Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Is Collaborating With JSTOR To Digitize, Preserve and Extend Access To International Journal of Electronic Commerce

The Effect of On-Line Consumer Reviews on Consumer Purchasing Intention: The Moderating
Role of Involvement
Author(s): Do-Hyung Park, Jumin Lee and Ingoo Han
Source: International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 11, No. 4 (Summer, 2007), pp. 125-
148
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27751234
Accessed: 01-12-2015 15:50 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/27751234?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Journal of
Electronic Commerce.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 192.122.237.41 on Tue, 01 Dec 2015 15:50:07 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Effect of On-Line Consumer Reviews on
Consumer Purchasing Intention: The Moderating
Role of Involvement
Do-Hyung Park, JuminLee, and IngooHan

ABSTRACT: On-line consumer reviews, both as informants and as recommend
functioning
ers, are important inmaking
purchase decisions and for product sales. Their persuasive
impactdepends on both theirquality and theirquantity.This paper uses theelaboration

likelihoodmodel toexplain how levelof involvement with a productmoderates these re
lationships.The studyproduces threemajor findings:(1) thequality of on-line reviews has
a effect on consumers' intention, (2) purchasing intention increases as
positive purchasing
of reviews and low-involvement consumers are affected
the number increases, (3) by the
rather than the quality of reviews, but high-involvement consumers are affected
quantity
by reviewquantitymainlywhen the review quality ishigh. These findingshave implica

tions for on-line sellers in terms of how to manage on-line consumer reviews.
KEYWORDS AND PHRASES: Consumer involvement,

elaboration likelihoodmodel, elec
tronic word-of-mouth, on-line consumer review, on-line word of mouth, review.
product
Internet-based electronic commerce is growing rapidly with the proliferation

of commercial Web sites and the increasing acceptance of on-line transactions
a new
by consumers [23]. As marketing channel, theWorld Wide Web differs
from traditional retail formats inmany ways [1]. Consumers shopping on
line cannot touch or smell products, as would be possible in traditional retail
outlets, so theirpurchase judgments must be based on the product information
presented on theWeb site. On-line sellers seek to overcome this limitation by
giving consumers the opportunity to share product evaluations on-line [11,
12]. This consumer-created information is helpful inmaking purchase deci
sions because itprovides indirect experiences of products.
In contrast to a traditional seller, an on-line seller generally provides consum
ers with two types of product information. It can offer seller-created product
information via itsWeb site or other traditional communication channels such
as advertisements, and it can also offer consumer-created product information
on itsWeb site. Consumer-created
by allowing consumers to post comments
information, an on-line consumer review, is new information presented from
the perspective of consumers who have purchased and used the product.
It includes their experiences, evaluations, and opinions. The user-oriented
information provided in thisway is, in effect, a new kind ofword-of-mouth
communication. As an independent product-information resource, on-line
reviews are increasing in popularity and importance [12, 22].
The firstauthor thanksYoonhee Hwang forhelp with the idea generation of this
study.The comments and guidance of Sebum Park is gratefully acknowledged. The
authors also thank the editor and reviewers for valuable comments.
Internationa]journal ofElectronicCommerce / Summer 2007, Vol. 11,No. 4, pp. 125-148.

Copyright ? 2007 M.E. Sharpe, Inc.All rights reserved.
1086-4415/2007 $9.50 + 0.00.
DOI 10.2753/JEC1086-4415110405
226 PARK, LEE, AND HAN
An on-line consumer review is an important factor inproduct sales [13]. For

example, Amazon.com began to offer consumers the option of posting product
comments on itsWeb site in 1995. At present, Amazon.com has about 10mil
lion consumer reviews covering all of its product categories. These reviews
are one of itsmost popular and successful features [21]. Other on-line sellers
inmany product categories are adopting the same strategy of providing a
venue where consumers can voice their opinions. Half the consumers who
visit on-line shopping malls consider consumer reviews important in their
buying decisions [37].
The quantity and quality of on-line consumer reviews are important
characteristics affecting consumer information-processing. The number of
on-line reviews of a product (review quantity) may be taken as representing
the product's popularity, since it is reasonable to assume that the number of
reviews is related to the number of consumers who have bought the product
[11,12]. Since there is no standard format, the content of on-line reviews (re
view quality) varies from short to long and from subjective to objective [11].A
one that ismore logical and persuasive, and supports
high-quality review is
its evaluation with reasons based on the facts about a product.
Involvement with the product has a moderating effect on information
processing [34]. The elaboration likelihood model (ELM) suggests that the
same information can be processed in differentways depending on consumer
involvement. Applying ELM, one would expect review quality to be of pri
mary importance for high-involvement consumers, and review quantity to
be crucial for low-involvement consumers. Do on-line consumer reviews,
unlike advertisement messages, have the same results as what is predicted
with ELM? To date, no study has specifically investigated the effects of re
view characteristics and themoderating effect of consumer involvement on
consumers' intention.
purchasing
The present paper investigates whether the quantity and quality of on
line consumer reviews can affect consumers7 purchasing intention and how
these effects are changed by consumer involvement. In addition, it shows the
underlying mechanism through which on-line consumer reviews influence
purchasing intention. The study focuses on the effects of positive on-line con
sumer reviews as a new kind of positive word-of-mouth. Several hypotheses
are proposed, and an experiment is conducted that addresses these questions
in the context of positive on-line consumer reviews.
Theoretical Background and Hypotheses
Dual Role of On-Line Consumer Reviews
Two types of product information are available to an on-line consumer in

contrast to an off-line consumer. One is seller-created information via a
traditional communication channel, such as advertisements, and the other
consists of on-line consumer reviews created by prior buyers based on their
experiences, evaluations, and opinions of products. An on-line consumer
review has a dual role, functioning both as informant and as recommender.
INTERNATIONALJOURNALOF ELECTRONIC COMMERCE 127
As informant, itprovides user-oriented product information, while as recom

mender, itprovides recommendations by previous consumers in the form of
electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM).
Although sellers also provide product information, it differs in three im
consumer reviews.
portant respects from the kind of information provided by
The firstdifference is the trustworthiness of the information source. The trust
worthiness of an information source is often positively related to information
credibility [4]. Previous studies suggest that consumer-created information
is more credible than seller-created information from the perspective of
trustworthiness [16].When sellers present product information, they tend to
hide inferior aspects of a product and emphasize good aspects. Consumers,
in contrast, provide honest evaluations of the strengths and weaknesses of a
from the user's viewpoint. Thus, on-line consumer reviews are likely
product
tobe more trustworthy than seller-created information. The second difference
is that consumer-created information will tend to be more consumer-oriented
than seller-created information [4]. Seller-created information is product-ori
ented and objective, focusing on product attributes formany and unspecified
persons. Consumer-created information describes the usage situations and
product advantages from the consumer's perspective. It ismore understand
able and familiar because it represents consumers' personal feelings or satis
faction about the product [12]. Finally, seller-created information is presented
in a standard form,whereas consumer-created information is not. It can be
or it can
subjective information, consisting mainly of emotional expressions,
be objective information just like seller-created information. In addition, itcan
consist of a fewwords or many words.
An on-line consumer review is a new form ofword-of-mouth communication
as a recommender. It is similar to traditional word-of-mouth as a messenger of
other consumers' opinions [11,12]. There are, however, threemajor differences
between on-line consumer reviews and traditional word-of-mouth. First, the in
fluence of traditional word-of-mouth is typically limited to a local social network
[7]. In contrast, the impact of on-line consumer reviews can reach farbeyond the
local community, because consumers anywhere in theworld can access reviews
on the Internet [12]. Second, traditional word-of-mouth isnot a decision variable
for a seller,whereas on-line sellers can decide whether to provide on-line con
sumer reviews on theirWeb site.An on-line seller can license consumer reviews
from intermediaries such as Epinions.com, and decide when topost them on its
Web site [12]. In addition, an on-line seller can select "remarkable" reviews and
post them in frontof itsWeb site, thereby leading consumers to concentrate on
the reviews. Finally, the information sources of traditional word-of-mouth are
familiar people, such as familymembers or friends,whereas on-line consumer
reviews come from unknown former purchasers [38]. Because their authors are
unknown, on-line reviews may have less credibility than direct messages from a
consumer's family or friends. Thus, the content of an on-line consumer review
is an important element in overcoming the lack ofmessage credibility If an on
line review is persuasive and logical, consumers are more likely to believe the
message. In addition, ifa great many consumers recommend a product, other
consumers, in conformity with their views, are likely to believe the recommen
dations and have a favorable attitude toward the product.
128 PARK,LEE,AND HAN
Effects of Review Quantity and Quality on Purchasing

