which could also devalue the results. Saunders et al (2003) Even with

these problems the researcher has attempted overcome them by starting

discussions throughout forum threads on the topic and posting links to the

survey on there with follow ups on weekly intervals as recommended by

Salkind, (2009). The researcher has also indicated at the start of the study

that the questionnaire will take a maximum or 5 minutes and that the

respondents have the chance to opt out at any time.

3.12 Ethical considerations

The researcher has complied with all NBS guidelines throughout the

research process from design to analysis.

07026579

37

Electronic consent was obtained from participants aged 18 and

over.

All participants are anonymous, the researcher only included age

and gender questions and there is no way to identify the

participants.

Confidentiality was detailed on the opening passage of the survey.

The results will be held in the strictest confidence and only made

available to the researcher, dissertation supervisor and a second

marker. All other evidence of participation will be removed after the

dissertation hand in. (please see Appendix C)

Participants were informed that they could remove their answers at

any time if they so wished.

When reporting the results the anonominity and confidentiality of

the participants will be upheld at all times.

All elements of the Data Protection Act 1998 interelatable to the

data collection from surveys will be upheld.

3.13 Summary of chapter

The methods outlined in this section will ensure that the research gained is

valid, ethically correct and accurate. Most importantly it will ensure that the

research objectives are met during the course of the data collection and

data analysis stages in order to gain a thorough understanding of the

topic, whilst also providing guidelines for future research by offering a

standardised method.

07026579

38

Chapter 4.0 Findings and Analysis

07026579

39

4:1 Introduction to chapter

This chapter aims to outline the results gathered from the survey

questionnaire (Appendix E) as outlined in the methodology chapter 3.

These results provide a descriptive basis for analysis and also include

hypotheses which have been designed to investigate any direct links

between the factors affecting a consumer review evaluation and their

influence on purchase decisions.

The researcher distributed a unique survey link from the following sites:

Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, onlineproductreviews.com and

independentproductreviews.com. 113 questionnaires were completed with

109 providing valid for the results of this study therefore the researchers

response rate was 96.0%.

Figure 4.1: Age demographics of respondents

There is a high level of respondents between the ages of 18-24 this could

be reflective of the sites that the researcher posted the questionnaire on,

as social networking sites are more favourable towards consumers

between these ages. Respondents aged between 24-65 are more likely to

have been directed from the online review forum threads on the

07026579

40

independent online review sites that the questionnaire was posted on.

61% of the sample was female and 39% male

4.2 Descriptive findings

4.2.1 What is your motivation for posting an online product review?

Research objective: To find out whether a respondent was more likely to

review after a good or bad product experience

Figure 4.2 Motivations for posting

Findings: 33% of respondents said although they use online product

reviews they have never posted one themselves. The remaining 67% of

respondents said that they would post a product review post purchase.

The remaining respondents in the sample were additionally asked what

their motivations for posting a product review were. 46.8% said they would

only post after a good product experience, followed by 10.1% saying they

would only post a product review after a bad experience and 10.1% saying

they would post a review to ‟gain community status‟ in an online virtual

community.

07026579

41

Analysis: From these results we can see that there is still a grey area

around participants who seek reviews but do not post reviews post

purchase and the respondents who do review post purchase. The

participants who do review post purchase are more likely to review after a

good experience in comparison to those who only review after a bad

product experience. Interestingly the same percentages who only post

after a bad product experience also post reviews in order to gain

community status. Therefore it is evident that the main motivation for

posted online product reviews is influenced by a good product experience.

4.2.2 How do you rate the quality of a review based on the amount of

content available?

Researcher objective: The researcher wanted to know how credible the

respondents viewed the information in reviews based on the amount of

content available.

Figure 4.3: Rating a review based on information content

Findings: As we can see from the graph above, respondents rated 5-10

indepth reviews as very credible amounting to 61% of the sample followed

1-5 indepth reviews

5-10 indepth reviews

1-5 short reviews

5-10 short reviews

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

A graph to show how respondents rate the credibility of reviews based on the

amount of content available

Very credible

credible

not sure

not credible

not very credible

07026579

42

by 5-short reviews at 19%, 1-5 indepth reviews at 18% and 1-5 short

reviews at 14%.

This shows that respondents felt that 5-10 indepth reviews were more

credible which the researcher believes could be due to the amount of

content available. However, 69% also viewed 5-10 short reviews as more

credible than 5-10 in-depth reviews at 39% of the sample. 1-5 indepth

reviews amounted to 60% of the sample and 50% to 1-5 short reviews.

This shows how respondents found 5-10 short reviews as more credible

than 5-10 indepth reviews for this particular option.

Interestingly 15% of the sample said they were unsure of the credibility of

1-5 short reviews in comparison to the 9% who were unsure about 1-5

indepth reviews. 6% rated 1-5 indepth reviews as not credible, the same

amount as 5-10 short reviews and no respondents chose 5-10 indepth

reviews to be not credible. Another interesting finding is 14% of

respondents said that they would find 1-5 short reviews not very credible in

comparison to 7% who said the same for 1-5indepth reviews. Only 2%

found 5-10 short reviews not very credible and no respondents found 5-10

indepth reviews not credible.

Analysis: From these results we can see that the credibility of reviews lies

between two extremes 5-10 short reviews and 5-10 indepth reviews. The

latter of which has the highest very credible rate 61%. From these results

the researcher believes that even though the differences between

respondents credibility expectations are clear, that respondents are more

likely to value 5-10 indepth reviews as more credible overall with 5-10

short reviews still viewed as credible in comparison to 1-5 indepth reviews

and 1-5 short reviews which respondents perceptions appeared more

scattered.

4.3 Hypotheses

The researcher devised 4 hypotheses after consulting the literature. These

hypotheses provided a series of factors that could potentially influence a

07026579

43

consumer‟s purchase decision based on their evaluation of the ewom

available. In order to present these results, the researcher used a variety

of charts and graphs to show the relationship between factors that

influenced a consumer‟s purchase decision based on the evaluation of

these reviews.

4.3.1 H1: Respondents are less likely to trust social networking and

brand websites when seeking online product reviews

Researcher’s objective: To discover which ewom platforms respondents

trust when conducting information seeking behaviour

Figure 4.4: Sites used to seek ewom

Findings: The results show that respondents top platform combination

was the independent review/ independent retailer sites 46% followed by

Brand websites/ independent retailer sites 19%. Directly after this was

social networking/ independent retailer site 11% then followed by the

brand/ independent review site 11%. The least favourable combinations

were brand website/ independent review 9% and social networking/ brand

websites 6%.

