The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Sound of Silence in Online Feedback: Estimating Trading Risks in the Presence of Reporting Bias
Open accessAbstract
Most online feedback mechanisms rely on voluntary reporting of privately observed outcomes. This introduces the potential for reporting bias, a situation where traders exhibit different propensities to report different outcome types to the system. Unless properly accounted for, reporting bias may severely distort the distribution of public feedback relative to the underlying distribution of private transaction outcomes and, thus, hamper the reliability of feedback mechanisms. This study offers a method that allows users of feedback mechanisms where both partners of a bilateral exchange are allowed to report their satisfaction to “see through” the distortions introduced by reporting bias and derive unbiased estimates of the underlying distribution of privately observed outcomes. A key aspect of our method lies in extracting information from the number of transactions where one or both trading partners choose to remain silent. We apply our method to a large data set of eBay feedback. Our results support the widespread belief that eBay traders are more likely to post feedback when satisfied than when dissatisfied and are consistent with the presence of positive and negative reciprocation among eBay traders. Most importantly, our analysis derives unbiased estimates of the risks that are associated with trading on eBay that, we believe, are more realistic than those suggested by a naïve interpretation of the unusually high (>99%) levels of positive feedback currently found on that system.
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
Log-normal distributions across the sciences: keys and clues
LIMPERT, E., STAHEL, W. A., & ABBT, M. (2001) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2001)051[0341:lndats]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 2,621
The value of reputation on eBay: A controlled experiment
Resnick, P., Zeckhauser, R., Swanson, J., & Lockwood, K. (2006) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-006-4309-2 · Cited by 1,118
Research works printed but not linked: 17
- 10.1177/109467059800100102 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1257/0022051041409075 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/9781118619179 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/1914036 · DOI
- 10.1287/mnsc.49.10.1407.17308 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1287/isre.1050.0054 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1257/jep.14.3.159 · DOI · Paper page
- Greene W. H., 2002, Econometric Analysis
- Hu N., 2006, Proc. Seventh ACM Conf. on Electronic Commerce (EC06), 324
- 10.1007/s10799-006-9181-4 · DOI
- Kesmodel D., 2005, Wall Street Journal
- Khopkar T., 2005, Proc. Sixth ACM Conf. on Electronic Commerce (EC05), 223
- 10.1016/S0278-0984(02)11030-3 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/1913267 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/biomet/67.3.515 · DOI
- 10.1214/aoms/1177698805 · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177698805
- Tesser A., 1975, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 193
Cited by
Research Commentary —Too Big to Fail: Large Samples and the p -Value Problem
Lin, M., Lucas, H. C., & Shmueli, G. (2013) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2013.0480 · Cited by 972
Promotional Reviews: An Empirical Investigation of Online Review Manipulation
Mayzlin, D., Dover, Y., & Chevalier, J. (2014) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.104.8.2421 · Cited by 937
Can You Gig It? An Empirical Examination of the Gig Economy and Entrepreneurial Activity
Burtch, G., Carnahan, S., & Greenwood, B. N. (2018) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2017.2916 · Cited by 785
Reputation and Feedback Systems in Online Platform Markets
Tadelis, S. (2016) · Annual Review of Economics · doi:10.1146/annurev-economics-080315-015325 · Cited by 524
Engineering Trust: Reciprocity in the Production of Reputation Information
Bolton, G., Greiner, B., & Ockenfels, A. (2013) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1120.1609 · Cited by 429
Metadata
- Authors
- Dellarocas, C., & Wood, C. A.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2008-03
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 460-476
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2129940040
- Cited by
- 451
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 23.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: The Sound of Silence in Online Feedback: Estimating Trading Risks in the Presence of Reporting Bias. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.1070.0747
- The paper
- Dellarocas, C., & Wood, C. A. (2008). The Sound of Silence in Online Feedback: Estimating Trading Risks in the Presence of Reporting Bias. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1070.0747
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.