Intention
A significant body of research in theMIS literature represents information qual

ity in terms of credibility objectiveness, timeliness, and sufficiency [3,33,41].
This body of research finds that the better and more extensive the information
is, the greater the consumer satisfaction. In addition, as consumer satisfaction
increases, so too do consumers7 purchasing intention. Therefore, information
quality can have a positive effect on purchasing intention.
Much research on the quality ofmessages inmarketing literature focuses
on themessage contents. These studies show that strong messages, that is to
say,messages which are understandable and objective, aremore effective than
weak ones, which are emotional and subjective [34,36]. From the perspective
of message quantity, themore themessages are processed, themore favor
able associations to its advocacy are formed. This leads to a more favorable
attitude [34].
There is no standard information format for consumers posting reviews,
and as a result, each on-line consumer review is different from others. There
are generally two types of reviews. Some reviews, such as "It's so
good that
I'm going tobuy another one" or "I can't believe I got this; I'm proud of it," are
subjective, emotional, and do not make reasoned arguments. Other reviews,
such as "This product is twice as fast as other comparable goods and even
are specific, clear, and back up their claims with reasons.
cheaper,"
In the present study, review quality is defined as the quality of a review's
contents from the perspective of information characteristics (relevance, un
der standability, sufficiency, and objectivity). Using this definition of review
quality, the last review example in the preceding paragraph is a high-quality
review because it ismore logical and persuasive and gives reasons based on
specific facts about the product. In contrast, the earlier review examples are
low-quality reviews because they are emotional, subjective, and vacuous, of
ferno factual information, and simply make a recommendation. Consumers
may treat reviews as a source of supplementary information ofWOM. Since
reviews are posted by people who have purchased the product in question,
even subjective and emotional reviews (defined as
low-quality reviews in this
study) provide important and useful information when they are positive. If a
review contains more understandable and objective comments with sufficient
reasons of recommendation, it is relatively more persuasive than a comment
that expresses feelings and recommendations without specific reasons. Since
previous buyers are anonymous on the Internet, people generally will not easily
accept or believe a review posted on aWeb site if itdoes not provide enough
information [38]. Other things being equal, reviews that are more persuasive
have a greater positive effect on consumers' purchasing intention. Thus the
following hypothesis is proposed:
HI: The quality of on-line consumer reviews positively affects consumers'

purchasing intention.
The number of on-line consumer reviews (review quantity) of a product

represents the product's popularity as the on-line word-of-mouth effect be
INTERNATIONAL JOURNALOF ELECTRONIC COMMERCE 129
cause it is related to the sales volume of the product [11,12]. The more reviews
there are, themore popular and important the product is. In addition, the
number of reviews is likely to lead consumers to rationalize their purchasing
decisions by telling themselves, "Many other people also bought the product."
Reference toword-of-mouth (other people's comments) is a risk-reduction
strategy that can do much to reduce or eliminate the uncomfortable feeling of
risk exposure [8].As a result, purchasing intention will increase in accordance
with the number of on-line consumer reviews.
HI: The quantity of on-line consumer reviews positively affects consumers'

purchasing intention.
Involvement and the Elaboration Likelihood Model
Involvement is defined as the perceived personal relevance of a product

based on the individual consumer's needs, interests, and values [20, 27, 42].
Involvement can be either situational or enduring [9]. Situational involvement
is a temporary elevation of interest that fluctuates, usually within the time
frame of a purchase decision, while enduring product involvement is a stable
phenomenon that represents the consumer's personal interest in the product
over a long period [9]. The information-processing motivation is influenced
by situational involvement and enduring involvement [9]. Zaichkowsky's
research stream relates to the concept of situational involvement or purchase
decision involvement [30,43]. Others conceptualize involvement as enduring
interest in the product class, and thus as enduring involvement or product
class involvement [39]. It is recognized that involvement may vary between a
a
specific decision and product class. In addition, some products are inherently
involving because of the nature of the purchase [43]. However, it is argued
that products per se cannot be intrinsically involving. For example, shampoo
may be both high involvement and low involvement depending on the cir
cumstances surrounding the purchase decision. A high-involvement shampoo
a first
purchase might be characterized by (forexample) independent shampoo
purchase, a consumer who is unfamiliar with the product, a consumer who
may previously have had a poor experience with shampoo, one who may
have allergies, or one concerned about social issues (such as not tested on
animals) that need to be considered [6]. Thus, the characteristics assigned to
low-involvement products by researchers on advertising involvement may
not hold in all circumstances. Furthermore, some high-involvement products
may not be purchased by highly involved consumers [26]. For example, a car
buyer may believe that the outcome (a car to drive) is important, but may have
no interest in the purchase process. Consequently, no
assumptions regarding
high or low involvement can be assigned to the product or the product class,
as involvement may vary with the various antecedents to involvement as they
relate to the individual consumer.
Situational involvement, defined as the ability of a situation to elicit from
individuals concern for their behavior in that situation [24], is used as the
moderating variable in the present study. There were three reasons forusing
situational involvement instead of enduring involvement. First, individuals'
involvement for the same product can be different depending on theirpersonal

characteristics. Second, it is hard to control the compounding effects resulting
from the difference between two products used in a laboratory experiment
(e.g., shampoo vs. notebook). The method of giving subjects different goals
for a single product can increase the internal validity of this study. Third, as
Mittal suggests, the situational importance of a purchasing decision is likely
to be most representative of the variance in the consumer's involvement, even
more than product-class involvement [32].
Involvement with a product equips a consumer with the ability and motiva
tion to initiate product-related conversations with others. According toDichter,
intense occupation with a product creates excess thoughts and emotions that
can be easily recalled inword-of-mouth episodes in order to relieve the ten
sion or relive the experience [17]. Reviewing earlier empirical evidence, Arndt
confirmed the association between involvement and word-of-mouth transmis
sion [2].Other researchers also corroborated the association [5]. Thus, on-line
consumer reviews as on-line word-of-mouth are associated with consumer
involvement. This association ismore evident when applying ELM.