46%

19%

11%

11%

8%

5%

A chart to show respondents preffered information seeking sites

combinations based on trust accountabilty

Independent Retailer and Independent Review Sites

Brand and Independent Retailer Sites

07026579

44

Analysis: From these results we can see how respondents favoured

independent retailer/independent review sites totalling nearly half the

sample size. In comparison to brand and social networking sites that were

rated the lowest by respondents. The concept of trust accountability shows

how consumers are less likely to trust information posted on brand and

social networking sites, and more likely to trust information posted on

brand/ independent retailer sites.

4.3.2 H2: Respondents primary motivation for information seeking is

to find out more information about the product

Researcher’s objective: To find out what the respondents most

consistent motivation is for information seeking

Figure 4.5: Primary motivations for information seeking

Combination

coding Combinations

no of

respondents

135 Price-People Experiences-Product Info 25%

125 Price/Risk/Product Info 11%

235 Risk/People Experiences/Product Info 10%

123 Price/Risk/People Experiences 9%

345

People Experience/How Products

Used/Product Info 7%

234

Risk/People Experiences/How Products

Used 6%

156 Price/Product Info/Lifestyle 5%

145 Price/How Products Used/ Product Info 5%

245 Risk/How Products Used/Product Info 5%

124 Price/Risk/How Products Used 3%

07026579

45

356 People Experience/Product Info/Lifestyle 3%

126 Price/Risk/Lifestyle 2%

134

Price/People Experiences/How Products

Used 2%

146 Price/How Products Used/Lifestyle 2%

346

People Experience/How Products

Used/Lifestyle 2%

136 Price/People Experiences 1%

236 Risk/People Experiences/Lifestyle 1%

256 Minimise Risk/Product Info/Lifestyle 1%

Total 100%

Findings: This was done by asking respondents to „group‟ together what

they believed to be their top 3 motivations in order to find the most

consistent one. From the results shown in the chart above we can see that

the most popular combination of motivations were; „to compare price/ read

about people‟s product experiences and product information 25% of the

sample. The second most popular combination was to: Compare price/

evaluate risk/ and product information at 11%, followed closely by: to

evaluate risk/compare peoples experiences and product information at

10%. In contrast motivation combinations: To compare prices/peoples

experiences/lifestyle, to evaluate risk/peoples experiences and product

information and evaluate risk/peoples experiences and lifestyle had an

equal distribution of 1% of the sample.

Analysis: Therefore from these results we can see that the most popular

motivations for information seeking using product reviews are to seek

product reviews followed by price. This proves the hypotheses correct

07026579

46

4.3.3 H3: The credibility of the product review itself is more important

to the respondents than the site it is hosted on or the individual

reviewer

Hypotheses Reasoning: The researcher wanted to find out what the

respondents felt was most important, the credibility of the product review

or the source of information.

Figure 4.6: Credibility of the information and the source

Findings: From these results we can see how respondents rated the

importance of the „Site‟, „Individual reviewer‟ and the „product review itself‟.

These are as follows: 47.7% of Respondents rated „the product review‟ as

„very important followed by the site 43.1% and then the individual reviewer

40.4%.

Therefore the sample believed that the product review itself was „very

important‟ when conducting their information seeking behaviour.

Very Important Important Not important

0%

20%

40%

60%

Axis Title

Axi

s Ti

tle

A chart to show how important respondents rate the credibility of the product review, individual reviewers

and site

Site

Individual reviewer

Product review itself

07026579

47

For the „important‟ option 52.3% rated the product review itself, followed by

the site at 36.7% and then the individual reviewer at 27.5%.

Therefore the sample rated the product review itself the most highly when

choosing „important‟ in their information seeking behaviour.

Finally respondents rated what they believed to be the least important with

32.1% choosing the individual reviewer when compared to the site 15.6%

and the product review itself 4.6%

Analysis: From these results we can see how the content reflected in the

product review itself is the most influential to respondents when

information seeking closely followed by the site the review is hosted on.

The individual reviewer was seen as the least important influence on the

respondent‟s information seeking behaviour. Therefore the researcher

believes that the hypothesis is proven correct.

4.3.4 H4: A consumer’s evaluation of online product reviews will

strongly influence their decision to purchase

Hypotheses Reasoning: The researcher wanted to measure the extent to

which respondents found the above credible as according to Cheung,

2008 study these attributes directly influence ewom adoption The research

also wanted to know how much the credibility of these reviews influenced

a consumers purchase decision

07026579

48

Figure 4.7: How consumers evaluate the credibility of review content

Findings: As we can see from the graph above respondents voted the

following 8 as credible with very little differentiation between these views. I

believe that the online reviews posted on this site are: honest 16% credible

64% trustworthy 56% justified 61% relevant 59% accurate 51% valuable

60% informative 55% however option 8 free from bias 34% was rated the

lowest in this category. Respondents also „strongly agreed‟ that the online

product reviews on their preferred site were: „honest‟ 28% „credible‟ 23%

„trustworthy‟ 23% „Justified,‟ 24% „relevant,‟ 30% „accurate,‟ 25%

„valuable,‟ 29%‟informative,‟ 33% and „free from marketer bias,‟ 24%.

Interestingly some respondents were unsure of their beliefs about the

product providing the results: „honest,‟ 11% „credible,‟ 10% „trustworthy,‟

20% „justified,‟ 13% „relevant,‟ 10% „accurate,‟ 19% „valuable,‟ 8%

„informative,‟ 12% „free from bias,‟ 22%. When looking at attributes that

respondents disagreed with the following were rated: „honest,‟ 0%

„credible,‟ 2% „trustworthy,‟ 1% „justified,‟ 2% „relevant,‟ 0% „accurate,‟ 5%

„valuable,‟ 3% „informative,‟ 0% and „free from marketer bias,‟ 17%. Finally,

Strongly disagree showed the following results: „honest,‟ 0%, „credible,‟ 1%

„trustworthy,‟ 0% „justified,‟ 0% „relevant,‟ 1% „accurate,‟ 0% „informative,‟

0% and „free from marketer bias,‟ 4%.

0

20

40

60

80

A graph to show how consumers evaluate the credibility of review

content

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither Agree or Disagree

Agree

07026579

49

Figure 4.8: How do respondents rate the influence of online product

reviews on their purchase decisions

Also 72% of respondents said they were strongly influenced to purchase a

product based on their evaluation of the credibility of a review discussed

above with only 26% saying they would not be influenced and 2% saying

product reviews had no influenced over their purchase decision.

Analysis: From these results we can see how 33% strongly agree that the

reviews are „informative‟ and 30% ‟relevant‟ which suggests that the

respondent finds the information posted in an online review applicable to

their needs. In the „agree‟ section respondents rated the results as honest

61% and credible 64% making up the highest amount in the sample.

