Chakraborty, U. (2019).

"Perceived Credibility of
Online Hotel Reviews and Its Impact on Hotel
Booking Intentions”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management.
(Publisher - Emerald, Scopus and SSCI indexed, and
ABDC – A ranked. 2018 Impact factor – 3.957 and
5-year impact factor – 4.531). It is 6th Ranked
Journal in the world in Tourism, Leisure and
Hospitality Management Context (Scimago Journal
Ranking)
 Introduction
 Word of mouth (WOM) can be described as informal communication between two
or more people. In marketing, word of mouth communication (WOM) involves
the passing of information between a non-commercial communicator (i.e.
someone who is not rewarded) and a receiver concerning a brand, a product, or a
service.
 Electronic Word of Mouth (EWOM)
 WOM is mediated through electronic means, the resulting electronic word of
mouth (EWOM) refers to any statement consumers share via the Internet (e.g., web sites,
social networks, instant messages, news feeds) about a product, service, brand, or
company.
 Online Reviews

 Online consumer reviews refers to the “peer-generated product evaluations posted on

company or third-party websites” (Mudambi and Schuff 2010, p.186).

 Online reviews are considered to be more credible source of information compared to

other traditional sources of information (Fang et al., 2016; O’Neil and Eisenmann, 2017).

 Consumers have highest level of trust on shared channels like online consumer reviews or
social media (O’Neil and Eisenmann, 2017).

 Online reviews offer deep insights about the brand (Lim and Kumar, 2017).
 Generally people consider online reviews as personal opinions about brands.

 Seven out of ten consumers write online reviews if they are requested for.

 Consumers recommend brands or products through social media.

 Traditional media such as television, radio, and newspapers are ineffective in establishing
a valuable rapport with consumers, it is actually social networks which build bonds and
engage online users into an amusing dialog, play, and intercourse with brands (Karpińska-
Krakowiak, 2016; Sasmita and Mohd Suki, 2015).
 Relevance of the Study
 The present era is Internet dominated world, where slight decrease in star rating on Yelp
can lead to significant losses for a business and slight increase in star rating can do
wonders.

 Marketing Science Institute has given top priority to social media marketing research.

 In US companies (FMCG, retail, media, IT, telecommunication, travel and leisure) are
using social media platforms and companies also integrated different social media
platforms in their day to day marketing activities.

 The Fortune 500 companies also use brand communities of different social media
platforms like Twitter, Facebook to interact with their consumers.

 Every minute consumers share almost 600,000 pieces of contents, upload 48 hours of
videos, text almost 100,000 messages and create more than 25000 posts.
 Relevance of the Study (India Context)
 Consumers in Asian countries, especially China, Japan, Hong Kong and India are more
influenced by online reviews compared to consumers in other countries.

 40 million Indian consumers use online reviews.

Literature Review

Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) framework -

S-O-R framework suggests that various environmental cues (stimuli) induces individual’s internal
evaluations (organism) which ultimately influence people’s behavior (response) in relation to the
organism (Liu et al., 2018).
Stimulus
Stimulus refers to the set of environmental cues or attributes that influence people’s
opinion (Chang, 2013). In the present study, stimulus refers to the factors that
influence the credibility of online hotel reviews.

To determine the environmental factors (stimuli), the current study adheres Yale attitude
change model (YACM).
According to the YACM, four factors are responsible for the credibility assessment of the
information. The four factors are
 Source of the information
 Receiver of the information
 Message content of the information
 Medium of the information.
The present study evaluates three factors namely source, receiver and message in the context of
fourth factor “online” medium.
 Source - refers to the "message source's perceived ability (expertise) or motivation to provide
accurate and truthful information (trustworthiness)" (Cheung, and Thadani, 2012, p. 466).

 Receiver - is one who follows the reviews.

Generally, when a receiver is keen to believe the reviews which are matched with his/her pre-
conceived information and knowledge, then he/she tends to accept the reviews.