ELM offers an appealing theoretical perspective on the consumer-informa
tion process with regard to on-line consumer reviews [35]. ELM posits that
individuals who want to process a message (i.e., who have motivation) and
individuals who are able to process themessage (i.e.,who have the ability) are
more likely to process persuasive attempts via the central route [28]. In other
words, they are more likely to engage in thoughtful, effortful processing of
persuasive arguments, attend to the persuasive arguments, and then generate
their own thoughts in relation to the arguments. However, individuals who
lack motivation or ability are more likely to process the information via the
aremental shortcuts, by focusing on noncontent cues.
peripheral routes, which
In ELM, involvement is associated with themotivation to process informa
tion, and prior knowledge (expertise) is associated with the ability to process
information [9, 34]. In this study, involvement is used as a moderating vari
able for information processing, and prior knowledge as a control variable. As
involvement increases, individuals have greater motivation to comprehend
the salient information, and theywill tend to produce increasingly elaborate
meanings during the comprehension stage of information processing. When
involvement is low, however, individuals will rely on peripheral cues from
the stimulus, such as the number of arguments. Researchers on ELM have
found that issue-relevant arguments and product-relevant attributes were
more influential under high-involvement conditions, while peripheral cues,
such as the characteristics of information sources or number of arguments,
were more influential under low-involvement conditions [10, 34, 36].
Petty and Cacioppo conducted a study inwhich they induced high and low
involvement [34]. They also varied the number of arguments presented in a
a
persuasive message. Participants in the low-involvement condition revealed
positive, linear relationship between attitude change and number of arguments
in themessage. Thus they were persuaded via the simple decision-making
tool 'Tots of arguments are good." For those in the high-involvement condi
tion, however, the number of argument messages did not increase attitude
change. Argument quality is critical to attitude change. Moreover, meta-ana
lytic research has consistently found that as involvement increases, so does

the importance of argument quality [25].
According to this research, the effects of review quality and review quantity
can vary with involvement. Low-involvement consumers simply accept what
other consumers recommend because they have low motivation to process
other consumers7 opinions. The review quality is less important for them. The
number of on-line consumer reviews to show product popularity ismore im
portant as a peripheral cue. On the other hand, high-involvement consumers
seek as much useful information as they can from on-line consumer reviews.
They want high-quality reviews that are logical and persuasive, with sufficient
reasons based on specific facts about the product. Therefore, the following
hypotheses are proposed:
H3: The quality of on-line consumer reviews has a stronger positive effecton
thepurchasing intention of high-involvement consumers than of low-involve
ment consumers.
H4: The quantity of on-line consumer reviews has a stronger positive effect
on thepurchasing intention of low-involvement consumers than of high-in
volvement consumers.
Research Design and Method
Design, Subjects, and Experimental System
We employed a 2 x 2 x 2 factorial design. The three independent variables

were review quality (high vs. low), review quantity (few vs. moderate), and
involvement (high vs. low).
Three hundred fifty-two college students participated voluntarily. Their
average age was 23, and 72 percent of them were male. Every subject was
given a reward. Subjects were randomly assigned to each of the cells in the
factorial design. Most of them (about 98%) already had purchase experience
in on-line shopping malls.
The experimental product was a portable multimedia player (PMP), a por
table next-generation multimedia player that plays digital music and video
files. There were three reasons for choosing a PMP as the experiment product:
(1) electronic products are frequently purchased in on-line shopping malls,
(2) consumers tend to rely on comments from previous users because elec
tronic products are so complicated, and (3) since the PMP was a brand-new
and unfamiliar product, the consumers processing the suggested information
had no stereotypes about the brand and its brand category
A virtual shopping mall sitewas provided for each subject. The mall con
tained both seller-created information about the target product and consumer
reviews. The seller-created information consisted of an overview of the product
and its functions. A picture of the product was provided, but its brand name
was hidden to remove any brand effect.All of this information was
replicated
from real on-line shopping malls.
High-quality review
The picture on the 3.5' LCD monitor isabsolutely amazing, Iam really impressed with the colors and the
contrast between darks on such a small screen. Plays songs at top-quality sound with 5.1 channels. Almost
every format is supported.
Low-quality review
Woooooooow! I searched fordays and compared every PMP and finallybought one. I'm really enjoying it
and it is tough to put itdown. All my friendsenvy my PMP. Right now I'mwriting a review, but Ican't wait to
play my PMP.
Table 1. Review Examples.
Independent Variables
On-line Consumer Reviews. Forty reviews were created based on real reviews
from on-line shopping malls. Each on-line consumer review included a title,
the reviewer's name, and the contents. The length of the reviews was controlled
because it can affect information quality and quantity [14]. The length of each
review was set at three lines with a font size of 10 point type.
A focus group interview (18 subjects) was used to decide the level of
review quantity. The members of the focus group did not participate in the
main experiment but were asked to define how many reviews were few or
moderate. When surfing Internet shopping malls, these members reported,
or six reviews of three or four lines each.
they generally read five Along these
interview results, one was selected as the few level and six was selected as
themoderate level for review quantity.
Relevance, objectiveness, understandability, and sufficiency were chosen
as the criteria for review quality. High-quality reviews are product-relevant,
understandable, and persuasive, with sufficient reasons based on facts about
the product. Low-quality reviews are emotional, subjective, and vacuous, with
no information except expressions of subjective feelings or simple interjections
were classified as either high
(e.g., "Wow!", "How wonderful!"). The reviews
or low quality. Table 1 shows examples. Before themain experiment, a pretest
was conducted to check whether these reviews were perceived as intended.
Twenty subjects (who did not participate in themain experiment) were asked
to classify each review according to its quality. The reviews that all of them
selected as either high or low quality were used for themain experiment.
Involvement. The study employed situational involvement for involvement
manipulation by embedding role-playing in the introductory page [29, 31].
Involvement was dichotomized into high and low levels. The two involvement
situations differed in the amount of goal directedness. The high-involvement
a scenario where they worked
respondents were asked to imagine in the
multimedia a
industry and had to buy PMP product for their business. These
instructions created a high level of goal directedness, with respondents focus
ing their attention on PMP-related issues. In addition, these subjects were told,
"You were specially selected for this study. Your answers will be treated as
important. We will have an interview in the second experimental session and

offer free gifts after the session." [29]However, the role-playing instructions
in the low-involvement situation completely lacked goal directedness. Low
involvement subjects were simply asked to imagine that theywere browsing a
Web site for fun and were also told that this experiment was going on in every
university in Seoul, and their individual answers would be but one part of
the overall results [29,31]. Thanks to thismanipulation, the high-involvement
subjects read and processed the product information more carefully than the
low-involvement
subjects.
Control Variables
An on-line shopping experiment could be affected by the characteristics of the

