The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 4 are not checked yet; none of the 36 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
The impact of online reviews on hotel booking intentions and perception of trust
Open accessChecked 2026-10-06 · 4 references not checked yet
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
38 Own result · 31 Not checked yet · 19 Own interpretation · 17 Own method · 4 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Consumers seem to be more influenced by early negative information, especially when the overall set of reviews is negative.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The order manipulation, placing two positive or two negative reviews first, successfully creates the intended framing without a separate manipulation check.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Higher levels of trust are also evident when a positively framed set of reviews focused on interpersonal service.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The order manipulation, placing two positive or two negative reviews first, successfully creates the intended framing without a separate manipulation check.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was a significant effect F(1,519) = 12.74, p < .001for framing on booking intention within the valenced overall poor reviews, with a positively framed review resulting in a more favourable booking intention than a negative framed review (small effect size r = .19).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, this characteristic did interact with framing to produce differential effects.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For the frame x target interaction (Fig. 3), simple effects tests, F(1,479) = 6.22,p = .013showed that trust was greater when the reviews were about customer service rather than core features within the positively framed condition (small effect size r = .16)”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The inclusion or exclusion of ratings alone did not result in an effect on booking intentions or trust.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For the frame x rating interaction (Fig. 2), simple effects tests, F(1,519) = 4.35, p = .038,showed that booking intention was greater when the reviews contained ratings versus no ratings for the positively framed condition (small effect size r = .14)”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In respect of an overall positive valence for a set of reviews, booking intentions remained constant despite positive or negative frames.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two significant interaction effects were found: frame x target, F(1, 466) = 7.97, p = .005,partial η 2 = .017(small effect); and frame x rating, F(1, 466) = 3.83, p = .051,partial η 2 = .008(small effect).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“there was no significant difference within the positively framed condition, F(1,519) = 1.13 p =.288.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 34
- Probably not a substantial claim. 30
- The quote only partly states this claim. 5
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This revealed a main effect for target but not valence (see Table 2).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we investigated whether there were any gender or age effects for the two dependent variables but none was found.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, positively framed information together with numerical rating details increases both booking intentions and consumer trust.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The order manipulation, placing two positive or two negative reviews first, successfully creates the intended framing without a separate manipulation check.
- Rests on an assumption: The presence or absence of numerical ratings is a valid manipulation that requires no additional test.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Next, a 2 (valence) x 2 (target) ANOVA on the valence manipulation check item was conducted, which revealed a main effect for valence but not target (see Table 2).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the results reported in Table 2 show a moderate to strong effect size for the manipulations (8% of variance for valence and 42% of variance for core target, respectively)”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, there was no significant difference in past booking online behaviour by age of respondent.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was a significant main effect associated with the valence manipulation, F(1, 506) = 13.48,p < .001,partial η 2 = .026(small-moderate effect)”
- Also stated in: § 4.2.1: Booking intentions · plain
“Ratings of booking intentions were higher in the positive valence (M = 3.81, SD = 1.65) than in the negative valence (M = 3.22, SD = 1.67) condition.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 4.2.1: Booking intentions · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two significant interaction effects were found: frame x target, F(1, 466) = 7.97, p = .005,partial η 2 = .017(small effect); and frame x rating, F(1, 466) = 3.83, p = .051,partial η 2 = .008(small effect).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For the frame x rating interaction (Fig. 4), simple effects tests revealed that framing had an effect for the set of reviews that included ratings F(1,479) = 11.56,p =.001, with higher trust evaluations for the positive frame than the negative frame (small effect size r = .22)but was not significant without ratings F(1,479) = .18,p = .670.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While there was no main effect for target (core or service), there was an interaction between this variable and frame, for trust in the hotel.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No main effect was evident for either target (p = .617)or ratings (p = .406).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This was demonstrated by an interaction effect between valence and frame that reveals a positive frame increases booking intentions even though the valence is negative.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That is, framing and rating information interact to produce either more positive assessments in the case of a positive frame and ratings or more negative assessments in the case of a negative frame and ratings.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and frame manipulation F(1, 506) = 4.45, p =.035, partial η 2 = .009(small effect)”
- Also stated in: § 4.2.1: Booking intentions · plain
“Ratings of booking intentions were higher in the positive frame (M = 3.71, SD = 1.656) than in the negative frame (M = 3.33, SD = 1.69) condition.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § 4.2.1: Booking intentions · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and frame manipulation, F(1, 466) = 6.16, p = .013,partial η 2 = .013(small effect)”