 Message - deals with the credibility assessment of the contents of the reviews.
 Review Quality (RQ),
 Review Consistency (RC),
 Positive-Sided Online Reviews (PR),
 Negative-Sided Online Reviews (NR),
 Two-Sided Online Reviews (TR).
 Organism
On the basis of YACM, the present study has determined the environmental factors that can
influence the perceived credibility of online reviews (PCOR).
 The PCOR can be considered as the evaluation of the authenticity of online reviews as per
the receiver's perception

 Response
In the present study, response refers to the people’s hotel booking intentions.
 The term hotel booking intentions is regarded as the precedents of consumer’s hotel booking
(Zhao et al., 2015).
 Research Questions , Research Objectives and Research Hypotheses

Research Questions and Research Objectives Research Hypotheses

RQ1. Do source, receiver and message have any impact on H1. Source has a positive impact on PCOR.
credibility evaluation of online hotel reviews?
H2. Receiver has a positive impact on PCOR.
RO1. To determine the factors that affect credibility of
online hotel reviews. In specific, this study evaluates the
importance of source, receiver and message factors on H3a. Review quality has a positive impact on PCOR.
credibility evaluation of online hotel reviews.

H3b. Review consistency has a positive impact on PCOR.

H3c. Positive-sided reviews have a positive impact on

PCOR.

H3d. Negative-sided reviews have a positive impact on

PCOR.

H3e. Two-sided reviews have a positive impact on PCOR.

 Research Questions and Research Research Hypotheses
Objectives

RQ2. Do credible online hotel reviews have H4. PCOR has a positive impact on hotel
any impact on people’s hotel booking booking intentions (HBI).
intentions?

RO2. To probe the effects of credible online

hotel reviews on people’s hotel booking
intentions.
 Scale development of the latent constructs
The present study has modified and followed existing scales to measure each latent construct
based on five point Likert type scales where 1= strongly disagree, 2= disagree, 3= neutral, 4=
agree, and 5= strongly agree.

 Content validity of the scales

The research instrument was communicated to three academicians to ensure its clarity towards
the objectives of the study. Further, interviews were conducted with four Five-star hotel
managers and six users of online hotel reviews to confirm the relevancy of the questionnaire.
 Pilot study
Pilot study was conducted to evaluate the validity of the questionnaire. Reliability and
dimensionality of the latent constructs were also measured.
 Cronbach’s alpha values were in the range of 0.813 to 0.940 clearly exceeding the threshold
value of 0.70 (Hair et al., 2015) which indicates better internal consistency of the
measurement scales.
 Comrey and Lee (1992) suggested that for factor analysis above 300 sample size is suitable.
The present study has considered 402 sample size for pilot study to perform exploratory factor
analysis (EFA) that ensures the unidimensionality of the latent constructs.
 Sample adequacy test, namely, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test (KMO) value was 0.774 clearly
exceeding the threshold value of 0.50 (Hair et al., 2015). EFA revealed that all the latent
constructs in the model were uni-dimensional with Eigen value more than 1.
 Final Study
Mansoori et al. (2018) suggested that sample size over 1000 are adequate for data analysis.
Therefore, for final study 1112 respondents were considered.
Response Rate
 Questionnaire was given to 1743 people. Among 1743 people, 1112 people responded. The
response rate of the study was 1112/1743 = 0.63 which was well above 0.40 indicates
acceptable response rate to do further data analysis (Callegaro et al., 2015).
 Descriptive statistics of the data revealed that the skewness of the latent constructs was in
between +/-1 which indicates the distribution of the data was normal (Hair et al., 2015).
Moreover, kurtosis value of the latent constructs was below 2.200 which means the data
was free from outliers (Sposito et al., 1983).
 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to determine the measurement model.

 Structural equation modeling (SEM) was performed to determine the relationships between
the latent constructs.

 The present study considered SEM for data analysis because SEM can directly measure the
relationships between observed and latent variables (Hair et al., 2015).

 Further, to perform CFA maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) technique was used for the
measurement model because according to Hair et al. (2015) MLE provides valid and stable
results. Various indices of measurement model, namely, normed chi square = 2.047,
Goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.963, Comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.985, Tucker- Lewis
index (TLI) = 0.982, Adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI) = 0.951 and Root Mean
Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.031. All the results were within the accepted
level according to Hair et al. (2015).
 Convergent Validity
 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to ensure the convergent validity of the
measurement model.
 The factor loadings of the items of all the 9 latent constructs were more than 0.5.
 The construct reliability value (CR) of all the 9 latent constructs were above 0.7 which
indicates acceptable results (Hair et al., 2015).
 Discriminant validity
 The square roots of AVEs of the latent constructs were higher than all the inter construct
correlations.
 AVE of the latent constructs were higher than their maximum shared variance (MSV) and
average shared variance (ASV).
 Multicollinearity
Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) for each of the independent latent constructs was measured.
The VIF values were less than 3.3, which means the present study data were free from any
multi-collinearity problem.