subjects (e.g., prior on-line shopping experience) and the stimulus (e.g., prices
or brand names of products) [23].Multiple methods were used to control for
the effects of possible confounding variables in order to improve the study's
internal validity Individual differences, including personality, cognitive style,
and personal Web experiences, were controlled for these factors by randomly
assigning subjects to the experimental conditions.
All groups had to equally accept seller-created information. Four measure
ments were used to check this. In addition, the perception that each review
of the product was positive had to be controlled because the study was only
considering positive reviews. This control was measured by two items. The
measurements are in theAppendix.
In an experiment of this kind, it is also necessary to control other variables
thatmight change the effects of on-line consumer reviews, such as brand ef
fect, attitude toward the reviews, and prior knowledge of the product. In the
present experiment, the product was so brand-new that product familiarity
was easily controlled. Brand effectwas also no
problem, because the brand
name and information about the brand were not revealed. The survey asked
questions about prior knowledge and general attitude toward reviews (i.e.,
perceived usefulness and trust in reviews). The prior-knowledge variable
was measured by an itemwith anchors ranging from "I've never heard of it"
to "I know itwell," and the general attitude toward reviews was measured
by six items. The measurements of general attitude toward reviews are in the
Appendix.
Dependent Variable
Purchasing Intention. Purchasing intention was measured on two six-point

numeric scales. The scale items were taken from previous studies published
in the information technology and marketing literature. These measurements
ranged from 1, representing extremely unlikely, to 6, extremely likely The
were "How likely is it that you will buy this
corresponding questions prod
uct?" and "How likely is it that you will recommend this product to your
friends?" [15].
Experimental Procedures
At the start of the experiment, the subjects were told that theywere to carefully
read the instructions provided in the survey and then complete the experiment
independently The subjects were manipulated to imagine different scenarios
in terms of involvement. Product information?seller-created information and
on-line consumer reviews?was provided. The quantity and quality of the
on-line consumer reviews provided to each group were different, depending
on its conditions. Afterward, the subjects were asked to fill in the same ques
tionnaire, focusing firston purchasing intention, then processing measures of
the two roles of on-line consumer reviews, manipulation checks, recall checks,
and demographic information.
Research Results
Manipulation and Control Checks
The subjects7 responses on the two items designed to check their perceptions
of the quantity of reviews were averaged. An ANOVA analysis indicated the
=
presence of themain effect of review quantity [F(l, 350) 480.236, p < 0.001].
Subjects in the six-review condition perceived the quantity of reviews as
than in the one-review condition = 3.52 and
greater subjects (M 1.85). Thus,
the review quantity was manipulated successfully. The subjects7 responses on
themanipulation checks relevant to the quality of reviews were also examined.
These were averaged for an ANOVA test. The result showed that subjects in
the high-quality-review condition had greater perceptions of the quality of
the reviews than those in the low-quality-review condition [F(l, 350) = 85.232,
= 3.64 and
p < 0.001, M 2.94]. The review quality was also manipulated.
Finally, the involvement manipulation check was performed. Recall scores
were used for thismanipulation check [40]. Subjects were asked to check the
attributes of the experiment product among eight attributes. Only five of the
attributes offered were correct. Subjects in the high-involvement condition
had more correct answers than those in the low-involvement condition [F(l,
= = 7.11 and
350) 418.689, p < 0.001, M 5.05]. The involvement condition was
manipulated successfully.
All groups equally accepted seller-created information. The degree of review
positiveness was also controlled successfully. The subjects7 general attitudes
toward reviews were checked. The factor analysis revealed that attitude had
two factors (eigenvalue = 2.869 and Cronbach7s a = 0.79; eigenvalue = 1.189
and Cronbach/s a = 0.70). The two factors and prior product knowledge were
used as covariate variables for testing the hypotheses.
Hypothesis Testing
Consumer purchasing intention had a single-factor structure when the two

itemswere factor analyzed. The single factorwas generated with an eigenvalue
Low-involvement M(SD) High-involvement M(SD)
Low High Low High

quality quality quality quality
1 review n = 42 n = 42 n = 42 n = 42
2.95 3.05 2.71 2.83
(0.909) (0.794) (0.457) (0.477)
6 reviews n = 44 n = 44 n = 42 n = 50
3.55 3.82 3.09 4.24
(0.663) (0.657) (0.692) (0.716)
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics of Purchasing Intention.
of 1.77 and Cronbach's alpha of 0.87. The mean value of these two items was
used in subsequent analyses. Table 2 presents themean and standard devia
tion of the dependent variable for each condition.
The hypotheses were tested by performing an ANCOVA. The results are in
Table 3. The covariate variables were not significant. The analysis indicated
the presence of a significant main effect of the review quantity [F(l, 337) =
112.680, p < 0.001]. The main effect of the review quality was also significant
=
[F(l, 337) 30.556, p < 0.001]. Thus, Hypotheses 1 and 2 were accepted. The
review quantity x review quality interaction effectwas significant [F(l, 337) =
16.706, p < 0.001]. This result showed that consumer purchasing intention
increased more as the number of high-quality reviews increased than as the
number of low-quality reviews increased.
The review quality x involvement interaction [F(l, 337) = 9.483, p < 0.002]
revealed that review quality has a stronger impact on purchasing intention
under high-involvement conditions than under low-involvement conditions.
The effect of review quality was significant in the high-involvement condition
but not in the low-involvement condition (see Figure 1). This result was the
same as the prediction from ELM. Thus, Hypothesis 3was accepted. However,
the review quantity x involvement interaction effectwas not significant [F(l,
=
337) 2.452, p < 0.118]. That is, the effects of review quantity were significant
for both high- and low-involvement subjects, and the impacts of the review
quantity on purchasing intention did not differ depending on the level of
involvement (Planned contrast: F(l, 348) = 2.116, p < 0.147). Thus, Hypothesis
4 was rejected. This result differed from the ELM prediction, showing that
high-involvement subjects considered review quantity important information
for their purchasing.
The results were further explained by exploring the different effects of
review quantity and review quality under low- and high-involvement condi
tions. Itwas possible toperform these analyses because the three-way interac
tion effect of review quantity x review quality x involvement was significant
=
[F(l, 337) 8.277, p < 0.004]. For low-involvement subjects, only themain effect
of the review quantity was significant [F(l, 165) = 30.483, p < 0.001]. The graph
on the left in Figure 2 shows the results. The expected results of ELM in the
low-involvement condition were replicated in the context of on-line consumer
reviews. In the low-involvement conditions, subjects revealed a positive re
Sum of
Effect squares Sig.
Prior knowledge 0.321 0.678 0.411

Firstfactorof general attitude toward reviews 0.055 0.117 0.733
Second factorof general attitude toward reviews 0.068 0.144 0.705
Review quantity 53.326 112.680 0.001
Review quality 14.461 30.556 0.001
Involvement 1.184 2.502 0.115
*
Review quantity Review quality 7.906 16.706 0.001
*
Review quantity Involvement 1.161 2.452 0.118
*
Review quality Involvement 4.488 9.483 0.002
* *
Review quantity Review quality Involvement 3.917 8.277 0.004
Table 3. ANCOVA Results.
4.5 t - Low
1 review Quality
- 6 reviews ?
HighQuality
1 3.5 ? 3.5
High High
Involvement Involvement
Interactions * Involvement and

