The influence of Online Ratings on Film ChoiceDecision Making and Perceived Risk

  1. Diana Gavilán Bouzas 1
  2. Susana Fernández Lores 2
  3. Gema Martínez Navarro 1
  1. 1 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

  2. 2 ESIC Business & Marketing School Madrid
Revista:
Comunicación y sociedad = Communication & Society

ISSN: 2386-7876

Año de publicación: 2019

Volumen: 32

Número: 2

Páginas: 45-57

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.15581/003.32.37847 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Comunicación y sociedad = Communication & Society

Resumen

Online users’ empowerment is an undeniable fact that has brought significant changes to the world of information. Society is becoming increasingly reliant on the online contributions shared by the users of social platforms. This paper focuses on the information provided by peers in movie-based online communities, in the form of numbers (ratings). Given the wide and varied offerings of films, the huge amount of information about each film and the experiential nature of cinema, this study analyses the influence of ratings at the moment of film choice. To test the influence of ratings on a moviegoer’s choice, controlling as they do the subject’s susceptibility to interpersonal influence, we conducted an experiment. A three-way, between-groups design (without rating and film critics/with rating/with rating and film critics) in a decision-controlled setting considers making a decision about what film to watch. Results provide empirical evidence that the addition of ratings simplifies the decision making. Also, ratings exert a significant influence in reducing risk perceptions, either global risk or each specific dimension of risk considered in the study –temporal risk, financial risk, experiential risk. Finally, academic and managerial implications and future research are also discussed.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Amblee, N. & Bui, T. (2011). Harnessing the influence of social proof in online shopping: The effect of electronic word of mouth on sales of digital microproducts. International journal of electronic commerce, 16(2), 91-114. https://www.doi.org/10.2753/JEC10864415160205
  • Arrow, K. J. (1976). Essays in the theory of risk-bearing. Oxford: North-Holland.
  • Bearden, W. O., Netemeyer, R. G. & Teel, J. E. (1989). Measurement of Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(4), 473-481. ttps://www.doi.org/10.1086/209186
  • BrightLocal (2014). Local Consumer Reviewer. Retrieved from https://www.brightlocal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Local-Consumer-Review-Survey-20141.pdf
  • Burnkrant, R. & Cousineau, A. (1975). Informational and normative social influence in buyer behavior. Journal of consumer research, 2(3), 206-215. https://www.doi.org/10.1086/208633
  • Christakis, N. & Fowler, J. (2010). Conectados. Madrid: Taurus.
  • Cialdini, R. (2001). Influence: Science and practice. Boston, MA: Pearson education.
  • Cisco System (2013, enero 12). Informe Anual. Cisco Systems, Inc.San José, CA: EE.UU. Retrieved from https://www.cisco.com/web/ES/pdf/Cisco_ASR_2012_v2_020813.pdf.
  • Dellarocas, C., Zhang, X. & Awad, N. (2007). Exploring the value of online product reviews in forecasting sales: The case of motion pictures. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(4), 23-45. https://www.doi.org/10.1002/dir.20087
  • Flavián-Blanco, C. & Guimaliú-Blasco, M. (2007). Un análisis de la influencia de la confianza y del riesgo percibido sobre la lealtad a un sitio web: el caso de la distribución de servicios gratuitos. Revista Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa, 16(1), 159-178. Retrieved from http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=2336194
  • Fundación Telefónica (2015, noviembre 13). La sociedad de la información en España. Barcelona: Ariel; Fundación Telefónica. Retrieved from https://www.fundaciontelefonica.com/arte_cultura/publicaciones-listado/pagina-item-publicaciones/itempubli/483/
  • Gavilan, D., Avello, M. & Martinez-Navarro, G. (2018). The influence of online ratings and reviews on hotel booking consideration. Tourism Management, 66, 53-61. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.10.018
  • Gürhan-Canli, Z. & Batra, R. (2004). When Corporate Image Affects Product Evaluations: The Moderating Role of Perceived Risk. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(2), 197-205. https://www.doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.41.2.197.28667
  • Hagel, J. & Armstrong, A. (1997). Net gain: expanding markets through virtual communities. The McKinsey Quarterly, 1, 140-154. https://www.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6653(199924)13:1%3C55::AID-DIR5%3E3.0.CO;2-C
  • Holbrook, M. & Hirschman, E. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of consumer research, 9(2), 132-140. https://www.doi.org/10.1086/208906
  • Eliashberg, J. & Shugan, S. (1997). Film Critics: Influencers or Predictors? Journal of Marketing, 61(2), 68-78. https://www.doi.org/10.2307/1251831
  • Kelman, H. C. (1961). Processes of opinion change. Public Opinion Quarterly, 25(1), 57-78. https://www.doi.org/10.1086/266996