Interestingly marketer bias scored noticeably less than the average in the

„agree‟ section at 34% and the highest in both the disagree section 17%

and 22% in the either disagree or agree option. This would suggest that

respondents are still unsure as to whether or not reviews are still

influenced by marketers, but it is an issue they are aware of when reading

reviews. 72% of participants who said that the credibility of the reviews in

the method shown in figure 4.7 would strongly influence their purchase

decisions.

07026579

50

Finalise: 92.7% of the sample answered „yes‟ when asked if they have

purchased the product post review with only 7.3% saying no. From this the

researcher believes that the higher the respondent rate the above

attributes as strongly agree or agree the more likely they are the purchase

the product.

4.4 Hypotheses Confirmation

The researcher confirms that all the hypotheses have been proved correct

and will further discuss this in chapter 5

Figure 4.9: Hypotheses

Hypotheses Supporting Authors Were the

hypotheses

proven?

H1 Respondents are less

likely to trust social

networking and brand

websites when seeking

online product reviews

Bikhart and Schindler

(2001) Xue and Phelps

(2004) Senecal and

Nantel (2004) Gruen et

al (2006) Sen and

Lerman (2007)

Dellocras (2003)

The hypothesis

was proven

correct

H2 Respondents primary

motivation for

information seeking is

to find out more

information about the

product

Bellman et al (1999)

Bikhart and Schindler

(2001) Park et al (2007)

Hodkinson et al (2000)

Wolfinbarger and Gilly

(2001)

The hypothesis

was proven

correct

H3 The credibility of the

product review itself is

more important to the

respondents than the

Park et al (2007)

Cheung et al (2008)

Brown et al (2007)

Bhatterjee and Sanford

The hypothesis

was proven

correct

07026579

51

site it is hosted on or

the individual reviewer

(2006) Mcknight and

Kacmar (2002)

Grewal, (1994)

H4 A consumers

evaluation of online

product reviews will

strongly influence their

decision to purchase

Sun et al (2006)

Jarvanpaa et al (1999)

Lee et al (2008) Park

and Lee (2008) Litvin et

al (2005) Cheung et al

(2008) Goldsmith and

Horowitz (2006)

Mcknight and Kacmar

(2002)

The hypothesis

was proven

correct

4.5 Summary of chapter

This chapter has provided results from the questionnaire deposited at the

end of chapter 3. From these results we can see that respondents prefer

to use independent retailer and independent review sites to conduct their

information seeking behaviour. Their main motivation combinations for

using these platforms are to compare price/experiences and see how the

product would be applicable to their lifestyle. They do not trust brand

websites and social networking as much as independent sites and they

are more likely to post a review themselves after a good product

experience.

Chapter 5 will conclude these findings, discuss any study limitations and

recommend any further research.

07026579

52

Chapter 5.0 Discussion and Conclusion

07026579

53

5.1 Introduction to chapter

In this chapter the researcher aims to compare findings of the primary

research outlined in chapter four with the relevant literature discussed in

chapter two to determine if any similarities have been established. All

research objectives stated in chapter one have been fulfilled.

Study limitations and restrictions will also be discussed, as well as any

future research suggestions to further explore how consumers evaluate

electronic word of mouth when making their purchase decisions.

5.2 H1: Respondents are less likely to trust social networking and

brand websites when seeking online product reviews.

The researcher‟s primary findings showed how Social networking and

brand websites were the respondent‟s least favourable sites when

information seeking in comparison to independent review and retailer

sites.

Within the ewom platform literature it is apparent that marketer bias is a

mediating factor in preferred site choice for information seekers. Various

authors discussed in chapter two further back this up. Bikhart and

Schindler (2001) state that reviews posted by professional reviewers are

more likely to attribute marketer bias in a consumer‟s opinion, and provide

minimal if any negative reviews on the product. Xue and Phelps (2004)

state that ewom posted on a brands website is perceived by consumers to

contain marketing bias and therefore the persuasion of that message is

decreased as it provides a biased representation of the products actual

performance. Senecal and Nantel (2004) state that marketer influenced

reviews have a higher association with brand websites in comparison to

independent retailer and review sites. The value of information posted on a

social networking site has also decreased due to the noticeable increase

of marketer‟s influence of product recommendations that are taken from

the consumers browsing history. Gruen et al (2006) study into independent

forums further back up how C2C interactions found on independent review

07026579

54

sites are more influential on a consumers purchase decision in comparison

to brand and social networking related content due to the motivation to

share honest opinions. Authors Sen and Lerman (2007) state that

consumers generally trust peer consumers more than they trust

advertisers or marketers. Dellarocas (2003) found that online channels

such as eBay (which acts as a marketplace for buyers and sellers to meet)

is an important in building trust and fostering cooperation amongst

consumers in these virtual communities. Therefore the primary research

findings further support the above theorist‟s conclusions.

5.3 H2: Respondents Primary motivation for information seeking is to

find out more information about the product.

The researcher‟s primary research findings showed how the respondent‟s

primary motivation for seeking was to find out more product information, as

it was the most consistent factor in respondent‟s motivation combinations

appearing in 53% of respondents results.

Bellman et al (1999) found that the most important predictor of online

buying behaviour was online product information search. Consumers who

had a „wired lifestyle' and used the Internet for most of their activities (such

as reading the news, paying bills, etc.) naturally turned to the Internet to

search for product information posted in online reviews at the primary

stage of a purchase decision. Bikhart and Schindler (2001) state that the

availability of uncapped product information is an attractive feature in the

information seekers decision making process. Park et al (2007) state that

consumer reviews have a dual role, primarily it provides product

information and also serves as a recommendation which is of value to the

information seeker. Therefore it is not surprising that product information

seeking often is portrayed as a critical stage conducted early in the

consumer buying process (Shim et al 2001; Hodkinson et al 2000).

Consumers primarily seek product information when making a purchase

decision in order to clarify their decision and further build up their

knowledge of the product before they consult any other attributes.

07026579

55

Wolfinbarger and GIlly (2001) say that when consumers have an idea of a

product they require further product information to clarify their decision.

Therefore the primary research findings further support the above

theorist‟s conclusions.

5.4 H3: The credibility of the product review itself is more important

to respondents than the site it is hosted on or the individual reviewer

The researcher‟s primary research findings showed how consumers value

the credibility of the information within a product review over the credibility

of the source.