- Also stated in: § 4.2.2: Trust in the hotel · plain
“Ratings of trust were higher in the positive frame (M = 3.89, SD = 1.28) than in the negative frame (M = 3.58, SD = 1.21) condition.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § 4.2.2: Trust in the hotel · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Framing had an effect for the set of reviews that included ratings F (1,519) = 11.76,p = 001 (small effect size r = .22)but not for the set of reviews without ratings, F (1,519) = .04,p = .839.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No main effect was evident for either target (p = .080)or ratings (p = .171).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Furthermore, Smith, Bolton and Wagner (1999) note, service failures are perceived as losses and receive a more negative weighting from a consumer.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Smith, Bolton and Wagner, 1999
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Ratings tend to be quite influential in product choice (Chen, 2008) and provide potential customers with a short-cut means to assess and evaluate a product (Tsang & Prendergast, 2009).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chen, 2008
- Not checked yetcites Tsang & Prendergast, 2009
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A service offering such as legal advice, hotel accommodation, or airline travel can be conceptualised as comprising a core and relational component (Iacobucci & Ostrom, 1993).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Iacobucci & Ostrom, 1993
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, it is argued that predominantly negative reviews will be given more weighting than positive reviews.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Reliance on easy to evaluate information, such as general category ratings (e.g.star ratings for hotels or customer ratings of products) may have a greater influence on product purchase decisions compared with more detailed information.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The presence or absence of numerical ratings is a valid manipulation that requires no additional test.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To ensure assumptions of analysis of variance (ANOVA) were met checks for outliers (using standard SPSS explore outlier analysis) were undertaken and none was evident.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“In justice literature there has been some research that suggests that evaluations are influenced more by what comes first that what is received subsequently (van den Bos, Vermunt & Wilke, 1997).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites van den Bos, Vermunt & Wilke, 1997
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In a study by Levin (1987), a framing effect was found whereby evaluations of the target received higher ratings with positive frames.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Levin, 1987
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A final online pilot test was undertaken with a small convenience sample and included both fixed choice scale items as well as open ended feedback boxes on all components of the study.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Consumer satisfaction in previous interactions with frontline service staff influences cognitive trust, which is consumer confidence or willingness to trust the service provider in the future (Johnson and Grayson, 2005).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Johnson and Grayson, 2005
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The sample drawn from an Australian database comprised 554 community members who had been randomly assigned to one of 16 conditions.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“The final design appeared to have reasonable ecological validity (Viswanathan, 2005), whereby the materials used reflected a realistic web site.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Viswanathan, 2005
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This is consistent with Papathanassis and Knolle's (in press, 2010) grounded theory based study that revealed a tendency for negative reviews to have more impact than positive reviews”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Papathanassis and Knolle, in press, 2010
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Xiang and Gretzel (2010) report on data that suggest a large proportion of travellers use search engines and social media when evaluating a destination.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Xiang and Gretzel (2010)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Chen (2008) found that recommendations of other consumers exerted more influence on product choice than did reviews from expert or firm related advisors.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chen, 2008
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Hartman, De Angeli and Sutcliffe (2008), in a study investigating information biases on website quality judgements, found framing influenced respondent service quality evaluations.Positive frames resulted in significantly higher evaluations of service quality than the same content presented with a negative frame.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hartman, De Angeli and Sutcliffe, 2008
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“As one of the seminal writers (Lovelock, 1983) on services marketing argues, customers often have to enter the service factory (e.g.restaurant) and subsequent satisfaction will be influenced by both the interactions with customer service staff and the standard of service facilities.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lovelock, 1983
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They argue that trust is one of the most important factors in determining whether people will purchase online.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Wang and Emurian, 2005
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Discriminant validity was also demonstrated with the treatments having a significant effect on the manipulation check variables and not on the confound variables.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It has been suggested that people tend to be 'cognitive misers' (Fiske & Taylor, 1991), that is, they take short cuts when making evaluations or decisions.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fiske & Taylor, 1991
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In sum, information received early, especially if negatively worded, is likely to be more influential on consumer evaluations.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The order manipulation, placing two positive or two negative reviews first, successfully creates the intended framing without a separate manipulation check.