 Common method bias. The present study considered respondent’s self-reported responses.
Therefore, common method bias can be present (Podsakoff et al., 2003).
Common latent factor (CLF) method was performed to check the presence of the common
method bias test.
The difference between the standard regression weights of the observed variables of the
research model without the common latent factor and the standard regression weights of the
observed variables of the research model with common latent factor were less than 0.2, it
implies that the data was free from common method bias.
 Structural Model
 Normed chi square = 2.631
 Goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.951
 Adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI) = 0.938
 Tucker- Lewis index (TLI) = 0.971
 Comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.976
 Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.038.
 Standardized Path Hypoth Results

Path Coefficient Coefficient (t) esis

(β)

Not
Source PCOR 0.034 1.058 H1 Supported

Receiver PCOR 0.128 3.863*** H2 Supported

RQ PCOR 0.106 3.104** H3a Supported

RC PCOR 0.098 2.963** H3b Supported

Not
PR PCOR 0.043 1.286 H3c Supported

NR PCOR 0.079 2.323* H3d Supported

TR PCOR 0.190 5.821*** H3e Supported

PCOR BI 0.163 5.040*** H4 Supported

Significance at the *** p < 0.001 level, ** p < 0.01 level and * p < 0.05 level
 Discussions of the Findings

 Receiver's previous knowledge and experiences affect PCOR. Generally, consumers in

India determine the similarity of online recommendations with their pre-conceived
knowledge.
 RQ had a statistically significant positive effect on the PCOR. This implies that consumers
in India too look for not just any review. They search for reviews that contain justifications
for those reviews (Yang et al., 2016).
 RC also affects PCOR. Consumers in India consider those online reviews as credible that
are similar too online reviews written by other reviewers.
 Negative reviews also had significant impact on PCOR. Because people believe that it is
unlikely to be contributed by the manufacturer or seller (Lee et al., 2017).
 Two-sided reviews had statistically significant positive impact on PCOR. Consumers in
general believe that every product has its own merits as well as demerits. If any review
focuses on both these aspects, it facilitates cognitive evaluation of the review and then the
consumers feel that the particular review is credible (Uribe et al., 2016).
 In various social media huge number of online recommendations exist and all the
information can't be trusted without determining its credibility (Johnson and Kaye, 2016).
Consumers in India look for credible reviews to take hotel booking decision.
 Source was found to be statistically not significant in determining the PCOR.
However, this finding is consistent with Cheung et al. (2008) on food and restaurant's
online reviews in the context of another Asian country, namely, Hong Kong. In the
case of services, where experience of individual is important, people may not be
completely convinced about the review sources unless they themselves experience the
service.
 The study result is inconsistent with Lo and Yao (2019). Lo and Yao (2019) found that
source has significant positive impact on the perceived credibility of online reviews.
While, Lo and Yao (2019) used experimental design where each and every review was
analysed by the respondents, the present study as well as Cheung et al. (2008) used the
descriptive research design (survey), where the reviews were viewed in aggregate by
the respondents. It seems the underlying design of the study is the reason for
differences in the findings between the present study and the study by Lo and Yao
(2019).
 Further, positive reviews found statistically insignificant in determining PCOR. One of
the possible reasons might be consumers in India believe that positive reviews likely
to be contributed by the manufacturer or seller.
 Research Profile
 Publication:
 Journal (7)
 (1) Chakraborty, U. and Bhat, S. (2018). "The effect of credible online reviews on brand equity
dimensions and its consequence on consumer behavior", Journal of promotion management. Vol. 24
No. 1, pp 57-82. (Publisher - Taylor and Francis, Scopus and ESCI indexed and ABDC - B ranked).
 (2) Chakraborty, U. and Bhat, S. (2018). "Online Reviews and Its Impact on Brand Equity",
International journal of internet marketing and advertising. Vol. 12 No. 2, pp 159-180. (Publisher -
Inderscience, Scopus indexed and ABDC - C ranked).
 (3) Chakraborty, U. and Bhat, S. (2018). "Credibility of online reviews and its impact on brand
image", Management research review. Vol. 41 No. 1, pp 148-164. (Publisher - Emerald, Scopus and
ESCI indexed and ABDC – C ranked).
 (4) Chakraborty, U. and Bhat, S. (2018). "Effect of Credible Reviews on Brand Image: A Mixed
Method Approach", IIM kozhikode society and management review. Vol. 7 No. 1, pp 1-10.
(Publisher - Sage. ICI and ESCI indexed).
 (5) Chakraborty, U. and Bhat, S. (2019). "Are online opinion leaders and seekers distinct?
A study on consumer electronics industry in India", Global Business Review. Vol. 20 No. 3,
pp 813-825. (Publisher - Sage, Scopus and ESCI indexed and ABDC – C ranked).
 (6) Chakraborty, U. (2019). “The Impact of Source Credible Online Reviews On Purchase
Intention: The Mediating Roles of Brand Equity Dimensions”, Journal of research in
interactive marketing. Vol. 13 No. 2, pp 142-161. (Publisher - Emerald, Scopus and SSCI
indexed, and ABDC –C ranked. Impact factor – 2.156).
 (7) Chakraborty, U. (2019). "Perceived Credibility of Online Hotel Reviews and Its Impact
on Hotel Booking Intentions”, International journal of contemporary hospitality
management. (Publisher - Emerald, Scopus and SSCI indexed, and ABDC – A ranked.
Impact factor – 3.957 and 5-year impact factor – 4.531).
 Book Chapter (1)
Chakraborty, U. and Bhat, S. (2016). Opinion Leadership Measurement Scale for Offline and Online.
In Somnath Chakbarti (Eds.), Globalizing Brand India: Opportunities and Challenges (1st ed., pp.
196 -208). New Delhi: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Research Paper Reviewed