Figure 1. Two-Way (Review Quantity
Review Quality * for Purchasing Intention
Involvement)
lationship between attitude change and number of reviews regardless of the

review quality. Hence, theywere persuaded via the simple decision-making
tool "The more, the better." For high-involvement, all effects?review quantity
= -
[F(l, 169) 76.993, p < 0.001], review quality [F(l, 169) 48.249, p < 0.001], and
the interaction of review quantity and quality [F(l, 169) = 26.376, p < 0.001]?
were significant. The results are shown in the graph on the right of Figure 2.
As can be seen, the purchasing intention of high-involvement subjects under
both the high- and low-quality conditions increased with the review quantity,
but the change was greater in the high-quality condition than the low-quality
condition. Since each on-line consumer review was regarded as the argu
ment message from a previous consumer, more high-quality reviews means
that therewere a greater number of persuasive arguments, leading tomore
persuasion. In addition, the review quantity positively affected purchasing
intention even when the review quality was low. Petty and Cacioppo reported
the joint tendencies for increasing the number of strong arguments to increase
agreement, but for increasing the number of weak arguments to decrease
agreement [36]. The present results (focusing on on-line consumer reviews)
differed from the results of the earlier studies (focusing on advertisements)
LowInvolvement High Involvement
- Low
Quality
-High Quality
I 3.5 -f
1 6
Review
Quantity Review
Quantity
* Review *
Figure 2. Three-Way Interaction (Review Quality Quantity
Involvement) for Purchasing Intention
when subjects under the high-involvement condition were given low-quality

reviews (weak arguments). A review, in contrast to an advertising argument,
can be a recommender even if its content is not helpful, so high-involvement
subjects may have considered many reviews as a signal representing product
popularity, and processed it through a central route. The role of on-line con
sumer reviews as a recommender may lead to an increase in the purchasing
intention of high-involvement subjects.
These explanations were supported by an additional analysis using process
measures of the two roles of on-line consumer reviews. The purpose of this
analysis was to find the underlying mechanism by which reviews affect pur
chasing intention. As suggested earlier in this paper, on-line consumer reviews
play both an informant role and a recommender role. Consumers acquire
user-oriented information from reviews playing an informant role. Thus, their
perceptions of the informativeness of the review information set (defined as
how much useful information all the reviews provide [18]) depend on review
quality, quantity, and involvement. If they obtain more useful information
from the review information set, theirperception of the informativeness of the
review information set will increase. This variable was measured using two
items, "reviews provide useful information about the product" and "review
information is helpful forme to understand the product," with 1 as strongly
a
disagree and 6 as strongly agree [18, 33]. In addition, consumers can obtain
a
sense of the popularity of product through on-line consumer reviews play
ing a recommender role. That is, consumers can infer the product's popularity
from how many people bought the product and how they evaluated it.The
perceived popularity of a product, defined as how many people like or enjoy
it,was measured using two items "the product is popular" and "the product
is liked by a lot of people," with 1 as strongly disagree and 6 as strongly agree
[44]. These measurements were subjected to reliability analysis and validity
analysis. The factor analysis revealed that these measurements had two fac
tors (perceived informativeness: eigenvalue = 2.406 and Cronbach's a = 0.93;
= 1.304 and Cronbach's a =
perceived popularity: eigenvalue 0.92).
Low-Involvement M(SD) High-Involvement M(SD)
1 review 6 reviews 1 review 6 reviews
Perceived informativeness
Low-quality 3.43 4.84 2.69 2.95

(0.94) (0.83) (0.90) (0.79)
High-quality 3.48 5.07 3.21 4.86
(1.04) (0.85) (0.87) (0.83)
Perceived popularity
Low-quality 3.71 5.09 3.40 5.10

(0.97) (0.80) (0.99) (0.85)
High-quality 3.55 5.07 3.57 5.06
(1.04) (0.76) (1.10) (0.77)
Table 4. Descriptive Statistics of Perceived Popularity and Perceived

Informativeness.
Table 4 presents the perceived informativeness and perceived popularity

of each condition. For the perceived informativeness, the effect of three-way
interaction was significant [F(l, 337) = 10.291, p < 0.001]. Low-involvement
subjects perceived reviews as more informative as the number of reviews
increased [F(l, 165) = 111.183, p < 0.001], but other effectswere not signifi
cant. That is, the change ofmean values was statistically significant from one
review to six reviews but not from low quality to high quality On the other
hand, all the effects on the perceived informativeness of high-involvement
= <
subjects were significant (review quantity [F(l, 169) 55.513, p 0.001], review
= <
quality [F(l, 169) 88.035, p 0.001), and the interaction of review quantity
and quality [F(l, 169) = 29.836, p < .001]). That is, the change ofmean values
from one review to six reviews was statistically significant when high-qual
ity reviews were offered, but not along review quantity when low-quality
reviews were offered. For the perceived product popularity resulting from
on-line consumer reviews as a recommender, only the effect of the review
=
quantity was significant [F(l, 337) 227.674, p < .001]. Subjects in both high
and low-involvement conditions perceived the experimental product as more
as the number of reviews increased. The effects of review
popular quality on
perceived popularity were not significant for either high- or low-involvement
subjects. These results are shown in Figure 3. They indicate that the perceived
informativeness of high-involvement subjects does not change as the number
of low-quality reviews increases, but their perceptions of popularity increase
with the number of low-quality reviews.
The perceived popularity and informativeness of the review informa
tion set both influence purchasing intention. Previous studies suggest that
consumers have a social desire to conform to the expectations of others, so
they often decide how to behave by observing the behavior of others [8]. The
perceived popularity of a product shown via on-line consumer reviews gives
evidence of social desirability, and therefore increases purchasing intention.
The relationship between the perceived informativeness and purchasing in
tention is studied in the advertisement informativeness literature. Previous
,
^Purchasing^
Intention
Involvement
Low
Consumers 0.228
High
Consumers
Involvement
JD.190
Review
Quantity Review
Quantity
Involvement
Low
Quality
Low
--Quality
Low-H?-High -High
Quality
Quality
ure 3. The Underlying Mechanism of the Two Online Consumer
of
Roles
+5 +3 6t
Quantity Review
Quantity
Quality
Low
"Quality
High Review
Low
Involvement
Quality
Low
-High
Quality
studies suggest that the more informative the information set is, the more
favorable associations consumers have, resulting in an increase in behavioral
intention [36].
were conducted to check the effects of perceived infor
Regression analyses
mativeness (informant role) and popularity (recommender role) on purchasing
intention. The independent variables were perceived informativeness and
and the variable was purchasing intention. The results
popularity, dependent
of the analysis are presented in Table 5. As can be seen, perceived popularity
and informativeness had a positive and significant effect on purchasing inten
tion for all subjects. More interesting, however, is that the strengths of the two
were different depending on the level of involvement.
independent variables
For low-involvement subjects, perceived popularity (? = 0.228, p < 0.003) had
a stronger effect than perceived informativeness (? = 0.190, p < 0.014). On the
other hand, for high-involvement subjects, perceived informativeness (? =
=
0.410, p < 0.001) had a stronger effect than perceived popularity (? 0.235, p
< 0.001). These results mean that low-involvement consumers consider the
recommender rolemore important than the informant role, but high-involve
ment consumers considered the informant role more important than the
recommender role. Since involvement is related to themotivation of infor
consumers are willing to elaborately
mation-processing, high-involvement
process the focalmessages to get additional product information from on-line
consumer reviews rather than use them as a signal of product popularity. In
contrast, low-involvement consumers are not likely to engage in elaborate
and therefore rely on themessages as a simple sign of
message-processing,
product popularity.
In sum, on-line consumer reviews, unlike advertisement messages, play
a dual role for consumers. The informant and recommender roles are both
consumer purchasing intention. Low-involvement con
positively related to the
sumers focus on the peripheral cue of showing popularity (recommender role)
consumers
regardless of review quality (informant role). High-involvement
focus not only on the product information obtained from reviews (informant
role) but also on the product popularity shown by the reviews (recommender
role).When high-involvement consumers are given low-quality reviews, they
do not acquire additional useful product information, but they are still affected
because the reviews are a signal of product popularity. Finally, a signal of the
recommender role increases purchasing intention, which makes the results of
this study different from the results of previous studies.
Conclusion and Discussion
Three major findings emerge from the research described in this paper. First,
the quality of on-line consumer reviews has a positive effect on consumer
are logical and persuasive, with sufficient
purchasing intention. Reviews that
reasons based on specific facts about the product, have a strong positive effect
on purchasing intention. Second, consumers' purchasing intention increases
reviews indicates
along with the number of reviews. The existence ofmany
that the product is popular, and this iswhat increases purchasing intention.
Low High
Full involvement involvement
ANOVA: F-value (p-value) 40.061 11.136 33.327
(p< 0.001) (p< 0.001) (p< 0.001)

