4.7 Article

Examining the influence of online reviews on consumers' decision-making: A heuristic-systematic model

Journal

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS
Volume 67, Issue -, Pages 78-89

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.dss.2014.08.005

Keywords

Online reviews; Electronic word-of-mouth; Consumer decision-making; Heuristic-systematic model

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71201149]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2012M511426, 2014T70601]
  3. Hong Kong Baptist University [FRG2/13-14/010]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Along with the growth of Internet and electronic commerce, online consumer reviews have become an important source of information that assists consumers to make purchase decision. However, theoretical development and empirical testing in this area of research are still limited, which greatly hinder us from understanding the influence of online reviews. Drawing upon the heuristic-systematic model from the literature of dual-process theories, we develop a research model to identify factors that are important to consumers' purchase decision-making. The model is empirically tested with 191 users of an existing online review site. We find that argument quality of online reviews (systematic factor), which is characterized by perceived informativeness and perceived persuasiveness, has a significant effect on consumers' purchase intention. In addition, we find that source credibility and perceived quantity of reviews (heuristic factors) have direct impacts on purchase intention. The two heuristic factors further demonstrate positive influences on argument strength. This result is consistent with the proposition of bias effect in the heuristic-systematic model, which elucidates the interrelationship between heuristic and systematic factors. Based on the findings, we discuss implications for both researchers and practitioners. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available