Park et al (2007) state how the product review itself provides a dual role. It

provides information about various products and services, and also serves

as a recommendation for a particular product or service. Cheung et al‟s

(2008) study into ewom adoption found that the usefulness of the

information and the quality of information formulated by the

comprehensiveness and relevance of the review are more influential to

consumers evaluating a product review than the credibility of the source

the information is obtained from. Brown et al (2007) states how the

credibility of the site as an information source is more important to a

consumer at the initial stage of information seeking in comparison to the

individual reviewer. However Bhatterjee and Sanford (2006) state how

the individual review needs to fulfil a consumers expectations of a product

by providing a persuasive message that is supported by the strength of

either positive or negative arguments embedded within that message, in

order to be perceived by the consumer as a credible source of information.

Cheung et al 2008 further believes that this is more likely to influence a

consumer‟s adoption of ewom. If the message is perceived as informative

and useful to the consumer by providing a strong argument for or against a

product purchase, it is valued more highly by the consumer and seen as

07026579

56

more important and credible regardless of the site it is hosted on or the

individual reviewer. Mcknight and Kacmar (2002) further back this up by

saying that information credibility is a vital predictor on the online

consumers further action and that a consumer who believes online

information has no reason to adopt it Therefore the primary research

findings further support these theorists conclusions

5.5 H4: A consumer’s evaluation of online product reviews will

strongly influence their decision to purchase.

The primary research findings show how consumers are heavily influenced

by the product reviews on their purchase decisions.

Sun et al (2006) states that the informal nature in which the information is

delivered and interpreted by the receiver through the use of product

reviews has a direct influence on information adoption which leads to

purchase decisions. This is further backed up by Jarvanpaa et al (1999)

who states that when consumers conduct any activity online they face:

uncertainty, vulnerability and a need for dependence on reliable sources of

information, therefore using preconceptual product ideas and further

verifying using a variance of reviews to support or reject will influence their

purchase decision. Lee et al (2008) furthers this by saying that reviews

that offer a variance of views influence a purchase decision due to shared

consumer interest, number of reviews and further resonation with

individual reviewers. Park and Lee (2008)states that consumers „seek out

weak tie experts‟ who have superior knowledge or a product that they

have a shared interest in order to verify their purchase decisions in the

context of products they are unfamiliar with. Litvin et al (2005) states how

a consumer‟s evaluation of a product review is heavily influenced by virtual

relationships developed within a virtual community sharing a collective

interest on particular product topics. Park and lee (2008) and Cheung et al

(2008) further back this up by stating how virtual communities are

influential as they offer a variance of honest reviews free from marketing

bias. Goldsmith and Horowitz (2006) also state that consumers that have

07026579

57

increased knowledge in a particular field and who are motivated to share

honest experiences of a product in the most beneficial and credible way

for the consumer are more likely to be perceived as a credible source of

information which consumers will use to evaluate their purchase decision.

To finalise Mcknight and Kacmar (2002) also contribute by saying that

information credibility is a vital predictor on the online consumers further

action and that a consumer who believes online information has no reason

to adopt it Therefore the primary research findings further support these

theorists conclusions.

5.6 Limitations

The researcher experienced limitations within this study primarily due to

the currentness of this topic, budget and time constraints. The study aimed

to explore how consumers evaluate ewom when making their purchase

decisions; however the study did not take into account the differences in

demographics, or further investigation into ewom valence and could have

benefitted from more motivational literature. The topic of electronic word of

mouth is what marketers would define as „real-time‟ for this reason

investigative study into motivations, seeking and purchase decision

evaluation is difficult to understand, especially as the modern day

consumer is still trying to establish the degree to which the review confirms

their purchase decisions. The researcher used as much literature to back

up the findings however there are still noticeable gaps when discussing

the above topics. Therefore the research cannot be generalised to the

population due to these limitations

5.7 Further Research Recommendations

The researcher would recommend a multimethods approach to be taken

into any future research in this field. The researcher believes that focus

groups and indepth interviews with larger samples followed up by a

quantative survey approach would prove beneficial in determining how a

consumer evaluates online product reviews when making their purchase

decisions. The nature of the topic has a lot to offer to marketers to assist

07026579

58

them in understanding consumer behaviour and the author believes that

over the next 5 years more research using a multimethods approach will

help them understand this. The researcher also believes that themes such

as trust and virtual communities should be further explored as these are

diverse fields with a lot of information is of use to the marketer and when

understanding them thoroughly could be incorporated into future marketing

plans to gain consumer loyalty.

5.8 Summary of chapter

This chapter has made comparisons and drawn similarities out of the

literature taken from chapter two. It has also concluded the researcher‟s

findings and proved the hypotheses correct.

References

07026579

59

Adaval (2001)

Arndt, J. (1967) Role of product related conversations in the diffusion of a new product. Journal of marketing research, 4 3) pp.291-295.

Bikhart, B. & Schindler, R.M (2001) Internet forums as influential sources of consumer information. Journal of interactive marketing, 15 (3) pp.31-40.

Birnbaum and stegner 1979

Biyalogorsky, E & Prasad, N. (2003) “Clicks and Mortar: The Effect of On-line Activities on Off-line Sales” Marketing Letters 14:1, 21–32.

Blaikie, N. (2003) Analysing Quantative Data .London. SAGE Publications

Blanton, H.(2001) Evaluating the self in the context of Another: The Three-selves Model of Social Comparison Assimilation and Contrast. In G.B Moskowitz (Ed.) Cognitive Social Psychology: The Princeton Symposium on the Legacy and Future of Social Cognition (pp.75-87). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Brace, I (2004) Questionnaire Design, London: Kogan Page Limited

Brown, J., Broderick, A.J. & Lee, N. (2007), “Word of mouth communica-tion within online communities: Conceptualizing the online social network”, Journal of interactive marketing, Vol.21 No 3, pp.2-20

Brown, J.J& Reigan P.H (1987) Social Ties and Word of Mouth Referral Behaviour. Journal of consumer research, 14 (3) pp.350-362

Buda, R,. & Zhang, Y. (2000). Consumer Product Evaluation: The interac-tive Effect of Message Framing, presentation Order and Source Credibility. Journal of Product & Brand management, 9,229-242.

Burns, A. Bush, R (2006) Marketing Research, New Jersey: Pearson Edu-cation`

Chaiken,S. (1980) “ Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion”. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, Vol.39, No.5 pp 752-66

Chatterjee, P. (2001) Online review: Do consumers use them? Advances in consumer research, 28, pp.129-133.

Chen,Y. Xie,J.2005. Third-party product review and firm marketing strate-gy. Marketing Sci. 23(2) 218-240.

Cheung, C.M.K., Lee, M.K.O. & Rabjohn, N. (2008), „The Impact of Elec-tronic Word of Mouth“, Internet Research, Vol.18 No.3, pp.229-47.