In the paper
“Chen (2008) also argues that potential consumers use online consumer reviews as one way to reduce risk and uncertainty in the purchase situation.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chen, 2008
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Three pre-tests of this kind were applied with the final one including a 'think aloud' task about the study.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A series of pre-tests were conducted to develop the stimuli, set the strength of the independent variables and to assess the external validity of the study.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, research suggests that negative information tends to be over emphasised and is more influential in forming impressions (see Fiske, 1993).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fiske, 1993
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Other researchers (van Schaik & Ling, 2009), report that in contexts where the consumer is in a goal oriented mode (e.g.such as making a booking), an easy information processing approach is preferred.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites van Schaik & Ling, 2009
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, the sample seemed well matched to the task, although somewhat biased toward females.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“and Lee, Park and Han's (2008) finding that as the proportion of negative reviews increased so too did consumer negative attitudes.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lee, Park and Han, 2008
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Broadly, these service targets can be either core system type features (e.g.hotel room poorly designed / maintained /cleaned) or more staff level customer service events (Hoffman & Bateson, 2006;Keaveney, 1995).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hoffman & Bateson, 2006
- Not checked yetcites Keaveney, 1995 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While the study employed a simulation of a web site that was professionally designed, this required a limitation to what information could be presented and made active.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These results lend support to the 'cognitive miser' (Fiske & Taylor, 1991) hypothesis, suggesting that easy-to-access information, in this case frame and rating is often, but not always, used.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fiske & Taylor, 1991
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, the believability of the simulated task was satisfactory and consistent across conditions.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“High scores on the scale indicate greater believability in the simulation exercise (Cronbach's alpha for this scale was .79).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, this paper demonstrated that the impressions formed and likely booking intentions are influenced by multiple factors, some of which interact to show simple main effects are not sufficient to understand the tourism consumer.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While core features play an important role in consumer service experience, it is the quality of the interactions with staff that is critical in influencing trust perceptions of the hotel.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is consistent with our proposition that people tend to weight negative information more strongly, with a magnified effect for a negative frame and negative content overall.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Taken together the manipulation and believability results suggest the manipulation of the independent variables of target and valence were perceived as intended and were not confounded.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the case of our research, the effect sizes for the significant results were quite small thus suggesting the need to investigate other explanatory variables.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We acknowledge that the experimental design is artificial and, as such, further investigation in the field, using other methods, may have the potential to shed further light on the research raised in this paper.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While an experimental approach is a strong research design it does limit the investigation to selected variables.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
The order manipulation, placing two positive or two negative reviews first, successfully creates the intended framing without a separate manipulation check.
“As framing was operationalised using an order approach (by either placing the first two reviews as negative or positive), no specific manipulation check was sought in the main study.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The presence or absence of numerical ratings is a valid manipulation that requires no additional test.