R7 0.188 0.116 0.278
Constant
1.786
b 2.062 1.522
9.984
t-value 7.3806.518
< < 0.001)
(p-value)(p< 0.001) (p 0.001) (p
Perceived popularity
0.167b 0.165 0.168
0.233
beta 0.2280.235
4.581
t-value 2.975
3.497
< 0.001)
(p-value) (p< 0.001) (p< 0.003) (p
Perceived informativeness
0.206
b 0.134 0.292
0.304
beta 0.190
0.410
5.975
t-value 2.476
6.093
< 0.014) <
(p< 0.001)
(p-value) (p (p 0.001)
Table 5. Regression Results.
These two findings can be interpreted as the effects of the quality and quantity
of on-line word-of-mouth messages.
Third, this paper shows the significant review quality x involvement inter
action effect, and the insignificant review quantity x involvement interaction
effect.Low-involvement consumers are affected by review quantity rather than
quality. On the other hand, high-involvement consumers are affected both by
review quantity and by review quality. The effect of review quality on high
involvement consumers ismore pronounced with a sizable number of reviews,
whereas the effect of review quantity is significant even when the review
quality is low. This result, which is not the same as the prediction from ELM,
is explained by the role of on-line consumer reviews as a recommender. Even
though low-quality reviews do not give useful information about a product,
they increase the purchasing intention of high-involvement consumers because
the review quantity shows thatmany people have bought and recommended
the product. High-involvement consumers regard review quantity as a useful
signal of product popularity and not simply as a peripheral cue.
This studymakes several practical contributions. Itsmajor results emphasize
the importance of properly managing on-line consumer reviews. Since on-line
reviews function both as informants and recommenders, they can be used stra
tegically as a communication channel. For example, on-line sellers can provide
a review format that enables reviewers to post
high-quality reviews focusing
on the informant role of on-line consumer reviews
(providing user-oriented
information to improve consumers' understanding of a product). If reviews
are presented in a matrix format based on reviewers and a check system for
attributes or product-usage situations, consumers can easily obtain information
on the product. Sellers can also offer rewards or incentives for consumers who
post good reviews. In addition, sellers can show reviews ordered by quality
rather than date, especially forhigh-involvement consumers.
Focusing on the recommender role of on-line consumer reviews (show
ing product popularity), it is effective to use a tool that shows a summary of
information that represents how many reviews there are and how good the
overall evaluation is. The total number of reviews and star ratings can be used
as anchors for purchasing decisions. Since consumers can easily know how
many people recommend a product through this tool, it is useful for consum
ers to predict a product's popularity, and thiswill increase their purchasing
intention, especially for the low-involvement consumers.
Consumer involvement is an important strategic factor. Both low-involve
ment consumers and high-involvement consumers are important tomarketers
making a strategic plan [26]. Low-involvement consumers may not be very
interested in buying products at themoment, but they should not be treated
as "'nonprofitable consumers." Instead, they should be treated as "potential
consumers" for the long-term profit of companies. For the short term, com
panies tend to think that low-involvement consumers are less important
than high-involvement consumers, so they consider review quality as the
important thing, focusing on the high-involvement consumers. However, for
the long term,marketers should set strategies to attract potential consumers
to gain a competitive position in themarket. Marketers should adopt a vari
ety of tactics to attract these potential consumers. Previous studies suggest
nonbrand strategies for low-involvement consumers [19]. According to the
studies, it is very important for low-involvement consumers to be given signals
or cues that stimulate their interest in a product. The study sug
peripheral
gests that review quantity plays the same role. Involvement can be detected
through click-stream data because on-line shopping tasks differwith the level
of involvement. For example, the searching task is close to high-involvement
action, while the browsing task is related to low-involvement action [23].
Using click-stream data, on-line sellers can categorize consumers by level of
involvement and show reviews that fit their involvement up front.Once sell
ers develop a system for recommending appropriate reviews to consumers
involved at both high and low levels, the effects of on-line consumer reviews
will be more convincing.
Limitations and Future Research
The present study has several limitations. First, purchasing intention was
measured with only two items. Since the construct demonstrated adequate
reliability and construct validity, this limitation did not have a serious effecton
the research findings, but the reliability of future research could be enhanced
by using more items tomeasure the construct. Second, the study did not
adequately control other variables that can influence the effect of on-line con
sumer reviews. Negative reviews and mixed-quality reviews were neglected
in order to create a simple research design. Further research removing these
variables one by one should be conducted. Finally, the level of involvement
manipulated consumers' elaboration likelihood. Consumer knowledge is a
factor that can affect elaboration likelihood. For example, consumers with
low expertise in the product category who are buying or shopping on-line
in general may be more affected more by the quantity of reviews, while con
sumers with high expertise will look at their quality. This issue needs to be
analyzed in the future.
Despite these limitations, the research summarized in thispaper presents the
effectof on-line consumer reviews along with several implications. Many other
interesting questions remain unanswered, however, and require further inves
tigation. First, this investigation focused on positive on-line consumer reviews.
On-line consumer reviews may have a different effect on purchasing intention
when there are some negative reviews. Second, the study can be extended by
considering other variables. Prior knowledge can affect perceptions of on-line
consumer reviews because it is an important factor in information-processing.
Product category depending on enduring involvement may have an effect on
the information-processing of on-line consumer reviews. Both enduring in
volvement from product categories and situational involvement are based on
the same construct?perceived relevance as related to information-processing
motivation. The expected results of the effects of product categories will be
similar to the results of this study as long as there is situational involvement.
In the case of low-involvement products like toilet paper, consumers usually
have low motivation to engage in effortfulmessage-processing, so the simple
signal of product popularity inferred from the number of reviews will affect
purchase intention regardless of the review type. In contrast, consumers are
on focal messages
willing to focus of the reviews when searching forhigh-in
volvement products such as laptop computers. Thus, the type of review may
also influence purchasing intention. The effects of on-line consumer reviews
can be generalized through these further studies.
REFERENCES
1.Alba, J.;Lynch, J.; Weitz, B.; Janiszewski, C; Lutz, R.; Sawyer, A.; and
Wood, S. Interactive home shopping: Consumer, retailer, and manufacturer
incentives to participate in electronic marketplaces. Journal ofMarketing, 61,
3 (1997), 38-53.
2. Arndt, J.Word ofmouth advertising and informal communication. In
RD. Cox (ed.), Risk Taking and InformationHandling inConsumer Behavior.
Boston: Harvard University, Division of Research, Graduate School of Busi
ness Administration, 1967, pp. 188-239.
3. Bailey, J.E., and Pearson, S.W. Development of a tool formeasuring and an
alyzing computer user satisfaction. Management Science, 29,5 (1983), 530-545.
4. Bickart, B., and Schindler, R.M. Internet forums as influential sources of
consumer information. Journal of InteractiveMarketing, 15, 3 (2001), 31-40.
5. Bloemer, J.;Ruyter, K.; and Wetzeis, M. Linking perceived service qual
ity and service loyalty: A multidimensional perspective. European Journal of
Marketing, 33,11/12 (1999), 1082-1106.
6. Brennan, L., and Mavondo, F. Involvement: An unfinished story? InA.
O'Cass (ed.)., Proceedings of theAustralia and New Zealand Marketing Academy
Conference. Gold Coast, QLD: Griffith University School ofManagement

