Histogram Distortion Bias in Consumer Choices

References

• Archak N, Ghose A, Ipeirotis PG (2011) Deriving the pricing power of product features by mining consumer reviews. Management Sci. 57(8):1485–1509.Link, Google Scholar
• Ba S, Pavlou PA (2002) Evidence of the effect of trust building technology in electronic markets: Price premiums and buyer behavior. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 26(3):243–268.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Birnbaum MH, McIntosh WR (1996) Violations of branch independence in choices between gambles. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 67(1):91–110.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boels L, Bakker A, Van Dooren W, Drijvers P (2019) Conceptual difficulties when interpreting histograms: A review. Ed. Res. Rev. 28:100291.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cao Q, Duan W, Gan Q (2011) Exploring determinants of voting for the “helpfulness” of online user reviews: A text mining approach. Decision Support Systems 50(2):511–521.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen Z, Lurie NH (2013) Temporal contiguity and negativity bias in the impact of online word of mouth. J. Marketing Res. 50(4):463–476.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen P-Y, Hong Y, Liu Y (2017) The value of multidimensional rating systems: Evidence from a natural experiment and randomized experiments. Management Sci. 64(10):4629–4647.Link, Google Scholar
• Chetty R, Looney A, Kroft K (2009) Salience and taxation: Theory and evidence. Amer. Econom. Rev. 99(4):1145–1177.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chevalier JA, Mayzlin D (2006) The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. J. Marketing Res. 43(3):345–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chintagunta PK, Gopinath S, Venkataraman S (2010) The effects of online user reviews on movie box office performance: Accounting for sequential rollout and aggregation across local markets. Marketing Sci. 29(5):944–957.Link, Google Scholar
• Cleveland WS, McGill R (1984) Graphical perception: Theory, experimentation, and application to the development of graphical methods. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 79(387):531–554.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cleveland WS, McGill R (1985) Graphical perception and graphical methods for analyzing scientific data. Science 229(4716):828–833.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Langhe B, Fernbach PM, Lichtenstein DR (2016) Navigating by the stars: Investigating the actual and perceived validity of online user ratings. J. Consumer Res. 42(6):817–833.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dellarocas C (2003) The digitization of word of mouth: Promise and challenges of online feedback mechanisms. Management Sci. 49(10):1407–1424.Link, Google Scholar
• Dellarocas C (2006) Strategic manipulation of internet opinion forums: Implications for consumers and firms. Management Sci. 52(10):1577–1593.Link, Google Scholar
• Dellarocas C, Zhang XM, Awad NF (2007) Exploring the value of online product reviews in forecasting sales: The case of motion pictures. J. Interactive Marketing 21(4):23–45.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, Pollet JM (2009) Investor inattention and Friday earnings announcements. J. Finance 64(2):709–749.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duan W, Gu B, Whinston AB (2008) Do online reviews matter? An empirical investigation of panel data. Decision Support Systems 45(4):1007–1016.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Feng J, Xin L, Zhang XM (2019) Online product reviews-triggered dynamic pricing: Theory and evidence. Inform. Systems. Res. 30(4):1107–1123.Link, Google Scholar
• Fisher M, Newman GE, Dhar R, van Osselaer S (2018) Seeing stars: How the binary bias distorts the interpretation of customer ratings. J. Consumer Res. 45(3):471–489.Google Scholar
• Forman C, Ghose A, Wiesenfeld B (2008) Examining the relationship between reviews and sales: The role of reviewer identity disclosure in electronic markets. Inform Systems. Res. 19(3):291–313.Link, Google Scholar
• Ghose A, Ipeirotis PG (2011) Estimating the helpfulness and economic impact of product reviews: Mining text and reviewer characteristics. IEEE Trans. Knowledge Data Engrg. 23(10):1498–1512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Godes D, Mayzlin D (2004) Using online conversations to study word-of-mouth communication. Marketing Sci. 23(4):545–560.Link, Google Scholar
• Godes D, Silva JC (2012) Sequential and temporal dynamics of online opinion. Marketing Sci. 31(3):448–473.Link, Google Scholar
• Goes PB, Lin M, Au Yeung CM (2014) Popularity effect in user-generated content: Evidence from online product reviews. Inform. Systems Res. 25(2):222–238.Link, Google Scholar
• Graham JL (1937) Illusory trends in the observations of bar graphs. J. Experiment. Psych. 20(6):597–608.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gu B, Park J, Konana P (2012) Research note—The impact of external word-of-mouth sources on retailer sales of high-involvement products. Inform. Systems Res. 23(1):182–196.Link, Google Scholar
• Häubl G, Trifts V (2000) Consumer decision making in online shopping environments: The effects of interactive decision aids. Marketing Sci. 19(1):4–21.Link, Google Scholar
• He SX, Bond SD (2015) Why is the crowd divided? Attribution for dispersion in online word of mouth. J. Consumer Res. 41(6):1509–1527.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hiura K, Kikumori M, Kishimoto K, Matsumoto N, Nakagawa M, Ujita M, Ono A (2010) Does negative e-WOM affect consumer attitude negatively or positively. J. eBus. 10(1):38–42.Google Scholar
• Ho-Dac NN, Carson SJ, Moore WL (2013) The effects of positive and negative online customer reviews: Do brand strength and category maturity matter? J. Marketing 77(6):37–53.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hu N, Pavlou PA, Zhang JJ (2009) Why do online product reviews have a J-shaped distribution? Overcoming biases in online word-of-mouth communication. Comm. ACM. 52(10):144–147.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hu N, Pavlou PA, Zhang J (2017) On self-selection biases in online product reviews. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 41(2):449–471.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang N, Hong Y, Burtch G (2017) Social network integration and user content generation: Evidence from natural experiments. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 41(4):1035–1058.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kosslyn SM (1994) Elements of Graph Design (W.H. Freeman, New York).Google Scholar