“Similarly, consumer numeric ratings were either present or absent on the reviews, therefore no additional tests were needed.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Individuals in the SE (i.e. users), themselves, gravitate towards information relating to the trustworthiness of the individuals they wish to engage with before deciding to interact [29–31].”
From Digital Identity: The effect of trust and reputation information on user judgement in the Sharing Economy (2018) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“However, it is clear that profiles containing platform- and community-generated information have a significant advantage [31,37,40].”
From Digital Identity: The effect of trust and reputation information on user judgement in the Sharing Economy (2018) · cites this paper as [31]
Statistics that don’t add up
Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
“F(15, 471) = 783, p = .70”
Reported p = .7 · recomputed p < .001
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Doesn’t add upF(15, 471) = 783reported p = .7 · recomputed p < .001The two fall on opposite sides of .05
“F(15, 471) = 783, p = .70”
- Consistentt(486) = 25.85reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“t(486) = 25.85,p < .001”
- ConsistentF(1, 506) = 13.48reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(1, 506) = 13.48,p < .001”
- ConsistentF(1, 506) = 4.45reported p = .035 · recomputed p = .035
“F(1, 506) = 4.45, p = .035”
- ConsistentF(1, 506) = 4.72reported p = .03 · recomputed p = .030
“F(1, 506) = 4.72, p = .030”
- ConsistentF(1, 506) = 5.11reported p = .024 · recomputed p = .024
“F(1, 506) = 5.11, p = .024”
- ConsistentF(1, 519) = 21.13reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F (1,519) = 21.13,p < .001”
- ConsistentF(1, 519) = 12.74reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(1,519) = 12.74, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(1, 519) = 4.35reported p = .038 · recomputed p = .037
“F(1,519) = 4.35, p = .038”
- ConsistentF(1, 519) = 0.04reported p = .839 · recomputed p = .842
“F (1,519) = .04,p = .839”
- ConsistentF(1, 466) = 6.17reported p = .013 · recomputed p = .013
“F(1, 466) = 6.17, p = .013”
- ConsistentF(1, 466) = 6.16reported p = .013 · recomputed p = .013
“F(1, 466) = 6.16, p = .013”
- ConsistentF(1, 466) = 7.97reported p = .005 · recomputed p = .005
“F(1, 466) = 7.97, p = .005”
- ConsistentF(1, 466) = 3.83reported p = .051 · recomputed p = .051
“F(1, 466) = 3.83, p = .051”
- ConsistentF(1, 479) = 6.22reported p = .013 · recomputed p = .013
“F(1,479) = 6.22,p = .013”
- ConsistentF(1, 479) = 0.89reported p = .346 · recomputed p = .346
“F(1,479) = .89,p = .346”
- ConsistentF(1, 479) = 14.12reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(1,479) = 14.12, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(1, 479) = 0.04reported p = .835 · recomputed p = .842
“F(1,479) = .04,p = .835”
- ConsistentF(1, 479) = 11.56reported p = .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(1,479) = 11.56,p = .001”
- ConsistentF(1, 479) = 0.18reported p = .67 · recomputed p = .672
“F(1,479) = .18,p = .670”
- ConsistentF(1, 479) = 1.71reported p = .192 · recomputed p = .192
“F(1,479) = 1.71, p = .192”
- ConsistentF(1, 479) = 2.86reported p = .091 · recomputed p = .091
“F(1,479) = 2.86, p = .091”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Ratings
“Appendix A shows an example of the stimulus material for two out of the 12 conditions.”
§ 3.1 Simulation material and manipulation of independent variables
“There was a total of 16 simulated web sites each containing 12 reviews.”
Citations
Cites
Discovering Statistics Using SPSS
Field, A. P., & Miles, J. N. V. (2000) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 28,269
Cohen, J. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 · Cited by 8,771
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.4.341 · Cited by 6,544
Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1002/dir.10073 · Cited by 5,916
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (2013) · World Scientific handbook in financial economic series · doi:10.1142/9789814417358_0016 · Cited by 5,379
The Service Encounter: Diagnosing Favorable and Unfavorable Incidents
Bitner, M. J., Booms, B. H., & Tetreault, M. S. (1990) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1252174 · Cited by 4,860
Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational exchanges
Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J., & Sabol, B. (2002) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.66.1.15.18449 · Cited by 4,196
Role of social media in online travel information search
Xiang, Z., & Ulrike Gretzel, B. (2009) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.016 · Cited by 3,722
Electronic word-of-mouth in hospitality and tourism management
Litvin, S. W., Goldsmith, R. E., & Pan, B. (2008) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2007.05.011 · Cited by 3,267
Customer Switching Behavior in Service Industries: An Exploratory Study
