The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Informational Cascades and Software Adoption on the Internet: An Empirical Investigation1
Abstract
Online users often need to make adoption decisions without accurate information about the product values. An informational cascade occurs when it is optimal for an online user, having observed others’ actions, to follow the adoption decision of the preceding individual without regard to his own information. Informational cascades are often rational for individual decision making; however, it may lead to adoption of inferior products. With easy availability of information about other users’ choices, the Internet offers an ideal environment for informational cascades. In this paper, we empirically examine informational cascades in the context of online software adoption. We find user behavior in adopting software products is consistent with the predictions of the informational cascades literature. Our results demonstrate that online users’ choices of software products exhibit distinct jumps and drops with changes in download ranking, as predicted by informational cascades theory. Furthermore, we find that user reviews have no impact on user adoption of the most popular product, while having an increasingly positive impact on the adoption of lower ranking products. The phenomenon persists after controlling for alternative explanations such as network effects, word-of-mouth effects, and product diffusion. Our results validate informational cascades as an important driver for decision making on the Internet. The finding also offers an explanation for the mixed results reported in prior studies with regard to the influence of online user reviews on product sales. We show that the mixed results could be due to the moderating effect of informational cascades.
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
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
Mimetic Isomorphism and Technology Evaluation: Does Imitation Transcend Judgment?
University of Western Ontario, Tingling, P., Parent, M., & Simon Fraser University (2002) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00025 · Cited by 149
Cited by
Zhang, K. Z. K., Zhao, S. J., Cheung, C. M. K., & Lee, M. K. O. (2014) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2014.08.005 · Cited by 781
Amblee, N., & Bui, T. (2011) · International Journal of Electronic Commerce · doi:10.2753/jec1086-4415160205 · Cited by 490
A Longitudinal Study of Herd Behavior in the Adoption and Continued Use of Technology1
Sun, H. (2013) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2013/37.4.02 · Cited by 375
Kwark, Y., Chen, J., & Raghunathan, S. (2017) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2017/41.3.05 · Cited by 350
Effects of Freemium Strategy in the Mobile App Market: An Empirical Study of Google Play
Liu, C. Z., Au, Y. A., & Choi, H. S. (2014) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2014.995564 · Cited by 274
Metadata
- Authors
- Duan, W., Gu, B., & Whinston, A. B.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2009-03-01
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-48
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W3123759571
- Cited by
- 483
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 41.12
- 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: Informational Cascades and Software Adoption on the Internet: An Empirical Investigation1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/20650277
- The paper
- Duan, W., Gu, B., & Whinston, A. B. (2009). Informational Cascades and Software Adoption on the Internet: An Empirical Investigation1. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/20650277
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.
