The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Navigating by the Stars: Investigating the Actual and Perceived Validity of Online User Ratings
Abstract
This research documents a substantial disconnect between the objective quality information that online user ratings actually convey and the extent to which consumers trust them as indicators of objective quality. Analyses of a data set covering 1272 products across 120 vertically differentiated product categories reveal that average user ratings (1) lack convergence with Consumer Reports scores, the most commonly used measure of objective quality in the consumer behavior literature, (2) are often based on insufficient sample sizes which limits their informativeness, (3) do not predict resale prices in the used-product marketplace, and (4) are higher for more expensive products and premium brands, controlling for Consumer Reports scores. However, when forming quality inferences and purchase intentions, consumers heavily weight the average rating compared to other cues for quality like price and the number of ratings. They also fail to moderate their reliance on the average user rating as a function of sample size sufficiency. Consumers’ trust in the average user rating as a cue for objective quality appears to be based on an “illusion of validity.”
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
The case for motivated reasoning.
Kunda, Z. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480 · Cited by 9,022
The Effect of Word of Mouth on Sales: Online Book Reviews
Chevalier, J. A., & Mayzlin, D. (2006) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.43.3.345 · Cited by 6,003
The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts
Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209380 · Cited by 3,811 · cited 1×
“In fact, this indirect route might be more insidious in the sense that traditional marketing appeals trigger persuasion knowledge (Friestad and Wright 1994) while user ratings do not.”
BackgroundThinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions.
Wilson, T. D., & Schooler, J. W. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.181 · Cited by 1,417 · cited 2×
“…on price–quality relationships and consumer learning about quality more generally (Bagwell and Riordan 1991; Curry and Faulds 1986; Erdem et al. 2008; Gerstner 1985; Hardie et al.1993; Lichtenstein and Burton 1989; Mitra and Golder 2006; Tellis and Wernerfelt 1987; Wilson and Schooler 1991).”
BackgroundSupport theory: a nonextensional representation of subjective probability
Tversky, A., & Koehler, D. J. (1994) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.101.4.547 · Cited by 1,167
Modeling Loss Aversion and Reference Dependence Effects on Brand Choice
Hardie, B. G. S., Johnson, E. J., & Fader, P. S. (1993) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.12.4.378 · Cited by 903 · cited 2×
“…subject to measurement error, Consumer Reports scores are the most commonly used measure of objective product quality in marketing (Gerstner 1985; Hardie, Johnson, and Fader 1993; Lichtenstein and Burton 1989; Mitra and Golder 2006; Tellis and Wernerfelt 1987), as well as in psychology (Wilson…”
BackgroundMethodSocial Influence Bias: A Randomized Experiment
Muchnik, L., Aral, S., & Taylor, S. J. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1240466 · Cited by 892 · cited 1×
“…not actually used the product (Anderson and Simester 2014), and raters that have actually used the product are influenced by previously posted ratings from other consumers and experts, creating herding effects (Jacobsen 2015; Moe and Trusov 2011; Muchnik, Aral, and Taylor 2013; Schlosser 2005).”
BackgroundThe Financial Information Content of Perceived Quality
Aaker, D. A., & Jacobson, R. (1994) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3152193 · Cited by 789
Cited by
Attracting Comments: Digital Engagement Metrics on Facebook and Financial Performance
Yoon, G., Li, C., Ji, Y. (., North, M., Hong, C., & Liu, J. (2018) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.2017.1405753 · Cited by 149
The Effects of Culture on Consumers’ Consumption and Generation of Online Reviews
Kim, J. M., Jun, M., & Kim, C. K. (2018) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2018.05.002 · Cited by 118
Zollo, L., Carranza, R., Faraoni, M., Díaz, E., & Martín-Consuegra, D. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102432 · Cited by 107
Gender bias in sentiment analysis
Thelwall, M. (2018) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/oir-05-2017-0139 · Cited by 78
Expressions of doubt and trust in online user reviews
Evans, A. M., Stavrova, O., & Rosenbusch, H. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106556 · Cited by 53
Metadata
- Authors
- de Langhe, B., Fernbach, P. M., & Lichtenstein, D. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2015-09-10
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 817-833
- ISSN
- 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5277
- OpenAlex
- W2229197100
- Cited by
- 329
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 81.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Navigating by the Stars: Investigating the Actual and Perceived Validity of Online User Ratings. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jcr/ucv047
- The paper
- de Langhe, B., Fernbach, P. M., & Lichtenstein, D. R. (2016). Navigating by the Stars: Investigating the Actual and Perceived Validity of Online User Ratings. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucv047
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