and Marketing, 2000, pp. 132-137 (http://smib.vuw.ac.nz:8081/www/
ANZM AC2000 /CDsite /paper s /b /Brennanl .PDF).
7. Brown, J.J.,and Reingen, PH. Social ties and word-of-mouth referral
behavior. Journal ofConsumer Research, 14, 3 (1987), 350-362.
8. Buttle, F.A. Word ofmouth: Understanding and managing referralmar
3
keting. Journal of StrategicMarketing, 6, (1998), 241-254.
9. Celsi, R.L., and Olson, J.C. The role of involvement in attention and
comprehension processes. Journal ofConsumer Research, 15, 2 (1988), 210-224.
10. Chaiken, S. Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the
use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of
Personality and
Social Psychology, 39, 5 (1980), 752-766.
11. Chatterjee, P. Online reviews: Do consumers use them? Advances inCon
sumer Research, 28 (2001), 129-133.
12. Chen, Y., and Xie, J.Online consumer review: A new element ofmar
keting communications mix. Working Paper. University ofArizona, 2004
(http:/ /papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=618782# Paper
Download).
13. Chen, Y., and Xie, J.Third-party product review and firmmarketing
strategy.Marketing Science, 24, 2 (2005), 218-240.
14. Chevalier, J.,and Mayzlin, D. The effect ofword ofmouth on sales: On
line book reviews. Journal ofMarketing Research, 43, 3 (2006), 345-354.
15. Cronin, J.J.,and Taylor, S. A. SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL: Reconcil
ing performance-based and perception-minus-expectations measurement of
service quality Journal ofMarketing, 58,1 (1994), 125-131.
16. Dellarocas, C. The digitization ofword ofmouth: Promise and chal
lenges of online feedback mechanisms. Management Science, 49,10 (2003),
1401-1424.
17. Dichter, E. How word-of-mouth advertising works. Harvard Business
Review, 44, 6 (1966), 147-166.
18. Edward, S.M.; Li, H.; and Lee, J.-H. Forced exposure and psychological
reactance: Antecedents and consequences of the perceived intrusiveness of
pop-up ads. Journal ofAdvertising, 31, 3 (2002), 83-95.
19. Gardner, M.P.; Mitchell, A.A.; and Russo, J.E. Low involvement strate
gies for processing advertisements. Journal ofAdvertising, 14, 2 (1985), 4-12.
20. Griffith, D.A.; Krampf, R.F.; and Palmer, J.W.The role of interface in elec
tronic commerce: consumer involvement with print versus on-line catalogs.
International Journal ofElectronic Commerce, 5, 4 (summer 2001), 135-154.
21. Harmon, A. Amazon glitch unmasks war of reviewers. New York Times,
February 14, 2004, Al (www.nytimes.com/2004/02/14/technology/
14AMAZ.html?ei=5007&en=183dcldl6a0c7b4c&ex-1392094800&partner=
USERLAND&pagewanted=all&position=).
22. Hennig-Thurau, T., and Walsh, G. Electronic word ofmouth: Motives for
and consequences of reading customer articulations on the Internet. Interna
tional Journal ofElectronic Commerce, 8, 2 (2004), 51-74.
23. Hong, W.; Thong, J.Y.L.; and Tarn, K.Y The effects of information format
and shopping task on consumers' online shopping behavior: A cognitive fit
perspective. Journal ofManagement Information Systems, 21,3 (2004), 149-184.
24. Houston, M.J., and Rothschild, ML. Conceptual and methodological

perspectives in involvement. In S. Jain (ed.), Research Frontiers inMarketing
Dialogues and Directions. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1978,
pp. 184-187.
25. Johnson, B.T., and Eagly, A.H. The effects of involvement on persuasion:
Ameta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 2 (1989), 290-314.
26. Kassarjian, H.H. Low involvement?A second look. In K.B. Monroe
(ed.), Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 8. Ann Arbor: Association forCon
sumer Research, 1981, pp. 31-34.
27. Krugman, H. The impact of advertising involvement. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 30, 4 (winter 1966), 583-596.
28.Maclnnis, D.J.; Moorman, C; and Jaworski, B.J. Enhancing and mea
suring consumers' motivation, opportunity, and ability to process brand
information from ads. Journal ofMarketing, 55, 4 (1991), 32-53
29. Maheswaran, D., and Sternthal, B. The effects of knowledge, motivation,
and type ofmessage on ad processing and product judgments. Journal of
Consumer Research, 17 (1990), 66-73.
30.McQuarrie, E.F., and Munson, J.M. The Zaichkowsky Personal Involve
ment Inventory: Modification and extension. InM. Wallendorf and P. An
derson (eds.), Advances inConsumer Research, vol. 14. Provo, UT: Association
forConsumer Research, 1987, pp. 36-40.
31. Meyers-Levy, J.,and Peracchio, L.A. Moderators of the impact of self
reference on persuasion. Journal ofConsumer Research, 22, 4 (1995), 408-423.
32.Mittal, B. A comparative analysis of four scales of consumer involve
ment. Psychology & Marketing, 12, 7 (1995), 663-682.
33. Negash, S.; Ryan, T.; and Igbaria, M. Quality and effectiveness inWeb
based customer support systems. Information& Management, 40, 8 (2003),
757-768.
34. Petty, R.E., and Cacioppo, J.T.The effects of involvement on response
to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persua
sion. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 46,1 (1984), 69-81.
35. Petty, R.E., and Cacioppo, J.T.Communication and Persuasion: Central and
Peripheral Routes toPersuasion. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1986.
36. Petty, R.E.; Cacioppo, J.T.; and Schumann, D. Central and peripheral
routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement.
Journal of Consumer 2
Research, 10, (1983), 135-146.
37. Piller, C. Everyone is a critic in cyberspace. Los Angeles Times, December
3,1999, Al.
38. Ratchford, B.T.; Talukdar, D.; and Lee, M.-S. A model of consumer choice
of the Internet as an information source. International Journal ofElectronic
Commerce, 5, 3 (2001), 7-22.
39. Richins, M.L.; Bloch, PH.; and McQuarrie, E.F. How enduring and situ
ational involvement combine to create involvement responses. Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 1, 2 (1992), 143-153.
40. Shavitt, S.; Swan, S.; Lowery, T.M.; and Wanke, M. The interaction of
endorser attractiveness and involvement in persuasion depends on the goal
that guides message processing. Journal ofConsumer Psychology, 3, 2 (1994),
137-162.
41. Srinivasan, A. Alternative measures of systems effectiveness: Associa