Keaveney, S. M. (1995) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1252074 · Cited by 2,905
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Hart, 2006, Internet inferno, Marketing Management, 15, 18
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 401–500 of 1,000
Las características del boca-oído electrónico y su influencia en la intención de recompra online
Matute, J., Redondo, Y. P., & Acerete, A. U. (2015) · Revista Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa · doi:10.1016/j.redee.2015.03.002 · Cited by 45
Liu, X., Schuckert, M. R., & Law, R. (2015) · Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing · doi:10.1080/10548408.2015.1008669 · Cited by 44
Customer experience and commitment on eWOM and revisit intention: A case of Taladtongchom Thailand
Paisri, W., Ruanguttamanun, C., & Sujchaphong, N. (2022) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2022.2108584 · Cited by 75
Nguyen, P. M. B., Pham, X. L., & Truong, G. N. T. (2023) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13487 · Cited by 71
Determinants hindering the intention of tourists to visit disaster-hit destinations
Wang, H. (2015) · Current Issues in Tourism · doi:10.1080/13683500.2015.1062471 · Cited by 48
Effects of crowdvoting on hotels: the Booking.com case
Garrigós‐Simón, F. J., Salvador, J. L. G., & Blas, S. S. (2017) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-08-2015-0435 · Cited by 43
Sharing information now vs later
Wu, L. L., Shen, H., Li, M., & Deng, Q. (. (2017) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-10-2015-0587 · Cited by 44
Veni, vidi, vici: The impact of social media on virtual acculturation in tourism context
Li, C., Guo, S., Wang, C. L., & Zhang, J. (2019) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2019.01.013 · Cited by 43
Ciasullo, M. V., Montera, R., & Palumbo, R. (2020) · The TQM Journal · doi:10.1108/tqm-12-2019-0299 · Cited by 43
Fake Reviews or Not: Exploring the relationship between time trend and online restaurant reviews
Hlee, S., Lee, H., Koo, C., & Chung, N. (2021) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2020.101560 · Cited by 43
Traveling to a Gendered Destination: A Goal-Framed Advertising Perspective
Pan, L., Lu, L., & Gürsoy, D. (2020) · Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research · doi:10.1177/1096348019899150 · Cited by 42
Ali, M. A., Ting, D. H., Ahmad-ur-Rehman, M., Ali, S., Shear, F., & Mazhar, M. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.780863 · Cited by 46
Can Response Management Benefit Hotels? Evidence from Hong Kong Hotels
Liu, X., Schuckert, M. R., & Law, R. (2015) · Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing · doi:10.1080/10548408.2014.944253 · Cited by 42
Wang, J., Zhang, X., & Zhang, H. (2018) · Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems · doi:10.3233/jifs-171421 · Cited by 42
Tanford, S., Choi, C., & Joe, S. (2018) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/0047287518793037 · Cited by 42
Sharifi, S. (2018) · Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management · doi:10.1080/19368623.2019.1531804 · Cited by 49
Negative online reviews and consumers’ service consumption
Golmohammadi, A., Mattila, A. S., & Gauri, D. K. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.004 · Cited by 54
Mobile word of mouth (m-WOM): analysing its negative impact on webrooming in omnichannel retailing
Flavián, C., Gurrea, R., & Orús, C. (2020) · International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management · doi:10.1108/ijrdm-05-2020-0169 · Cited by 50
Exploring tourist interaction from user-generated content: Topic analysis and content analysis
Yan, Q., Jiang, T., Zhou, S., & Zhang, X. (2022) · Journal Of Vacation Marketing · doi:10.1177/13567667221135196 · Cited by 41
The eWOM adoption model in the hospitality industry: the moderating effect of the vlogger’s review
Le, H. T. P. M., & Ryu, S. (2023) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology · doi:10.1108/jhtt-08-2021-0233 · Cited by 42
Oc, Y., Plangger, K. A., Sands, S., Campbell, C. L., & PITT, L. F. (2023) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21831 · Cited by 41
Explaining tourist revisit intention using natural language processing and classification techniques
Gregoriades, A., Pampaka, M., Herodotou, H., & Christodoulou, E. (2023) · Journal Of Big Data · doi:10.1186/s40537-023-00740-5 · Cited by 57
Eco-Chic stays: The influence of green communication on guest booking intentions
Li, Y., Ahmad, N., & Lewandowska, A. (2024) · Journal Of Vacation Marketing · doi:10.1177/13567667241293792 · Cited by 41
The application and comparison of web services for sentiment analysis in tourism
Gao, S., Hao, J., & Fu, Y. (2015) · 2015 12th International Conference on Service Systems and Service Management (ICSSSM) · doi:10.1109/icsssm.2015.7170341 · Cited by 41
The relative importance of e-tailer website attributes on the likelihood of online purchase
Tamimi, N., & Sebastianelli, R. (2015) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/intr-07-2013-0131 · Cited by 41
Theoretical Foundations of Social Media Power in Hospitality and Tourism: A Hierarchical Model
Mehraliyev, F., Choi, Y., & King, B. E. M. (2020) · Cornell Hospitality Quarterly · doi:10.1177/1938965520924650 · Cited by 42
Managing the face in service failure: the moderation effect of social presence
Qiu, S., Li, M., Mattila, A. S., & Yang, W. (2018) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-06-2016-0315 · Cited by 40
Yan, X., Shah, A. M., Li, Z., Khan, S., & Shah, S. A. A. (2018) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.24251/hicss.2018.479 · Cited by 40
Shine bright like a star: Hotel performance and guests’ expectations based on star ratings
Mohsin, A., Rodrigues, H., & Brochado, A. M. (2019) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.04.012 · Cited by 40
Analyzing different types of negative online consumer reviews
Lis, B., & Fischer, M. (2020) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-05-2018-1876 · Cited by 51
Message framing in P2P lending relationships
Huang, J., Sena, V., Li, J., & Ozdemir, S. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.065 · Cited by 40
Who is behind the message? The power of expert reviews on eWOM platforms
Naujoks, A., & Benkenstein, M. (2020) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2020.101015 · Cited by 51
Mahmud, M. S., Islam, M. N., Ali, M. R., & Mehjabin, N. (2020) · Global Business Review · doi:10.1177/0972150920976345 · Cited by 58
Khalil, M., Septianto, F., Lang, B., & Northey, G. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102470 · Cited by 42
UGC involvement, motivation and personality: Comparison between China and Spain
González-Rodríguez, M., Díaz-Fernández, M., Bilgihan, A., Shi, F.-F., & Okumus, F. (2021) · Journal of Destination Marketing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100543 · Cited by 40
Internet marketing for sustainable development and rural tourism
Andreopoulou, Z. S., Tsekouropoulos, G., Koliouska, C., & Koutroumanidis, T. (2014) · International Journal of Business Information Systems · doi:10.1504/ijbis.2014.063931 · Cited by 40
Antecedents of online purchasing behaviour in the tourism sector
Berbegal‐Mirabent, J., Mas‐Machuca, M., & Marimón, F. (2016) · Industrial Management & Data Systems · doi:10.1108/imds-05-2015-0213 · Cited by 43
Kang, M., Sun, B., Liang, T., & Mao, H. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.983060 · Cited by 39
Online Reviews: The Impact of Power and Incidental Similarity
Zhang, L. (2014) · Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management · doi:10.1080/19368623.2014.929550 · Cited by 41
Improving the multidimensional sequencing of hotel rooms on an online travel agency web site
Rianthong, N., Dumrongsiri, A., & Kohda, Y. (2016) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2016.03.002 · Cited by 43
Dickinger, A., Lalicic, L., & Mazanec, J. A. (2017) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-10-2015-0597 · Cited by 39
Ahn, D., Park, H., & Yoo, B. (2017) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2017.09.001 · Cited by 39
Will ‘doing right’ lead to ‘doing well’? An examination of green behavior
Sukhu, A., & Scharff, R. L. (2018) · Journal of Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1108/jcm-04-2016-1778 · Cited by 39
Listening to the Consumer: Exploring Review Topics on Airbnb and Their Impact on Listing Performance
Zhang, J. (2019) · The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice · doi:10.1080/10696679.2019.1644953 · Cited by 40
The impact of national culture on hotel guest evaluation – A big data approach
Pei, Z., Gerdes, J. H., & Meng, F. (2020) · International Journal of Tourism Research · doi:10.1002/jtr.2357 · Cited by 40
Santos, G., Mota, V. F. S., Benevenuto, F., & Silva, T. H. (2020) · Social Network Analysis and Mining · doi:10.1007/s13278-020-00656-5 · Cited by 39
Peeking inside the minds of tourists using a novel web analytics approach
Aggarwal, S., & Gour, A. (2020) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.10.009 · Cited by 44
How do consumers process online hotel reviews?
Kim, E. E. K., & Lee, C.-H. (2015) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology · doi:10.1108/jhtt-09-2014-0045 · Cited by 38
Online complaining behavior: Does cultural background and hotel class matter?
Sann, R., Lai, P., & Liaw, S. (2020) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.02.004 · Cited by 39
Review papers on eWOM: prospects for hospitality industry
Sann, R., Lai, P.-C., & Chen, C.-T. (2020) · Anatolia · doi:10.1080/13032917.2020.1813183 · Cited by 36
Zinko, R., Furner, C. P., Burgh-Woodman, H. C. D., Johnson, P. C., & Sluhan, A. (2020) · Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research · doi:10.3390/jtaer16030032 · Cited by 39
Nilashi, M., Samad, S., Ahani, A., Ahmadi, H., Alsolami, E., Mahmoud, M., Majeed, H. D., & Alarood, A. A. (2021) · Computers & Industrial Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.cie.2021.107348 · Cited by 38
Wu, G., Liang, L., & Gürsoy, D. (2021) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.102996 · Cited by 38
Online Information Sources Used in Hotel Bookings
Murphy, H. C., & Chen, M.-M. (2014) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/0047287514559033 · Cited by 37
How reviewers’ use of profanity affects perceived usefulness of online reviews
Hair, M., & Ozcan, T. (2018) · Marketing Letters · doi:10.1007/s11002-018-9459-4 · Cited by 37
The Influence of Online Review Exposure on Reviewers’ Intensity Level of Negative Word of Mouth
Rouliez, P., Tojib, D., & Tsarenko, Y. (2019) · Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research · doi:10.1177/1096348019840798 · Cited by 37
Yuan, Y., Tsao, S.-H., Chyou, J.-T., & Tsai, S. (2019) · Soft Computing · doi:10.1007/s00500-019-04300-z · Cited by 41
Yim, D., Malefyt, T. D. W., & Khuntia, J. (2021) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-021-00472-5 · Cited by 37
“I have to watch my back”: Exploring Chinese hotel guests’ generalized distrust and coping behavior
Ying, T., Tan, X., Wei, W., Zheng, Y., Ye, S., & Wu, M.-Y. (2021) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2021.104355 · Cited by 37
Shukla, A., & Mishra, A. A. (2022) · FIIB Business Review · doi:10.1177/23197145221099683 · Cited by 44
Examining the impact of negative, user-generated content on stakeholders
Haigh, M. M., & Wigley, S. L. (2015) · Corporate Communications An International Journal · doi:10.1108/ccij-02-2013-0010 · Cited by 36
Social media opinion sharing: beyond volume
Cabosky, J. (2016) · Journal of Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1108/jcm-02-2015-1323 · Cited by 36
Trust and formal contracts: complements or substitutes? A study of tourism collaboration in Poland
Czernek, K., Czakon, W., & Marszałek, P. (2017) · Journal of Destination Marketing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.07.001 · Cited by 36
ICTs in hotel management: a research review
Gonzalez, R., Gascó, J. L., & Llopis, J. (2019) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-07-2017-0470 · Cited by 36
Colladon, A. F., Grippa, F., & Innarella, R. (2019) · Tourism Management Perspectives · doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2019.100588 · Cited by 36
Li, S., Li, Y., Liu, C., & Fan, N. (2023) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/00472875231158588 · Cited by 35
Hotels’ online reputation management: benefits perceived by managers
Pérez-Aranda, J., Arán, M. V., & Molinillo, S. (2019) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-07-2017-0460 · Cited by 35
Social structure of social media research in tourism and hospitality
Mehraliyev, F., Choi, Y., & Köseoğlu, M. A. (2019) · Tourism Recreation Research · doi:10.1080/02508281.2019.1609229 · Cited by 36
Direct and indirect negatively valenced engagement behavior
Azer, J., & Alexander, M. (2020) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-08-2019-0296 · Cited by 35
The importance of online reviews depends on when they are presented
Camilleri, A. R. (2020) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2020.113307 · Cited by 37
Brand equity, online reviews, and message trust: the moderating role of persuasion knowledge
Ahmad, F., & án, F. G. (2020) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-09-2019-2564 · Cited by 41
Jou, R., & Day, Y.-J. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su13042043 · Cited by 35
Bad Intentions: Customers’ Negative Reactions to Intentional Failures and Mitigating Conditions
Nazifi, A., Roschk, H., Ordenes, F. J. V., & Marder, B. L. (2021) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/00472875211044221 · Cited by 36
Blasi, S., Fano, S., Sedita, S. R., & Toschi, G. (2022) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-03-2022-0366 · Cited by 37
Aggregate consumer ratings and booking intention: the role of brand image
Casado‐Díaz, A. B., Pérez, L. M., & Rubio, R. S. (2016) · Service Business · doi:10.1007/s11628-016-0319-0 · Cited by 36
Toward service recovery strategies: the role of consumer-organization relationship norms
Hur, J., & Jang, S. S. (2016) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-08-2015-0263 · Cited by 34
Does Verifying Uses Influence Rankings? Analyzing Booking.Com and Tripadvisor
Martín-Fuentes, E., Mateu, C., & Fernández, C. C. (2018) · Tourism Analysis · doi:10.3727/108354218x15143857349459 · Cited by 34
Gellerstedt, M., & Arvemo, T. (2019) · Information Technology & Tourism · doi:10.1007/s40558-019-00143-4 · Cited by 34
Improving travellers' trust in restaurant review sites
Anaya‐Sánchez, R., Molinillo, S., Aguilar-Illescas, R., & Liébana-Cabanillas, F. J. (2019) · Tourism Review · doi:10.1108/tr-02-2019-0065 · Cited by 43
An analysis of user-generated crisis frames: Online public responses to a tourism crisis
Xie, C., Zhang, J., Huang, Q., Chen, Y., & Morrison, A. M. (2021) · Tourism Management Perspectives · doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2021.100931 · Cited by 34
Baima, G., Santoro, G., Pellicelli, A. C., & Mitręga, M. (2022) · International Marketing Review · doi:10.1108/imr-03-2021-0122 · Cited by 34
Vicario, R. B., Ruíz-Palomo, D., Fernández-Miguélez, S. M., & Gutiérrez-Ruiz, A. M. (2022) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2022.08.012 · Cited by 34
Prayag, G., Hall, C., & Wood, H. (2018) · Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management · doi:10.1080/19368623.2017.1318731 · Cited by 32
Stressor effects of negative online reviews on anger and burnout in the restaurant industry
Weber, K., Bradley, G. L., & Sparks, B. (2017) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-10-2016-0560 · Cited by 33
Self-citationExpert Online Review Platforms: Interactions between Specialization, Experience, and User Power
Mehraliyev, F., Choi, Y., & King, B. E. M. (2020) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/0047287520901595 · Cited by 34
Be a part of it: promoting WOM, eWOM, and content creation through customer identification
Romero, J., & Ruiz‐Equihua, D. (2020) · Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC · doi:10.1108/sjme-11-2019-0092 · Cited by 42
Biswas, A. (2021) · International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management · doi:10.1108/ijqrm-10-2021-0363 · Cited by 37
The Effects of Brand Community Identification on Consumer Behavior in Online Brand Communities
Valmohammadi, C., Taraz, R., & Mehdikhani, R. (2021) · Journal of Internet Commerce · doi:10.1080/15332861.2021.2011597 · Cited by 42
An analysis of smart tourism system satisfaction scores: The role of priced versus average quality
Kim, J.-Y., & Canina, L. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.070 · Cited by 32
Providers’ perceptions of the online community marketplace for lodging accommodations
Deale, C. S., & Crawford, A. (2016) · Tourism and Hospitality Research · doi:10.1177/1467358416682067 · Cited by 32
Does time dull the pain? The impact of temporal contiguity on review extremity in the hotel context
Yang, Y., Wu, L. L., & Yang, W. (2018) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.02.015 · Cited by 32
A study on online travel reviews through intelligent data analysis
Fazzolari, M., & Petrocchi, M. (2018) · Information Technology & Tourism · doi:10.1007/s40558-018-0121-z · Cited by 34
Negative eWOM Management: How Do Hotels Turn Challenges into Opportunities?
Chen, Y.-F., Law, R., & Yan, K. K. (2021) · Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism · doi:10.1080/1528008x.2021.1911729 · Cited by 32
Wei, Z., Zhang, M., & Ming, Y. (2022) · Current Issues in Tourism · doi:10.1080/13683500.2022.2030682 · Cited by 38
Saydam, M. B., Olorunsola, V. O., Avcí, T., Dambo, T. H., & Beyar, K. (2022) · Tourism Critiques Practice and Theory · doi:10.1108/trc-08-2021-0013 · Cited by 32
Use of Facebook in the US heritage accommodations sector: an exploratory study
Yoo, K.-H., & Lee, W. (2015) · Journal of Heritage Tourism · doi:10.1080/1743873x.2014.985228 · Cited by 32
Gheorghe, I.-R., & Liao, M. (2012) · Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.043 · Cited by 31
Rianthong, N., Dumrongsiri, A., & Kohda, Y. (2016) · Tourism Management Perspectives · doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2016.07.003 · Cited by 31
Do Hotel Attributes and Amenities Affect Online User Ratings Differently across Hotel Star Ratings?
Soifer, I., Choi, E.-K., & Lee, E. (2020) · Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism · doi:10.1080/1528008x.2020.1814935 · Cited by 34
Sim, Y., Lee, S. K., & Sutherland, I. E. (2021) · Tourism Management Perspectives · doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2021.100903 · Cited by 31
Metadata
- Authors
- Sparks, B. A., & Browning, V.
- Affiliations
- Griffith University (AU)
- Queensland University of Technology (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Sparks, Beverley A.
- Venue
- Tourism Management
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-12
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1310-1323
- ISSN
- 0261-5177 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1991622328
- Cited by
- 1,688
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 159 · 2025: 136 · 2024: 105 · 2023: 142 · 2022: 140 · 2021: 150 · 2020: 158 · 2019: 157 · 2018: 119 · 2017: 112 · 2016: 107 · 2015: 85 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 117.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Tourism Management (publishedVersion)
- QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Griffith University
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Digital Marketing and Social Media
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality Management › Diverse Aspects of Tourism Research
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
- Keywords
- online reviews, hotel booking intention, consumer trust, electronic word of mouth, review valence, numerical ratings, interpersonal service, consumer choice, information processing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