 Journal of Business Research (Elsevier).
 Journal of Asia Business studies (Emerald).
 Journal of Promotion Management (Taylor and Francis).
 Internet Research (Emerald).
 Management Research Review (Emerald).
 Asia Pacific Journal of marketing and Logistics (Emerald).
 Information Technology & People (Emerald)
 Journal of Management Development (Emerald)
 International Conference Attended (5)
 1- Globalizing brand India opportunities and challenges 2015. IIM Kashipur. Paper titled- Inclusion of
Electronic Word of Mouth as an Additional Psychometric Property of Revised King and Summers
Opinion Leadership Scale
 2- Management Doctoral Colloquium and VGSOM Research Scholars’ Day 2016. IIT Kharagpur.
Paper titled- Online Recommendation Credibility and Adoption: Effects of EWOM on Customer Based
Brand Equity Dimensions
 3. International Conference on Marketing, Technology and Society 2016. IIM Kozhikode. Paper titled-
Effect of credible reviews on brand image: A mixed method approach.
 4. IMR Doctoral conference 2016-17. IIM Bangalore. Paper titled- Do credible online reviews effect
brand equity? A mixed method approach.
 5. 12th SIMSR Global Marketing Conference. K. J. Somaiya Institute of Management Studies. Paper
titled- The Impact of Credible Online Reviews on Purchase Intention: The Mediating Roles of Brand
Equity Dimensions.
 Research Plan
 Papers Under Review
Chakraborty, U. "Payment bank in India: Acceptance and use”, International journal of
economic policy in emerging economies. (Publisher - Inderscience, Scopus and ABDC- C
indexed).
Chakraborty, U. and Biswal, SK. “Impact of Online Reviews on Consumer’s Hotel Booking
Intentions: Does Brand Image Mediate?”, Journal of Promotion Management. Publisher –
Taylor and Francis, Scopus and ABDC- B category journal).

 Paper Under Preparation

Chakraborty, U. and Biswal, SK. “Impact of Online Reviews on Destination Brand Equity”.
Target Journal – Journal of Travel Research, Publisher – Sage, A* category journal.
 Proposal For Book under preparation
This will be a book on online reviews. The book will consider how marketers can deal will
product reviews. How marketers can deal with fake reviews.

 In future, I would like to work on the negative effects of social media towards millennials.
The basic focus would be how to reduce the negative impact of social media on
millennials.
 Through project fund I would like to open one consumer behavioral lab which will help me
to get foreign collaborations.
 Teaching Plan

 My teaching approach has always been to focus on a multidisciplinary approach, which has
garnered much appreciation from students. I taught principles of management and
Economics to B-tech 3rd year students at National Institute of Technology Karnataka
(NITK). There I taught supply chain management, consumer behavior, research
methodology and data analysis to the MBA students as well.
 In SIBM, Pune I am handling subjects like research methodology, data analysis,
economics, consumer behavior and brand management.