Cheung, M. Y., Luo, C., Sia, C. L. & Chen, H. 2008. How do People

Evaluate Electronic Word‐Of‐Mouth? Informational and Normative Based

07026579

60

Determinants of Perceived Credibility of Online Consumer

Recommendations in China. 11th Pacific‐Asia Conference on Information Systems. Auckland, New Zealand

Cheung and Rabjohn (2008) Chen,Y Yubo and J. Xie (2008), “Online Consumer Review: Word-of-mouth as A New Element of Marketing Communication Mix,” Management Science, 54 (3), 477-491 (Frank M. Bass Best Paper Award Finalist, SSRN's No.1 All Time Download for Marketing Science)

Cheung,C,M,K & Lee,M,K,O (2007) „ Information adoption in an online discussion forum“, Proceedings of the international joint conference on e-business and Telecommunications, Barcelona, Spain, 28-31 july.

Chevalier,J. & Mayzlin, D. (2006). “The Effect of Word of Mouth on Sales: Online Book reviews. Journal of Marketing Research, 43,3,345-354.

Clemons, E.K. 2008. How Information Changes Consumer Behavior and How Consumer Behavior Determines Corporate Strategy. Journal of Man-agement Information Systems, 25,2,13-40.

Clemons, E. K. & Gao, G. 2008. Consumer informedness and diverse

consumer purchasing behaviours: Traditional mass‐market, trading down, and trading out into the long tail.Electronic Commerce Research and

Applications, 7, 1, 3‐17.

Corritore,C.L.., Kracher,B & Wiedenbeck,S. (2003), „Online trust: Con-cepts, Evolving themes, a model“, International Journal of Human Com-puter Studies, Vol.58 pp.737-58.

Cooper, D. Schindler, P. (2008) Business Research Methods, 10th edn, Singapore: McGraw Hill.

Czaja, R. Blair, J. (2005) Designing surveys, London: Sage Publishing Ltd.

Dargan, B. 2008. Online reviews, whether good or bad, are always a posi-tive. New Media Age.

Davis, A. & Khazanchi,D. 2008. An Empirical Study of Online Word of Mouth as a predictor for Multi-product Category e-commerce Sales. Elec-tronic Markets, 18,2,130-141.

Dellarocas, C. (2003) The digitalization of word of mouth: promise and challenges of online feedback mechanisms. Management Science 49(10), pp. 1407-1424.

Doh (2009) http://www.mendeley.com/research/how-consumers-evaluate-ewom-electronic-wordofmouth-messages/

07026579

61

Dunhan, D,F., Johnson, S.D,. Wilcox, J.B. & Harrell, G.D. (1997) Influence on consumer use of word of mouth recommendation sources. Academy of marketing science, 25(4), pp. 283-295

Eagly, A.H. & Chaiken,S. (1975) An Attribution analysis of the effect of communicator characteristics on opinion change: The case of communica-tor attractiveness. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 32 (1), pp. 136-144.

Evans, Martin, Gamini Wedande, Lisa Ralston, and Selma van‟t Hul (2001), “Consumer Interaction in the Virtual Era: Some Qualitative In-sights,” Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 4 (3), 150-159.

Fitzgerald, Bone, P. (1995), “ Word of mouth effects on short-term and long term product judgements”, Journal of Business Research, Vol 32, pp.213-23.

Fong & Burton,2010

Godes, D., & Mayzlin, D. (2004). Using Online Conversations to study Word of Mouth Communication. Marketing Science, 23,545-560.

Goldsmith, R.E. & Horowitz,D. (2006) “ Measuring motivations for online opinion seeking”, Journal of Interactive Advertising Research, Vol.6 No.2, pp.1-16.

Granitz, N.A & Ward, J.C. (1996) Virtual community: a sociocognitive analysis. Advances in Consumer Research, 23, pp.161-166.

Gruen et al (2006)

Grewal, D. Gotlieb,J,. & Marmorstein,H, (1994). The Moderating Effects of Message Framing and Source Credibility on the Price-Percieved Risk Re-lationship. Journal of consumer research,21,145-153

Harasim (2003) Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge , MA : The MIT Press Hart, C (1998) Doing a literature review. London: SAGE Publications Hennig- Thurau,T., Gwinner,K.P., Walsh,G. & Gremler,D.D. (2004) Elec-tronic word of mouth via consumer opinion platforms: What motivates con-sumers to articulate themselves on the internet. Journal of Interactive mar-keting, 18(1) pp.38-52.

Hung, H, K., & Li, Y,S. (2007) The Influence of eWOM on Virtual Consum-er Communities: Social Capital, Consumer Learning, and Behavioural Outcomes. Journal of Advertising Research, pp.485-492.

Hussey, J. Hussey, R. (1997) Business Research, London: Macmillan Press Ltd

07026579

62

Internetworldstats (2010) Available at: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm accessed on 21st December 2010

Jankowicz, A. (2000) Business Research Projects, 3rd edn. London: Thomson Learning

Jarvenpaa S.L, Tractinsky, Saarinen, L. (1999) “ Consumer trust in an In-ternet Store: A Cross- cultural validation [J] Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 5 (2): 14-26.

Katz,E., & Lazarfeld,P.F. (1955). Personal Influence. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

Kelley, H.H. (1973). The Process of Causal Attribution. American Psy-chologist,28,107-128

Ko, D.G., Kirsch, l.J. & King, W.R. (2005) “ Antecedents of Knowledge transfer from consultants to clients in enterprise system implementations”, MIS Quarterly, Vol.29 No.1 pp.59-85.

Kollock,P., & Smith, M.A (1996) Managing the Virtual Commons: Cooper-ation and Conflict in Computer Communities. In S.Herring (ED.) Computer Mediated Communication (pp.109- 128) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Lifen, A., Zhao,L,A., Lewis,K,N, Hanmer, L, Ward,P (2010) "Adoption of internet banking services in China: is it all about trust?", International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 28 Iss: 1, pp.7 – 26

Litvin, S,W, Goldsmith, R,E. Pan, B.(2005) “ Electronic Word of Mouth in hospitality and Tourism Management”. Tourism Manage; 29;458-68.Mitchell, A. A & Dacin, P. A. (1996). The Assessment of Alternative Measures of Consumer Expertise. Journal of Consumer Research, 23,219-239.

Lyons, B., 2004. "An examination of the factors affecting the development of relational trust within pseudonymous cyber-space communities." Thesis.