tions and implications. MIS Quarterly, 9, 3 (1985), 243-253.
42. Zaichkowsky, J.L.Measuring the involvement construct. Journal ofCon
sumer Research, 12, 3 (1985), 341-352.
43. Zaichkowsky, J.L. The personal involvement inventory: Reduction, revi
sion and application to advertising. Journal ofAdvertising, 23, 4 (1994), 59-70.
44. Zhu, J.H., and He, Z. Perceived characteristics, perceived needs, and
perceived popularity Communication Research, 29,4 (2002), 466-495.
Appendix
Please indicate the degree to which you would agree with the following
statements by choosing a number from 1 to 6, where 1 indicates "strongly
disagree" and 6 indicates "strongly agree." (The same scale was used for each
of the questions below.)
Strongly Strongly
disagree agree
1 2 3 4 5 6
General Attitude Toward Reviews
1. When I buy a product on-line, I always read reviews that are pre
sented on theWeb site.
2. When I buy a product on-line, the reviews presented on theWeb site
are helpful formy decision making.
3. When I buy a product on-line, the reviews presented on theWeb site
make me confident in purchasing the product.
4. If I do not read the reviews presented on theWeb sitewhen I buy a
product on-line, Iworry about my decision.
5. When I buy a product on-line, reading the reviews presented on the
Web site impose a burden on me.
6. When I buy a product on-line, reading the reviews presented on the
Web site irritatesme.
Review Quality
1. Each review has sufficient reasons supporting the opinions.

2. Each review is objective.
3. Each review is understandable.
4. Each review is credible.
5. Each review is clear.
6. In general, the quality of each review is high.
Review Quantity
1. The number of reviews is large.

2. The quantity of review information is large.
Review Positiveness
1. Reviewers positively evaluate the product.

2. In general, reviewers recommend the product.
Product Information (Seller-created Information)
1. The product information is objective.

2. The product information is understandable.
3. The product information is credible.
4. The product information is clear.
Perceived Informativeness of the Review Information Set
1. The reviews provide useful information about the product.

2. The review information is helpful forme to understand the product.
Perceived Product Popularity
1. The product is popular.

2. The product is liked by a lot of people.
DO-HYUNG PARK is a doctoral candidate at the Korea

(prehero@business.kaist.ac.kr)
Advanced Institute of Science and Technology Business School, where he received
his bachelor's in industrial management and his master's in manage
degree degree
ment His research interests include electronic word-of-mouth, consumer
engineering.
behavior in electronic commerce, user behavior in virtual communities, and Internet
marketing.
JUMIN LEE (leejumin@business.kaist.ac.kr) is a Ph.D. candidate in the

Department
of Management Information Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Tech
Systems,
Business School, where she earned her bachelor's and master's
nology degree degree
in electrical and computer science. Her research interests include user
engineering
behavior in e-commerce, virtual communities, and interaction.
human-computer
INGOO HAN (ighan@kgsm.kaist.ac.kr) is a professor at theKorea Advanced Institute

of Science and Technology Business School. He received his doctorate from the Univer
at are electronic
sity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. His research interests commerce,
virtual communities, and artificial in and finance.
intelligence applications accounting
His recent research issues have included consumer behavior in electronic commerce,
trust in virtual communities, and prediction of stock price an artificial

using intelligence
algorithm.He has published in the InternationalJournalofElectronicCommerce,Decision
SupportSystems,Information & Management, ExpertSystemswithApplications, International
Journalof IntelligentSystems inAccounting, Finance & Management, Telecommunication
Economy, and Research.
Systems, Engineering Contemporary Accounting

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Is Collaborating With JSTOR To Digitize, Preserve and Extend Access To International Journal of Electronic Commerce

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Is Collaborating With JSTOR To Digitize, Preserve and Extend Access To International Journal of Electronic Commerce

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Effect of On-Line Consumer Reviews on Consumer Purchasing Intention: The Moderating

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Do-Hyung Park, JuminLee, and IngooHan

impactdepends on both theirquality and theirquantity.This paper uses theelaboration

by reviewquantitymainlywhen the review quality ishigh. These findingshave implica

KEYWORDS AND PHRASES: Consumer involvement,

Internet-based electronic commerce is growing rapidly with the proliferation

Internationa]journal ofElectronicCommerce / Summer 2007, Vol. 11,No. 4, pp. 125-148.

An on-line consumer review is an important factor inproduct sales [13]. For

Theoretical Background and Hypotheses

Dual Role of On-Line Consumer Reviews

Two types of product information are available to an on-line consumer in

As informant, itprovides user-oriented product information, while as recom

Effects of Review Quantity and Quality on Purchasing

A significant body of research in theMIS literature represents information qual

HI: The quality of on-line consumer reviews positively affects consumers'

The number of on-line consumer reviews (review quantity) of a product

HI: The quantity of on-line consumer reviews positively affects consumers'

Involvement and the Elaboration Likelihood Model

Involvement is defined as the perceived personal relevance of a product

involvement for the same product can be different depending on theirpersonal

involvement. This association ismore evident when applying ELM.

lytic research has consistently found that as involvement increases, so does

Research Design and Method

Design, Subjects, and Experimental System

We employed a 2 x 2 x 2 factorial design. The three independent variables

every format is supported.

Table 1. Review Examples.

important. We will have an interview in the second experimental session and

An on-line shopping experiment could be affected by the characteristics of the

Purchasing Intention. Purchasing intention was measured on two six-point

Manipulation and Control Checks

Consumer purchasing intention had a single-factor structure when the two

Low-involvement M(SD) High-involvement M(SD)

Low High Low High

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics of Purchasing Intention.

Prior knowledge 0.321 0.678 0.411

Table 3. ANCOVA Results.

Interactions * Involvement and

lationship between attitude change and number of reviews regardless of the

LowInvolvement High Involvement

when subjects under the high-involvement condition were given low-quality

Low-Involvement M(SD) High-Involvement M(SD)

1 review 6 reviews 1 review 6 reviews

Low-quality 3.43 4.84 2.69 2.95

Low-quality 3.71 5.09 3.40 5.10

Table 4. Descriptive Statistics of Perceived Popularity and Perceived

Table 4 presents the perceived informativeness and perceived popularity

Conclusion and Discussion

ANOVA: F-value (p-value) 40.061 11.136 33.327

(p< 0.001) (p< 0.001) (p< 0.001)

Table 5. Regression Results.

Limitations and Future Research

Conference. Gold Coast, QLD: Griffith University School ofManagement

24. Houston, M.J., and Rothschild, ML. Conceptual and methodological

41. Srinivasan, A. Alternative measures of systems effectiveness: Associa

General Attitude Toward Reviews

1. Each review has sufficient reasons supporting the opinions.

1. The number of reviews is large.

1. Reviewers positively evaluate the product.

Product Information (Seller-created Information)

1. The product information is objective.

Perceived Informativeness of the Review Information Set