The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Helpfulness of Online Product Reviews as Seen by Consumers: Source and Content Features
Abstract
Online product reviews are important determinants of consumers' purchase decision. Although prior research has articulated various benefits of online product reviews, there are few investigations into whether or not they are perceived as helpful by consumers. Product review helpfulness is conceptualized as a second-order formative construct, which is manifested by perceived source credibility, perceived content diagnosticity, and perceived vicarious expression of the product review. In this study, we conduct a laboratory experiment to investigate product review helpfulness as well as its corresponding antecedents from the product review feature perspective (i.e., source- and content-based review features). Findings from the study are threefold. First, the results of the data analysis support the theoretical conceptualization of product review helpfulness as a formative construct. Second, the results support the notion that the source- and content-based review features have direct impact on product review helpfulness. Consumers perceive customer-written product reviews as more helpful than those written by experts; they also perceive a concrete review as more helpful than an abstract review. Third, we find an interaction effect of the source- and content-based features of product reviews on review helpfulness. A customer-written product review with a low level of content abstractness yields the highest perceived review helpfulness.
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
Bell, E., Bryman, A., & Harley, B. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/hebz/9780198869443.001.0001 · Cited by 10,965
The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60214-2 · Cited by 8,822
Shafir, E. (1993) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(93)90034-s · Cited by 1,453
Self-efficacy: implications for organizational behavior and human resource management
Gist, M. E. (1987) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1987.4306562 · Cited by 1,447
Cheung, M. Y., Luo, C., Sia, C. L., & Chen, H. (2009) · International Journal of Electronic Commerce · doi:10.2753/jec1086-4415130402 · Cited by 1,286
Motivated Heuristic and Systematic Processing
Chen, S., Duckworth, K., & Chaiken, S. (1999) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1001_6 · Cited by 356
Callero, P. L., Howard, J. A., & Piliavin, J. A. (1987) · Social Psychology Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2786825 · Cited by 255
Prepurchase Attribute Verifiability, Source Credibility, and Persuasion
Jain, S. P., & Posavac, S. S. (2001) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp1103_03 · Cited by 154
Specifying Formative Constructs in Information Systems Research1
Petter, S., Straub, D., & Rai, A. (2007) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148814 · Cited by 32
Cited by
How do product recommendations affect impulse buying? An empirical study on WeChat social commerce
Chen, Y., Lu, Y., Wang, B., & Pan, Z. (2019) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2018.09.002 · Cited by 370
A study of factors that contribute to online review helpfulness
Huang, A. H., Chen, K., Yen, D. C., & Tran, T. P. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.010 · Cited by 364
Lee, M., & Lee, H. (2022) · International Journal of Consumer Studies · doi:10.1111/ijcs.12667 · Cited by 101
Daradkeh, M. K. (2019) · Information Technology & People · doi:10.1108/itp-10-2017-0359 · Cited by 47
Nilashi, M., Abumalloh, R. A., Ahmadi, H., Samad, S., Alrizq, M., Abosaq, H., & Alghamdi, A. (2023) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21828 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Li, M., Huang, L., Tan, C.-H., & Wei, K.-K.
- Venue
- International Journal of Electronic Commerce
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2013-07
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 101-136
- ISSN
- 1086-4415 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-9301
- OpenAlex
- W1999624853
- Cited by
- 352
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 48.43
- 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: Helpfulness of Online Product Reviews as Seen by Consumers: Source and Content Features. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2753/jec1086-4415170404
- The paper
- Li, M., Huang, L., Tan, C.-H., & Wei, K.-K. (2013). Helpfulness of Online Product Reviews as Seen by Consumers: Source and Content Features. International Journal of Electronic Commerce. https://doi.org/10.2753/jec1086-4415170404
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.