Matthews,B & Ross,L. (2010) Research methods, A practical guide for the social sciences. London:Pearson

Mcknight and Kacmar (2002) (2002)http://isr.journal.informs.org/cgi/content/abstract/13/3/334

Mitchell and Dacin (1996)

Moorman et al 1991

07026579

63

Nelson, M,R., & Otnes, C ,C. (2005), “Exploring Cross-Cultural Ambiva-lence: A Netnography of Intercultural Wedding Message Boards,” Journal of Business Research, 58 (1), 89-95.

New Opinion Research Corporation (2010). “Online Consumer Reviews Significantly Impact Consumer Purchasing Decisions. Accessed on 28th November 2010. http;//www.opinionresearch.com/fileSave%5COnline_Feedback_PR_Final_6202008.pdf.

Nonaka (1994)

Lerman and Sen (2007)

Lee,J.,Park,D,H., & Han,I. (2008). “The effect of negative online consumer reviews on product attitude: An information processing view”. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Volume 7, Issue 3, pp.341-352.

Park, D,H., Jumin, L. & Ingoo,H. (2007) The Effect of Online Consumer Reviews on Consumer Purchasing Intention: The Moderating Role of In-volvement. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 11,4,125-148.

Pitta,D,A., & Fowler,D. (2005), “Internet Community Forums: An Untapped Resource for Consumer Marketers, “ Journal of Consumer marketing, 22(5), 265-274.

Rains,S.A. (2007) “ The Impact of anonymity on perceptions of source credibility and influence in computer mediated group communication: a test of two competing hypotheses”, Communication Research, vol.34 No.1, pp 100-25.

Rheingold, H. (1993). The Virtual Community: Home-steading on the Elec-tronic Frontier. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing.

Salkind, N, J. (2009) Exploring Research, 7th edn, New Jersey: Pearson Education

Saunders,M.Lewis, P. Thornhill, (2003) Research methods for Business Students, Essex: Pearson Education

Schindler,R.M. & Bikhart,B. (2005) Published word of mouth: referable, consumer-generated information on the internet,

Haugtvedt,C.P., Machleit,K.A. & Yalch,R. (eds) Online consumer psychol-ogy: Understanding and Influencing Consumer Behaviour in the Virtual World, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp.35-61

Senecal & Nantel, J. (2004) The influence of online product recommenda-tions on consumers online choices. Journal of Retailing, 80 (2), pp.159-169.

07026579

64

Settle,R.B. & Alreck,P,L. (1989) “Reducing Buyers‟ sense of risk”, Market-ing communications, Vol.14 No.1, pp.34-40.

Sher, P & Lee, S. (2009). Consumer Skepticism * online Reviews: An Elaboration Likelihood Model Perspective. Social Behavior and Personali-ty, 37 91),137.

Soloman,M., Bamossy,G., Askegaard,S. & Hogg,M.K. (2006). Consumer Behaviour: A European Perspective, London, Financial Times; Prentice Hall.

Sorensen, A,T. & Rasmussen, S,J. (2004). Is Any Publicity Good Publici-ty? A Note on the Impact of Book Reviews, Working paper, Stanford uni-versity

Sun, T., Youn,S.,Wu, G. & Kuntaraporn,M. (2006) Online word of mouth (or mouse): an exploration of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of computer mediated communication, 11(4), available at (NEED AD-DRESS) accessed 21st December 2010.

Sussman, S.W. & Siegal, W.S.(2003), “Informational influence in Organi-zations: an integrated approach to knowledge adoption”, Informational Systems Research, Vol.14 No.1, pp.47-65.

Tadelis, S. (2002) The Market for Reputations as an Incentive Mechanism. The Journal of Political Economy, 110,854.

Walther ,J, B. (1992). Interpersonal Effects on Computer Mediated Interac-tion: A Relational Perspective. Communication Research, 19,52-90.

Ward,J. Ostrom,A. (2001) “ Motives for posting Negative word of mouth communication on the internet” Advances in consumer research, 29-249.

Wolfinbarger and Gilly 2001

Wuyts et al (2010)

www.apple.com accessed December 5th 2010

www.rateabeer.com accessed November 27th 2010

www.thebeeryard.com accessed November 18th 2010

www.which.com accessed November 18th 2010

Xiofen and Yiling 2009

Xue,F. & Phelps,J.E. (2004) Internet-Facilitated consumer to consumer communication: the moderating role of receiver characteristics. Interna-tional Journal; of Internet Marketing and Advertising, 1 (2), pp.121-136.

Yang and Mai (2008)

07026579

65

Ye,Q., Law,R. & GU,B. (2009). “The Impact of online user reviews on hotel room sales”. International Journal of Hospitality management,28,1,180-182.

Zang,Z., & Peterson,R.T.(2003). I read About it Online...” Marketing Re-search, 15.

Zikmund, W. (2003) Business Research Methods, 7th edn. Ohio: Thomson

Petty ,R.E. & Cacioppo,J,T.(1986), Communication and Persuasion: Cen-tral and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. Springer-Verlag, New York,NY.

Bibliography

Bryman,A & Cramer,D. (2005) Quantative Data Analysis with SPSS 12 &

13, A guide for social scientists

McCormack,B.& Hill,E.(1997) Conducting a Survey, The SPSS

Workbook.London: International Thomson Business Press

Silverman,D. (2000) Doing Qualitative Research, A Practical Handbook.

London: SAGE Publications.

Kiesler, S.L., Zubrow,D., Moses,A.M., & Geller (1985). Affect in Computer-

mediated Communication: An experiment in Synchronous Terminal to

Terminal Discussion. Human Computer Interaction,1,77-104.

07026579

66

Appendix A- Reflective statement

The dissertation process is one I have found extremely difficult and demanding. Not

only because of the nature of the dissertation and the pressure of „getting it right‟ but

also due to the currency of the topic and the difficulty of writing a research paper

having limited experience using this writing style. Not only this, but I lost two

supervisors due to illness through the process. However regardless of the difficulties

I have faced throughout the process, it is a process that I have found thoroughly

rewarding. Seeing the dissertation come together when you have all completed

sections is one of the most exhilarating feelings I have ever experienced.

Having spent 15 months on two different placements experimenting with the concept

of electronic word of mouth from both an agency and corporate stance and quickly

realising how it can be influential on a consumer‟s perception of a company I wanted

to further explore this concept and observe consumer perceptions of products with

reviews provided by people whom it is difficult to place an element of trust due to the

environment. I also found that there was only a set amount of research around this

topic (20 years) and given the day and age we now live in, the topic of electronic

word of mouth and its influence is becoming more prominent in our everyday lives.