  • Kozinets, R. V. (2002). The Field behind the Screen: Using Netnography for Marketing Research in Online Communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 61-72. https://www.doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.39.1.61.18935
  • Leimeister, J. M., Schweizer, K., Leimeister, S. & Krcmar, H. (2008). Do virtual communities matter for the social support of patients? Antecedents and effects of virtual relationships in online communities. Information Technology & People, 21(4), 350-374. https://www.doi.org/10.1108/09593840810919671
  • Levine, R., Locke, C., Searls, D., & Weinberger, D. (2011). The Cluetrain Manifesto: The end of business as usual. New York: Basic Books.
  • Linares-Palomar, R. & Baraybar-Fernández, A. (2017). The empowerment of the film spectators: Theatrical on demand in Spain. El profesional de la información, 26(1), 67-76. https://www.doi.org/10.3145/epi.2017.ene.07
  • Litvin, S., Goldsmith, R. & Pan, B. (2008). Electronic word-of-mouth in hospitality and tourism management. Tourism management, 29(3), 458-468. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2007.05.011
  • Liu, Y. (2006). Word of mouth for movies: Its dynamics and impact on box office revenue. Journal of Marketing, 70(3), 74-89. https://www.doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.70.3.74
  • Lopez-Gonzalez, H., Guerrero-Solé, F. & Larrea, O. (2014). Community building in the digital age: Dynamics of online sports discussion, Communication & Society / Comunicación y Sociedad, 27(3), 83-105.
  • Malhotra, N. K. (1982). Information load and consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(4), 419-30. https://www.doi.org/10.1086/208882
  • Mudambi, S. & Schuff, D. (2010). What makes a helpful review? A study of customer reviews on Amazon.com. MIS Quarterly, 34(1), 185-200. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2175066
  • Newman, P. R. (1982). The peer group. In B. B. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 526-535). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Nielsen (2012, diciembre 12). Estado de los Medios de Comunicación: El Informe de Social Media. Retrieved from http://franbarquilla.com/nielsen-social-media-report-2012-enespanol/
  • Park, C. W. & Lessig, V. P. (1977). Students and housewives: Differences in susceptibility to reference group influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(2), 102-110. https://www.doi.org/10.1086/208685
  • Pena-Marin, J. & Bhargave, J. (2016). Lasting performance: Round numbers activate associations of stability and increase perceived length of product benefits. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(3), 410-416. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2015.11.004
  • Pennington, D. (2000). Social cognition. London: Routledge.
  • Ponnamma-Divakaran, P. K. & Nørskov, S. (2016). Are online communities on par with experts in the evaluation of new movies? Evidence from the Fandango community. Information Technology & People, 29(1), 120-145. https://www.doi.org/10.1108/ITP-022014-0042
  • Reinstein, D. & Snyder, C. (2005). The influence of expert reviews on consumer demand for experience goods: a case study of movie critics. The Journal of industrial economics, 53(1), 27-51. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.00221821.2005.00244.x/abstract
  • Roselius, T. (1971). Consumer rankings of risk reduction methods. Journal of Marketing, 35(1), 56-61. https://www.doi.org/10.2307/1250565
  • Salmon, S., De Vet, E., Adriaanse, M., Fennis, B., Veltkamp, M. & De Ridder, D. (2015). Social proof in the supermarket: Promoting healthy choices under low self-control conditions. Food Quality and Preference, 45, 113-120.
  • Senecal, S. & Nantel, J. (2004). The influence of online product recommendations on consumers online choices. Journal of Retailing, 80(2), 159-69. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2004.04.001
  • Schonlau, M., Fricer R. D. & Elliott, M. N. (2002). Conducting Research Surveys via E-mail and the Web. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2002. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1480.html
  • Sokolova, T. & Krishna, A. (2016). Take it or leave it: how choosing versus rejecting alternatives affects information processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(4), 614-635. https://www.doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucw049
  • Souza, T. L. D., Nishijima, M. & Fava, A. C. P. (2018). Do consumer and expert reviews affect the length of time a film is kept on screens in the USA? J Cult Econ, (forthcoming), 1-27. https://www.doi.org/10.1007/s10824-018-9332-6
  • Think with Google (2014, October 1st). Behind the box office: what influences the films we see. Retrieved from https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/consumer-insights/behind-thebox-office/
  • Van Schaik, P. & Ling, J. (2009). The role of context in perceptions of the aesthetics of web pages over time. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 67(1), 79-89. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.09.012
  • Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342-365. https://www.doi.org/10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet