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 601–700 of 1,000
Simultaneous effects of multiple cues in restaurant reviews
Kim, E. L., & Tanford, S. (2019) · Journal of Services Marketing · doi:10.1108/jsm-06-2018-0188 · Cited by 23
Measuring usability and purchase intention for online travel booking: A case study
Ani, N., Noprisson, H., & Ali, N. M. (2019) · International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering · doi:10.1556/1848.2019.0020 · Cited by 23
The impact of creating shared value on hotels online reputation
Fernández-Gámez, M. Á., Gutiérrez-Ruiz, A. M., Vicario, R. B., & Ruíz-Palomo, D. (2020) · Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · doi:10.1002/csr.1958 · Cited by 23
Lu, L., Wu, L. L., & He, Z. (2020) · Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research · doi:10.1177/1096348020944537 · Cited by 24
How old is your soul? Differences in the impact of eWOM on Generation X and millennials
Ruiz‐Equihua, D., Casaló, L. V., & Romero, J. (2021) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights · doi:10.1108/jhti-10-2020-0193 · Cited by 31
Zhang, Q., Su, L., Zhou, L., & Dai, Y. (2023) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/00472875231209426 · Cited by 22
Duong, L. H., Kong, Y.-Q., Olya, H., Lee, C., & Girish, V. G. (2024) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2024.105122 · Cited by 22
Addressing the Janus face of customer service: a typology of new age service failures
Taylor, C. R., Kitchen, P. J., Sarkees, M. E., & Lolk, C. O. (2020) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-12-2019-0916 · Cited by 22
Negative Airbnb reviews: an aspect-based sentiment analysis approach
Vassilikopoulou, A., Kamenidou, I. E., & Priporas, C. (2022) · EuroMed Journal of Business · doi:10.1108/emjb-03-2022-0052 · Cited by 22
A cross‐cultural study on online reviews and decision making: An eye‐tracking approach
Moriuchi, E., & Moriyoshi, N. (2023) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.2165 · Cited by 24
Balagué, C., Martín-Fuentes, E., & Gómez, M. J. (2016) · Cuadernos de Turismo · doi:10.6018/turismo.38.271351 · Cited by 22
Tour Booking: Do Travelers Respond to Tourism Accreditation and Codes of Ethics Initiatives?
Marchoo, W., Butcher, K., & Watkins, M. (2014) · Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing · doi:10.1080/10548408.2014.861699 · Cited by 22
Sudaryanto, S., Hanim, A., Rosediana Dewi, I., Kartikasari, A. D., & Rusdiyanto, R. (2025) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2025.2503093 · Cited by 21
Dordai, L., Becze, A., & Roman, M. (2026) · Gastronomy · doi:10.3390/gastronomy4010004 · Cited by 37
Urraca-Valle, R., Sanz-García, A., Fernández-Ceniceros, J., Sodupe-Ortega, E., & Martínez-de-Pisón, F. J. (2015) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19644-2_52 · Cited by 21
A Study on Text-Score Disagreement in Online Reviews
Fazzolari, M., Cozza, V., Petrocchi, M., & Spognardi, A. (2017) · Cognitive Computation · doi:10.1007/s12559-017-9496-y · Cited by 23
THE ECONOMIC AND BEHAVIORAL CONSEQUENCES OF ONLINE USER REVIEWS
Magnani, M. (2020) · Journal of Economic Surveys · doi:10.1111/joes.12357 · Cited by 24
Are all five points equal? Scaling heterogeneity in hotel online ratings
Leung, X. Y., & Yang, Y. (2020) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102539 · Cited by 21
Teng, Y.-M., Wu, K., & Chou, C.-Y. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12103972 · Cited by 21
Girardin, F., Bezençon, V., & Lunardo, R. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102676 · Cited by 21
Tao, L.-L., & You, T. (2022) · Applied Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s10489-021-03151-2 · Cited by 21
Self-Admitted Technical Debt and comments’ polarity: an empirical study
Cassee, N., Zampetti, F., Novielli, N., Serebrenik, A., & Penta, M. D. (2022) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10664-022-10183-w · Cited by 21
Changes in service quality of sharing accommodation: Evidence from airbnb
Zuo, W., Bai, W., Zhu, W., He, X., & Qiu, X. (2022) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102092 · Cited by 24
Ndou, V., Hysa, E., & Maruccia, Y. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su15032057 · Cited by 21
The role of online reviews in restaurant selection intentions: A latent growth modeling approach
Xia, Y., & Ha, H. (2023) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2023.103483 · Cited by 25
Trust in managerial response offsets negative review
Yhee, Y., Kim, H., Kim, J., & Koo, C. (2023) · Annals of Tourism Research · doi:10.1016/j.annals.2023.103641 · Cited by 22
Perceived prevalence and personal impact of negative online reviews
Bradley, G. L., Sparks, B., & Weber, K. (2016) · Journal of service management · doi:10.1108/josm-07-2015-0202 · Cited by 21
Self-citationDeterminants of online hotel room prices: comparing supply-side and demand-side decisions
Razavi, R., & Israeli, A. A. (2019) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-09-2018-0707 · Cited by 21
Abedi, F., Zeleznikow, J., & Bellucci, E. (2019) · International Journal of Law and Information Technology · doi:10.1093/ijlit/eaz005 · Cited by 21
Facing new challenges in rural tourism: signaling quality via website
Martín, I. R., Correa, F. A., & Garrido, N. P. (2019) · Information Technology & Tourism · doi:10.1007/s40558-019-00157-y · Cited by 21
Han, X., Li, B., Zhang, T., & Qu, J. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/14417 · Cited by 22
Malodia, S., Otterbring, T., Taheri, B., & Dhir, A. (2024) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/00472875241234387 · Cited by 21
Emerging Sources, Formats, Channels, Devices, and Audiences in Modern eWOM Communications
Filieri, R., Christodoulides, G., & Nicolau, J. L. (2025) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.22239 · Cited by 23
Embracing life while confronting mortality: Therapeutic mechanisms of travel for cancer patients
Qiao, G., Fu, Y., & Yang, X. (2025) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2025.105362 · Cited by 21
An, Q., & Ozturk, A. B. (2022) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology · doi:10.1108/jhtt-05-2021-0146 · Cited by 31
Salehi-Esfahani, S., Torres, E. N., & Hua, N. (2022) · Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management · doi:10.1080/19368623.2022.2121349 · Cited by 20
Xiao, M. (2023) · Journal of Interactive Advertising · doi:10.1080/15252019.2023.2167501 · Cited by 25
Biswas, A. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2218783 · Cited by 20
Hlee, S., Lee, J., Yang, S., & Koo, C. (2016) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-28231-2_25 · Cited by 20
Qing, P., Huang, H., Razzaq, A., Tang, Y., & Tu, M. (2018) · Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · doi:10.1111/cjag.12184 · Cited by 20
Impact of Online Consumer Reviews on Hotel Booking Intentions: The Case of Pakistan
Danish, R. Q., Hafeez, S., Ali, H. F., Shahid, R. K., & Nadeem, K. (2019) · European Scientific Journal ESJ · doi:10.19044/esj.2019.v15n7p144 · Cited by 20
The role online review on mobile commerce adoption: an inclusive growth context
Pipitwanichakarn, T., & Wongtada, N. (2020) · Journal of Asia Business Studies · doi:10.1108/jabs-02-2019-0060 · Cited by 29
Unfair customer reviews: Third-party perceptions and managerial responses
Surachartkumtonkun, J., Grace, D., & Ross, M. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.071 · Cited by 21
Non-price cues utilization during social coupon purchasing-decision
Nakhata, C., & Kuo, H.-C. (2014) · Journal of Product & Brand Management · doi:10.1108/jpbm-06-2014-0631 · Cited by 20
Rating prediction of peer-to-peer accommodation through attributes and topics from customer review
Subroto, A., & Christianis, M. (2021) · Journal Of Big Data · doi:10.1186/s40537-020-00395-6 · Cited by 19
Travelers’ emotional experiences during the COVID-19 outbreak: The development of a conceptual model
Qi, H., & Li, F. S. (2021) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2021.04.013 · Cited by 20
Deconstructing Online Hospitality Review Systems
Xiao, Q., Li, S., Zhang, X., Zhang, F., Yue, Q., & Wan, S. (2021) · Journal of Organizational and End User Computing · doi:10.4018/joeuc.292523 · Cited by 19
Does eWOM influence entrepreneurial firms’ rate of diffusion of innovation?
Ahmad, A. M. K., AlMallah, M. M., & AbedRabbo, M. (2021) · Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship · doi:10.1108/jrme-01-2021-0012 · Cited by 19
A Study on Customer Satisfaction in Bali’s Luxury Resort Utilizing Big Data through Online Review
Williady, A., Wardhani, H. N., & Kim, H. (2022) · Administrative Sciences · doi:10.3390/admsci12040137 · Cited by 19
Nguyen, H. T., Le, A. T. T., Phan, A. C., & Hoang, T. D. L. (2022) · Journal of Asia Business Studies · doi:10.1108/jabs-03-2022-0090 · Cited by 19
Pantano, E., Servidio, R. C., & Viassone, M. (2011) · International Journal of Digital Content Technology and its Applications · doi:10.4156/jdcta.vol5.issue5.23 · Cited by 19
The Impact of Review Environment on Review Credibility
Mackiewicz, J., Yeats, D., & Thornton, T. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication · doi:10.1109/tpc.2016.2527249 · Cited by 21
Digiorgio, V. (2016) · Information Technology & Tourism · doi:10.1007/s40558-016-0069-9 · Cited by 19
From buzz to bucks: The impact of social media opinions on the locus of innovation
Zhang, W., Kang, L., Jiang, Q., & Pei, L. (2018) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2018.04.004 · Cited by 19
The Impact of Social Media on Restaurant Corporations’ Financial Performance
Fernández-Miguélez, S. M., Díaz-Puche, M., Campos-Soria, J. A., & Galán-Valdivieso, F. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12041646 · Cited by 19
Food delivery now or later: The match-up effect of purchase timeframe and review recency
Kim, M., Kim, E. J., & Busser, J. A. (2022) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2022.103143 · Cited by 19
Jain, P. K., Patel, A., Kumari, S., & Pamula, R. (2022) · Multimedia Tools and Applications · doi:10.1007/s11042-022-11972-7 · Cited by 19
The Marketing Effectiveness of Hotel Facebook Pages: From Perspectives of Customers and Messages
Leung, X. Y. (2020) · Digital Scholarship - UNLV (University of Nevada Reno) · doi:10.34917/4332661 · Cited by 18
Cai, Y., Li, G., Wen, L., & Liu, C. (2023) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2023.103633 · Cited by 18
Gaur, L., & Afaq, A. (2020) · Advances in computer and electrical engineering book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-2772-6.ch001 · Cited by 18
How consumer opinions are affected by marketers: an empirical examination by deep learning approach
Yu, B. T. W. (2021) · Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1108/jrim-04-2021-0106 · Cited by 20
Maia, C. R., Lunardi, G. L., Dolci, D. B., & Añaña, E. D. S. (2022) · Brazilian Business Review · doi:10.15728/bbr.2022.19.3.4 · Cited by 20
‘Apparent’ and actual hotel scores under Booking.com new reviewing system
Leoni, V., & Boto‐García, D. (2023) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2023.103493 · Cited by 18
An Investigation of the Key Attributes of Korean Wellness Tourism Customers Based on Online Reviews
Riswanto, A. L., & Kim, H. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su15086702 · Cited by 18
Motivations and attitudes towards consulting eWOM when booking accommodation
Velázquez, B. M., Blasco, M. F., & Saura, I. G. (2023) · Service Business · doi:10.1007/s11628-023-00533-z · Cited by 18
Ren, X., Wang, L., & Luo, X. R. (2024) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2024.114188 · Cited by 18
Dynamic process model of mass effects on travel demand
Schmöcker, J., HATORI, T., & Watling, D. P. (2013) · Transportation · doi:10.1007/s11116-013-9460-y · Cited by 18
Cardon, V. (2015) · Cairn.info · doi:10.3917/rac.026.0039 · Cited by 18
Effects of Placement Marketing on Product Attitude and Purchase Intention in Traditional Industry
Huang, P., & Yao, C. (2017) · Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education · doi:10.12973/ejmste/78701 · Cited by 18
A novel product recommendation model consolidating price, trust and online reviews
Huang, Y., Wang, N.-N., Zhang, H., & Wang, J. (2018) · Kybernetes · doi:10.1108/k-03-2018-0143 · Cited by 18
The added value of rating pictograms for sustainable hotels in classified ads
Vinzenz, F. (2018) · Tourism Management Perspectives · doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2018.10.006 · Cited by 17
Teodoro, A., Dinis, I., Simões, O., & Gomes, G. (2017) · European Journal of Tourism Research · doi:10.54055/ejtr.v17i.298 · Cited by 18
Wellness comes in salty water: thalassotherapy spas and service level of satisfaction
Rodrigues, H., Brochado, A. M., Troilo, M., & Mohsin, A. (2021) · International Journal of Spa and Wellness · doi:10.1080/24721735.2021.1977008 · Cited by 24
Do Travel Product Types Matter? Online Review Direction and Persuasiveness
Tsaur, S., Huang, C.-C., & Luoh, H.-F. (2014) · Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing · doi:10.1080/10548408.2014.890156 · Cited by 18
Nicholas, C. K.-W., & Lee, A. (2017) · International Conference Big Data Research · doi:10.1145/3152723.3152739 · Cited by 18
A Room of One’s Own: Need for Uniqueness Counters Online WoM
Chark, R., Fong, L. H. N., & Tang, C. M. F. (2018) · Cornell Hospitality Quarterly · doi:10.1177/1938965518790223 · Cited by 18
The Power of AI-Generated Content: Evidence From the Peer-to-Peer Accommodation Market
Fan, N., Li, X. R., Liu, C., & Fan, Z. (2025) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/00472875251332951 · Cited by 21
Effective airbnb advertising during COVID-19 pandemic: Message format and hypothetical distance
Choi, M., & Choi, Y. (2022) · Journal Of Vacation Marketing · doi:10.1177/13567667221113077 · Cited by 17
Shaputra, R. I., Fitriani, W. R., Hidayanto, A. N., Kumaralalita, L., & Purwandari, B. (2023) · Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1155/2023/5087488 · Cited by 20
How online reviews with different influencing factors affect the diffusion of new products
Sun, B., Kang, M., & Zhao, S. (2023) · International Journal of Consumer Studies · doi:10.1111/ijcs.12915 · Cited by 18
Li, Z., Chan, C., Chen, Y.-F., Chan, W. W. H., & Im, U. L. (2023) · Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism · doi:10.1080/1528008x.2023.2219467 · Cited by 17
Review Moderation Transparency and Online Reviews: Evidence from a Natural Experiment
Jiang, L., Ravichandran, T., & Kuruzovich, J. (2023) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2023/16216 · Cited by 17
Zhong, Q., Zhou, L., Zhang, J., & Ji, T. (2024) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.104063 · Cited by 18
Tourist Valorisation of Urban Poverty: an Empirical Study on the Web
Privitera, D. S. (2015) · Urban Forum · doi:10.1007/s12132-015-9259-3 · Cited by 17
What do we know about social media and firms’ financial outcomes so far?
Kizildag, M., Altin, M., Özdemir, Ö., & Demirer, I. (2017) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology · doi:10.1108/jhtt-10-2016-0074 · Cited by 17
Bilgin, Y. (2020) · Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) · Cited by 17
Harahap, M. S., & Dwita, V. (2020) · Padang International Conference on Economics Education, Economics, Business and Management, Accounting and Entrepreneurship (PICEEBA) · doi:10.2991/aebmr.k.201126.067 · Cited by 17
Analysis of Online Customer Complaint Behavior in Vietnam’s Hotel Industry
Hien, N. T., Su, Y.-L., Sann, R., & Thanh, L. T. P. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14073770 · Cited by 17
Quantifying Reviewer Credibility in Online Tourism
Wang, Y., Chan, S. C. F., Ngai, G., & Leong, H. V. (2013) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40285-2_33 · Cited by 17
Older Tourists: An Exploratory Study on Online Behaviour
Vigolo, V., & Confente, I. (2013) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-03973-2_32 · Cited by 17
Multi-dimension reviewer credibility quantification across diverse travel communities
Wang, Y., Chan, S. C. F., Leong, H. V., Ngai, G., & Au, N. (2016) · Knowledge and Information Systems · doi:10.1007/s10115-016-0927-y · Cited by 17
Towards a Model of Electronic Word-of-Mouth and Its Impact on the Hotel Industry
Torres, E. N., & Singh, D. (2016) · International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration · doi:10.1080/15256480.2016.1226155 · Cited by 17
Zara, S., & Erskine, M. A. (2018) · AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.17705/1thci.00102 · Cited by 17
Guo, Y., Wang, Y., & Wang, C. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11164290 · Cited by 17
Marketing Instrument of Improving Hotel Management Service: Evidence of Visegrad Group Countries
Bačík, R., Kmeco, Ľ., Fedorko, R., Oleárová, M., & Rigelský, M. (2019) · Marketing and Management of Innovations · doi:10.21272/mmi.2019.1-17 · Cited by 16
Bruno, S., Yang, C., Tian, W., Xie, Z., & Shao, Y. (2019) · Geo-spatial Information Science · doi:10.1080/10095020.2019.1649848 · Cited by 16
Sutherland, I. E., Sim, Y., & Lee, S. K. (2020) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102776 · Cited by 16
Chiang, C.-F., & Huang, C.-W. (2021) · Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism · doi:10.1080/1528008x.2021.1923107 · Cited by 16
Filieri, R., Galati, F., & Raguseo, E. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2021.3133277 · Cited by 18
Phạm, M., Vo, N. K. T., Tran, S. S. T., To, H. H. T., & Lam, B. (2023) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.104096 · Cited by 32
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