Consumers both old and new still use electronic word of mouth to verify their

purchase decisions regardless of their loyalty to a product, company or service

therefore I wanted to investigate the reasons why, whilst also hoping to provide a

credible piece of research that could possibly build a foundation for further research

in this area longer term.

One thing that the dissertation process has taught me is that you never give up on

what you want to do, no matter how hard the area is, no matter how many things go

wrong (even when you think your day can‟t get any worse and you‟re ready to give

up.) No matter how many sleepless nights spent worrying and 18 hour days working

on it. It is a process that although testing helps you to further develop your skills and

yourself. From this process I have learnt how to project manage, plan contingency

time, write academically, improvise, think more creatively and analyse hard statistical

07026579

67

data. I have learnt to cope with stress more than I ever thought possible and I have

learnt how to perfect my work, and see it through from inception to execution.

I now have the opportunity to use the skills gained from the dissertation process and

the knowledge I have gained from the electronic word of mouth field and apply these

to everything I do in my future career in the agency field.

07026579

68

Appendix B: Cheung et al (2008) Information Adoption Model

07026579

69

Appendix C- Pilot Questionnaire

Page 1

Page 2

07026579

70

Page 3

Page 3 continued

07026579

71

Page 4

Page 4- continued

07026579

72

Page 4- Continued

Page 4- Continued

07026579

73

Page 5

07026579

74

Appendix D: Pilot Questionnaire- Changes made

The researcher used the below to pilot the dissertation questionnaire, all question

changes are justified in the table below.

There was other feedback around the design and amount of questions which the

researcher changed accordingly when felt these statements were accurate, this

feedback is detailed below.

Q Questions Question type and

Justification

Changes

made

There are a lot of questions, which make it longer then it maybe needs to be, do

you need them all?’

„The colour of the questionnaire is a bit too bright and slightly distracting, might be

worth changing to a more neutral colour?’

‘The questionnaire is a bit repetitive, there’s a lot of questions about me buying the

product like, did you buy the product after reviewing, did the review influence you to

buy the product, I think you should delete and change them’

‘It might be worth breaking the questionnaire up into 2-4 questions per page rather

than having too much data on one page as it looks longer’

07026579

75

1 How old are you?

Category Question

The researcher

used this question

to gain a brief

understanding of the

age groups filling in

the questionnaire

Question

remained the

same

2 Are you?

Category Question

To researcher

wanted to see if

there was any

differentiation

between gender

Question

remained the

same

3 Have you ever looked for a online

product review?

Filter and Yes/No Question

This was the

deciding factor on

whether or not

participants

completed the

questionnaire, any

respondents that

said no were

removed from the

results

Question

remained the

same

07026579

76

4 What are your motivations for looking

at online product reviews, please pick

your top 3

List Question Changes

made

The researcher

wanted to find out

what respondents

motivations were for

seeking online

reviews and to

depict any patterns

or relationships

between the

variables

Question re-

worded to:

„Please pick

your top two

motivations

for looking at

online

product

reviews‟ and

amount

chaged to

make

analysis

easier,

answers

format

changed into

a list for

readibility

purposes

5 How frequently do you look for

product reviews?

List Question

The researcher

thought it would be

interesting to see

how frequently

respondents looked

for reviews as the

Question

remained the

same

07026579

77

literature states how

this is on the rise.

6 Which of the following do you use

when looking for product reviews?

Please select the top 2

List Question

The researcher

wanted to know

what types of sites

respondents used

when seeking

product reviews in

order to see if there

was any

relationships

between this and

motivations

Wording of

the question

changed to

be more

direct:

What sites do

you use when

looking for

product

reviews

please select

up to two and

order

changed into

more direct

list format to

make it

easier on the

eye

7

For the websites you did not pick in

question 6, why did you not choose

List Question

07026579

78

them?

The researcher

wanted to know why

respondents didn‟t

pick the other

options and whether

or not it was down

to trust and the

growing marketer

bias on sites with

the review

functionality

Question

remained the

same

8

Rank the following in order of

importance when evaluating the

credibility of a product review

Ranking Scale Question

The researcher

wanted to know

which was the most

important to the

respondent as in the

current literature this

is a topic of interest

Question

remained the

same

9

Have you ever posted a product

review?

Yes/No Question

The researcher

thought it would be

interesting to see

Question

Remained

the same

07026579

79

how many

respondents

(information

seekers) had

actually posted a

review post

purchase

10 If so, what is your motivation for

posting a review

List Question

The researcher

wanted to see what

a respondents

motivation was for

posting a review,

based on the

literature stating

how bad reviews

have a more

negative perception

of a product

compared to good

reviews

Question

remained the

same

11 Have you bought a product after

reading reviews?

Yes/No Question

The researcher

wanted to know

generally whether or

not respondents had

purchased the

product

Question

was re-

ordered due

to it start the

next set of

questions

07026579

80

about

reviewing as

a follow up

12 In terms of how many products you

buy over £10, estimate how many you

would search for online product

reviews on before making your

purchase

List Question

The researcher

wanted to get an

idea of how many

products people

searched for online

using reviews in

order to measure

their popularity

Question was

removed due

to its

complexity.

It could cause

confusion

due to lack of

timeline and

most

respondents

commented

that they

couldn‟t recall

a direct

number

13 Would you require a online product

review site to confirm a large or

expensive purchase?

Yes/No Question

07026579

81

The researcher

wanted to see how

respondents used

online reviews to

confirm a purchase

that was expensive

that may have a

stigma or

uncertainty attached

to it

Question

wording was

changed

slightly the

word „site‟

was removed

due to the

individualism

of the review

itself

14 How much of an influence did the

online product reviews have on your

decision to buy?

List Question

The researcher

wanted to know to

what degree did the

online review have

on the respondents

decision to buy

Question

stayed the

same

15 Did you buy this product based on

your online product review

experience?

Yes/No Question

The researcher

wanted to know

whether or not

respondents had

actually purchased

a product based on

their review

experience

Question

remained the

same

16 How would you rate the accuracy of

the online product reviews after

Ranking Question

07026579

82

experiencing the product?

The researcher

wanted to know how

effective the product

review had been

post purchase and

whether or not this

provided some

credibility around

the review

Question

remained the

same

17 Did you make your own online review

after experiencing the product?

Yes/No Question

The researcher

wanted to see how

many respondents

made an online

review reflecting

their product

Experience

Question

stayed the

same

18 What is the last type of product you

reviewed online?

List Question

The researcher

wanted to see what

kinds of products

people were

reviewing and the

literature depicted

the following 3 were

the most widely

used

Question was

removed as

most of the

respondents

fed back

stating that

they couldn‟t

remember.

