How does the Valence of Online Consumer Reviews Matter in Consumer

Decision Making? Differences between Search Goods and Experience Goods

Nelsons definition, search goods are those whose main features can be objectively
evaluated from information that is readily available, whereas experience goods need to
be personally tried and examined prior to purchase.
For search goods, there is no significant difference in WOM effect between the negative
reviews and positive reviews, suggesting no significant effect of e-WOM valence for
search goods. However, e-WOM valence has the negative impact for experience goods. In
details, the WOM effect of negative reviews is greater than that of positive reviews for
experience goods. In addition, the effect of positive reviews is greater for search goods
than for experience goods, whereas, there is no significant difference in the effect of
negative reviews between search goods and experience goods. These findings
demonstrate the asymmetry of the interaction between product type and e-WOM
valence.
WHAT MAKES A HELPFUL ONLINE REVIEW? A STUDY OF CUSTOMER REVIEWS ON
AMAZON.COM
There is solid evidence that two-sided messages in advertising can enhance source
credibility in consumer communications (Eisend 2006; Hunt and Smith 1987), and can
enhance brand attitude (Eisend 2006). This would imply that moderate reviews are more
helpful than extreme reviews.
Review extremity, review depth, and product type affect the perceived helpfulness of the
review. Product type moderates the effect of review extremity on the helpfulness of the
review. For experience goods, reviews with extreme ratings are less helpful than reviews
with moderate ratings. For both product types, review depth has a positive effect on the
helpfulness of the review, but the product type moderates the effect of review depth on
the helpfulness of the review. Review depth has a greater positive effect on the
helpfulness of the review for search goods than for experience goods.
****************************************************************************************
****************************************************************************************
Research done by Bei et al. (2004) has concluded that overall speaking, online
information is used more often for experience goods than for search goods but the usage
rate of online information source varies across different types of goods. More
specifically, consumers tend to use more soft data, such as comments from others or
neutral report, for experience goods and more hard data, such as information provided
by retailers and manufacturers, for search goods.
Huang et al. (2009) advances this topic by adding the concepts of search depth and search
breadth to the study. In their study, there are significant differences in the searching and
purchasing behavior for search and experience goods. Specifically, experience goods is
found to entail deeper depth of search (illustrated by more time spent per product page),
whereas search goods is found to entail wider breadth of search (illustrated by more
product pages viewed).
The displaying manner of information about search goods attributes, such as
price, color, and other standard product specifications and comparisons, is typically
more self-explanatory and thus requires less time to obtain and process. On the other
hand, the Internet provides consumers an easier access to neutral product evaluation
which is more important to experience goods (Bei et al. 2004). Information about
experience attributes generally involves reading consumer ratings and feedback,
downloading digital samples from the Web site, and referring to third-party product
tests and recommendations (Huang et al. 2009). Moreover, the opinions and feedbacks
regarding experience goods may vary from person to person, consumers usually take
more time to digest and merge contradictive information in order to determine the
overall quality of the alternative.
Searching for experience on the web
The divide between search and experience goods, in terms of consumers perceived
ability to judge product quality before purchase, remains in traditional retail
environments but erodes in the online environment. the total time consumers spend
online searching for product information is not significantly different for search and
experience goods. Consumers view fewer pages but spend more time per page before
purchasing experience goods than search goods. In addition, we find that communication
mechanisms, such as consumer feedback and experience simulation (e.g., consumer
reviews, multimedia), increase the time spent in a domain but only for buyers of
experience goods.
Factors Driving Consumer Intention to Shop Online:
An Empirical Investigation
FCHAICT ANOGR SA DNRD I VDIHN OGL OAN KLIAI NE SH OP PI NG

convenience and product type influence consumer intention to engage in online

shopping. When consumers perceive offline shopping as inconvenient, their intention to
shop online is greater. Also, online shopping intention is higher when consumers
perceive the product to be search goods than experience goods.

The impact of age and shopping experiences on the

classification of search, experience, and credence goods in
online shopping
on the correlation between the online search and the actual purchase of products, it was
found that although young people are likelier to purchase online the longer they
searched for the product, older generations are comparatively more likely to purchase
because they spend less time searching (Sorce et al. 2005). For older generation, we
speculate that, while the adaptation process may take longer, their rich Main Street
shopping experiences give them advantages.
Like age, gender is another important factor in explaining many differences in
consumers shopping behaviors and perception of goods. However, it seems gender
is not as significant factor as age in predicting online shopping behavior. A recent
study for online shopping behaviors from international and cross-cultural perspectives
found gender has no significant influence on shopping behavior (Stafford et al.
2004). But it found that the 2534 age group was the most active online shopping
group. Another e-commerce study found gender and social class were not significant
factors for mobile commerce adoption though it found that younger consumers are
more predisposed to use mobile equipment as a shopping channel (Bigne et al.
2005).
The relationships between e-shopping and store shopping
in the shopping process of search goods
This study showed that for both internet and traditional stores, the medium by which
shoppers became aware of the product, searched product information, or tried the product
were very likely to be the medium by which sales took place. Notably, the medium of
awareness was the most important factor among the three stages of communication.

It has been widely recognized that shopping activity is conducted not only
for the goal of goods acquisition. The appeal of traditional store shopping is multifarious,
including social interaction, entertainment, movement, and trip chaining (Mokhtarian,
2004). Much of the appeal cannot be easily displaced by e-shopping. making traditional
store shopping still quite competitive over e-shopping. In a conceptual analysis of the
transportation impacts of B2C e-commerce, Mokhtarian (2004) reviewed the
comparative advantages of store shopping and e-shopping, and conclude that neither
type uniformly dominated the other.
Cannibalization or synergy? Consumers channel selection in onlineoffline
multichannel systems