• Krider RE, Raghubir P, Krishna A (2001) Pizzas: π or square? Psychophysical biases in area comparisons. Marketing Sci. 20(4):405–425.Link, Google Scholar
• Kronrod A, Danziger S (2013) ‘Wii will rock you!’ The use and effect of figurative language in consumer reviews of hedonic and utilitarian consumption. J. Consumer Res. 40(4):726–739.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kuksov D, Xie Y (2010) Pricing, frills, and customer ratings. Marketing Sci. 29(5):925–943.Link, Google Scholar
• Lem S, Onghena P, Verschaffel L, Van Dooren W (2014) Interpreting histograms. As easy as it seems? Eur. J. Psych. Ed. 29(4):557–575.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li X, Hitt LM (2008) Self-selection and information role of online product reviews. Inform. Systems Res. 19(4):456–474.Link, Google Scholar
• Liu Y (2006) Word of mouth for movies: Its dynamics and impact on box office revenue. J. Marketing 70(3):74–89.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luca M, Smith J (2013) Salience in quality disclosure: Evidence from the US news college rankings. J. Econom. Management Strategy 22(1):58–77.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luca M, Zervas G (2016) Fake it till you make it: Reputation, competition, and Yelp review fraud. Management Sci. 62(12):3412–3427.Link, Google Scholar
• Lurie NH, Mason CH (2007) Visual representation: Implications for decision making. J. Marketing 71(1):160–177.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mayzlin D, Dover Y, Chevalier J (2014) Promotional reviews: An empirical investigation of online review manipulation. Amer. Econom. Rev. 104(8):2421–2455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moe WW, Trusov M (2011) The value of social dynamics in online product ratings forums. J. Marketing Res. 48(3):444–456.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moore SG (2015) Attitude predictability and helpfulness in online reviews: The role of explained actions and reactions. J. Consumer Res. 42(1):30–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mudambi SM, Schuff D (2010) Research note: What makes a helpful online review? A study of customer reviews on Amazon.com. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 34(1):185–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Newman GE, Scholl BJ (2012) Bar graphs depicting averages are perceptually misinterpreted: The within-the-bar bias. Psychonomic Bull. Rev. 19(4):601–607.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parkhurst D, Law K, Niebur E (2002) Modeling the role of salience in the allocation of overt visual attention. Vision Res. 42(1):107–123.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raghubir P, Krishna A (1999) Vital dimensions in volume perception: Can the eye fool the stomach? J. Marketing Res. 36(3):313–326.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosario AB, Sotgiu F, Valck KD, Bijmolt TH (2016) The effect of electronic word of mouth on sales: A meta-analytic review of platform, product, and metric factors. J. Marketing Res. 53(3):297–318.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sen S, Lerman D (2007) Why are you telling me this? An examination into negative consumer reviews on the web. J. Interactive Marketing 21(4):76–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shen W, Hu YJ, Ulmer JR (2015) Competing for attention: An empirical study of online reviewers’ strategic behavior. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 39(3):683–696.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sherman SJ, Cialdini RB, Schwartzman DF, Reynolds KD (1985) Imagining can heighten or lower the perceived likelihood of contracting a disease: The mediating effect of ease of imagery. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 11(1):118–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simonson I (2016) Imperfect progress: An objective quality assessment of the role of user reviews in consumer decision making, a commentary on de Langhe, Fernbach, and Lichtenstein. J. Consumer Res. 42(6):840–845.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spence I (1990) Visual psychophysics of simple graphical elements. J. Experiment. Psych. Human Perception Performance 16(4):683–692.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stone ER, Yates JF, Parker AM (1997) Effects of numerical and graphical displays on professed risk-taking behavior. J. Experiment. Psych. Appl. 3(4):243–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sun M (2012) How does the variance of product ratings matter? Management Sci. 58(4):696–707.Link, Google Scholar
• Sun M, Zhang XM, Zhu F (2019) U-shaped conformity in online social networks. Marketing Sci. 38(3):461–480.Link, Google Scholar
• Torralba A, Oliva A, Castelhano MS, Henderson JM (2006) Contextual guidance of eye movements and attention in real-world scenes: The role of global features in object search. Psych. Rev. 113(4):766–786.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky B (1997) Cognitive principles of graphic displays. Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Workshop on Diagrammatic Reasoning (Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertainty 5(4):297–323.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang CA, Zhang XM, Hann I-H (2018) Socially nudged: A quasi-experimental study of friends’ social influence in online product ratings. Inform. Systems Res. 29(3):641–655.Link, Google Scholar
• Xiong G, Bharadwaj S (2014) Prerelease buzz evolution patterns and new product performance. Marketing Sci. 33(3):401–421.Link, Google Scholar
• Ye S, Gao G, Viswanathan S (2014) Strategic behavior in online reputation systems. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 38(4):1033–1056.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yin D, Bond SD, Zhang H (2014) Anxious or angry? Effects of discrete emotions on the perceived helpfulness of online reviews. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 38(2):539–560.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yin D, Mitra S, Zhang H (2016) When do consumers value positive vs. negative reviews? An empirical investigation of confirmation bias in online word of mouth. Inform. Systems Res. 27(1):131–144.Link, Google Scholar
• Zacks J, Tversky B (1999) Bars and lines: A study of graphic communication. Memory Cognition 27(6):1073–1079.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhu F, Zhang XM (2010) Impact of online consumer reviews on sales: The moderating role of product and consumer characteristics. J. Marketing 74(2):133–148.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhu L, Yin G, He W (2014) Is this opinion leader’s review useful? Peripheral cues for online review helpfulness. J. Electronic Commerce Res. 15(4):267–280.Google Scholar