On reflection

the

researcher

thought it less

07026579

83

valuable

when fulfilling

the

hypotheses

and

objectives

Which particular online product review

site did you use?

Open- ended Question

19

The researcher

thought it interesting

to see what

individual sites

respondents used to

make their decisions

Question was

removed due

to question 6

already

asking for site

categories

and the

researcher

felt it didn‟t

add much

value to the

study

20 Why did you use this particular online

product review site?

List Question

The researcher

wanted to know

whether or not a

purchase decision in

an area of product

unfamiliarity could

be persuaded by an

online review

Question

removed due

to its follow

on of the

previous

question that

was removed

21 Which of the following product sectors

do you feel would need clarity from

List Question

07026579

84

online product review sites?

The researcher

wanted to know how

much information

needed to be

provided in order for

the respondent to

deem it credible

Question

removed after

a re-

assessment

of objectives,

and due to

the more

general study

perspective,

also results

may have

been harder

to analyse

22 Have you ever

bought a product that you have

limited experience with based on your

evaluation of the online product

review?

Yes/No Question

The researcher

wanted to know

whether or not a

purchase decision in

an area of product

unfamiliarity could

be persuaded by an

online review

Question

remained the

same

07026579

85

23 When Evaluating a product, how many

reviews would you think were enough

to be credible?

Rating Scale Question

The researcher

wanted to know how

much information

needed to be

provided in order for

the respondent to

deem it credible

Question

remained the

same

24 Which of the following do you agree

with?

List Questions

The researcher

wanted to know

whether a

respondent would

trust the online

review based on the

type of positive and

negative reviews

Question

stayed the

same

25 Please choose a product review site

you are familiar with and list in the

bow below

Open ended question

The researcher

wanted to

respondents to pick

a site they were

familiar with and

rate using the rating

scale shown in

question 26 to see

how they evaluated

The question

was removed

as the

researched

decided to

use the last

question to

evaluate the

sites chosen

07026579

86

the credibility of that

site and whether or

not they adopted the

information from it

in question 6

on a more

general scale

20 When looking for online product

reviews on the website chosen above,

to what extent do you agree with the

following statements?

Agree/Disagree Question

The researcher

wanted to test

aspects of the

information adoption

model by Cheung,

2008 to see how

respondents

evaluated the

message and

source and whether

or not that

influenced

information adoption

leading to a

purchase decision

Question

wording

changed to

„When

looking for

online

reviews on

your

preferred site,

to what

extent do you

agree with

the following

statements?‟

Which could

be

interrelated to

the sites

chosen in

question 6,

making it

easier to

analyse

07026579

87

Appendix E: Final Questionnaire

Page 1

07026579

88

Page 2

Page 3

Page 3- Continued

07026579

89

Page 4

Page 5

07026579

90

Page 5- continued

Page 6

07026579

91

Page 7

07026579

92

Appendix F: Questionnaire Justifications

Q Questions Question type and

Justification

1 How old are you? Category Question

07026579

93

The researcher used this

question to gain a brief

understanding of the age

groups filling in the

questionnaire

2 Are you? Category Question

To researcher wanted to

see if there was any

differentiation between

gender

3 Have you ever looked for an online product

review?

Filter and Yes/No

Question

This was the deciding factor

on whether or not

participants completed the

questionnaire, any

respondents that said no

were removed from the

results

4 Please pick your top two motivations for looking

at online product reviews

List Question

07026579

94

The researcher wanted to

find out what respondents

motivations were for seeking

online reviews and to depict

any patterns or relationships

between the variables

5 How frequently do you look for product reviews? List Question

The researcher thought it

would be interesting to see

how frequently respondents

looked for reviews as the

literature states how this is

on the rise.

6 What sites do you use when looking for product

reviews please select up to two

List Question

The researcher wanted to

know what types of sites

respondents used when

seeking product reviews in

order to see if there was any

relationships between this

and motivations

7 For the websites you did not pick in question 6,

why did you not choose them?

List Question

07026579

95

The researcher wanted to

know why respondents

didn‟t pick the other options

and whether or not it was

down to trust and the

growing marketer bias on

sites with the review

functionality

8 Rank the following in order of importance when

evaluating the credibility of a product review

Ranking Scale Question

The researcher wanted to

know which was the most

important to the respondent

as in the current literature

this is a topic of interest

9 Have you ever posted a product review? Yes/No Question

The researcher thought it

would be interesting to see

how many respondents

(information seekers) had

actually posted a review

post purchase

10 If so, what is your motivation for posting a

review

List Question

07026579

96

The researcher wanted to

see what a respondents

motivation was for posting a

review, based on the

literature stating how bad

reviews have a more

negative perception of a

product compared to good

reviews

11 Would you require an online product review to

confirm a large or expensive purchase?

Yes/No Question

The researcher wanted to

see how respondents used

online reviews to confirm a

purchase that was

expensive that may have a

stigma or uncertainty

attached to it

12 Have you bought a product after reading

reviews?

Yes/No Question

The researcher wanted to

know generally whether or

not respondents had

purchased the product

13 How much of an influence did the online product

reviews have on your decision to buy?

List Question

07026579

97

The researcher wanted to

know to what degree did the

online review have on the

respondents decision to buy

14 Did you buy this product based on your online

product review experience?

Yes/No Question

The researcher wanted to

know whether or not

respondents had actually

purchased a product based

on their review experience

15 How would you rate the accuracy of the online

product reviews after experiencing the product?

Ranking Question

The researcher wanted to

know how effective the

product review had been

post purchase and whether

or not this provided some

credibility around the review

16 Did you make your own online review after

experiencing the product?

Yes/No Question

The researcher wanted to

see how many respondents

made an online review

reflecting their product

experience

17 Have you ever bought a product that you have

limited experience with based on your

evaluation of the online product review?

Yes/No Question

The researcher wanted to

07026579

98

know whether or not a

purchase decision in an

area of product unfamiliarity

could be persuaded by an

online review

18 When Evaluating a product, how many reviews

would you think were enough to be credible?

Rating Scale

The researcher wanted to

know how much information

needed to be provided in

order for the respondent to

deem it credible

19 Which of the following do you agree with? List Question

The researcher wanted to

know whether a respondent

would trust the online review

site based on the type of

positive and negative

reviews

20 When looking for online reviews on your

preferred site, to what extent do you agree with

the following statements?

Agree/Disagree Scale

07026579

99

The researcher wanted to

test the information adoption

model by Cheung, 2008 to

see how respondents

evaluated the message and

source and whether or not

that influenced information

adoption leading to a

purchase decision

Appendix G: Ethics Forms

07026579

100

07026579

101

Last Page