Cet article a pour but d’approfondir les raisons et les modalités d’un rapprochement entre marketing et développement durable et, plus particulièrement, d’analyser les conditions d’une meilleure réciprocité entre les deux concepts dans le but de les renforcer l’un et l’autre L’auteur propose d’abord une réflexion sur la nature des deux notions ce qui peut les opposer, ce qui peut les rapprocher II analyse ensuite le comportement des entreprises face aux enjeux du développement durable en s’efforçant de décrire les situations qui conduisent à mobiliser davantage le marketing L’intégration d’objectifs sociaux et environnementaux, dans les programmes de marketing, est abordée par la présentation d’un plan en cinq étapes, depuis l’étude de la sensibilité – développement durable » d’un marché, jusqu’à la valorisation des efforts en entreprises et des performances durables obtenues Dans sa conclusion, l’auteur donne sa vision des quelques éléments qui pourraient caracteriser et donner du sens à l’expression « marketing durable •
Mots clés:
Développement durable – Responsabilité Sociétale des Entreprises – Parties prenantes – Confiance des consommateurs – Traçabilité – Juste prix – Partenariat – Cycle production-consommation – Eco-conception – Santé et sécurité – Certification – Éthique – Intelligence du long terme – Vérification de performance – Marketing durable
Grandes lignes:
Techniques marketing et comportements a adopter pour inscrire les entreprises dans le concept de developpement durable
Importance du prix et de la relation client pour éduquer les consommateurs
Definition et principe du green marketing
Aide et suivi de performances environnementales pour les entreprises du luxe notamment
Résumé: Cet article propose de mieux comprendre la diffusion du concept de développement durable chez les consommateurs et sa traduction en matière de comportements. Partant d’une analyse des courants de littérature sur les nouvelles formes de consommation, il repose sur une recherche qualitative organisée dans la sphère familiale, puis quantitative dans un contexte plus classique de questionnaires en face-à-face. Il met en lumière plusieurs dimensions qui qualifient plus précisément le citoyen-consommateur « sensibilisé au développement durable ». Il propose aussi de mesurer la nature des relations existant entre cette sensibilité et des pratiques comportementales citoyennes ou plus marchandes ainsi recensées. Les apports de ces analyses montrent que pour mieux accompagner ou anticiper les évolutions des comportements, des approches plus segmentées des consommateurs s’avèrent nécessaires. Elles pourront s’appuyer sur les représentations du concept de développement durable ainsi que sur les orientations d’action qui en découlent.
Mots clés: Developpement durable, comportement du consommateurs, consommation socialement responsable, ethique
Grandes lignes:
Explication du concept de developpement durable et emergence
Concept et courants de consommation plus responsables
Initiation et responsabilité du consommateur
Prise de conscience des individus et sensibilité individuelle emergente
Communication retenue dans le cadre du Congrès sur les Tendances du Marketing en Europe à Paris Béatrice Canel-Depitre Maître de conférences en Sciences de gestion Université Le Havre – Laboratoire Cerene E-mail : beatrice.canel@.univ-lehavre.fr
Le prix a perdu de sa substance et ne permet plus de faire la différence entre le bon et le mauvais produit. Le consommateur est souvent en quête du prix le plus bas cautionnant la chasse à la compression des coûts au mépris des droits élémentaires de l’homme et de son environnement. Cependant, face à la multiplication des crises sanitaires et environnementales, on note une progression de la « consommation engagée ». Ce nouveau type d’engagement implique une perception différente du prix. Derrière le prix faible on envisage les conséquences sur sa propre sécurité sanitaire mais également sur les droits élémentaires de l’individu ou sur le respect de l’environnement. La « consommation engagée » conduit à revoir la fixation des prix pour redonner son sens au prix.
Grandes lignes;
definition consommation engagée
effet économique: part du pouvoir d’achat dans la consommation engagée
Perception des prix par les consommateurs
Fixation des prix par les marques ; “prix indicateur de qualité”
Interet a augmenter les prix si production respectueuse de l’environnement
Mots clés: écologie, economie, fixation des prix, consommation engagée, prix,
Bureau Dominique, Salanié François, Schubert Katheline. Économie de l’environnement et des ressources naturelles. Présentation générale. In: Économie & prévision, n°190-191, 2009-4-5. pp. 1-4; doi : 10.3406/ecop.2009.7989 http://www.persee.fr/doc/ecop_0249-4744_2009_num_190_4_7989
Cet article fait un point sur les conditions climatiques 1o ans après le constat fait dans les années 2000 et notamment sur l’épuisement des ressources naturelles dus à une production massive et une forte croissance. Les auteurs relèvent également un important point sur quel est le role des entreprises, acteur important de la politique environnemental et comment la gestion des ressources naturelles doit etre prise en main.
Résumé : L’économie ne s’intéresse pas aux animaux. L’ambition de cet article est de stimuler des recherches en économie sur les animaux et le véganisme. Par véganisme, nous considérons tous les comportements visant à modifier (et pas seulement éliminer) l’utilisation ou la consommation d’animaux pour des raisons morales. Nous proposons une introduction sélective au sujet, centrée sur la consommation de viande et les conditions d’élevage des animaux. La viande se situe aujourd’hui à la croisée des chemins à cause de ses externalités sanitaires et environnementales, et de la montée du végétarisme dans les pays développés. L’économie du véganisme –ou veganomics– peut aider à mieux comprendre le comportement des consommateurs (omnivores, flexitariens, végétariens) et ses implications sur les stratégies des producteurs, des activistes et des décideurs publics, et ainsi mieux cerner un monde où la relation à l’animal peut profondément évoluer.
Grandes lignes:
Nouvelle ère du véganisme: prise de conscience des populations
Montée des actions pour la protection animale
Cible: pays plus grands consommateurs de viande pour la récupération des peaux et la production de cuir
problème sanitaire et écologique de l’exploitation animale
Mots clés: veganisme, ecologie, tendance, consommation
W Yang, J Zhang, H Yan, (2020), Impacts of online consumer reviews on a dual-channel supply chain, Omega
Mots clés : canal, Avis en ligne, Gestion de la chaîne logistique, prix, consommateurs
Résumé : Cet article examine les effets des avis de consommateurs en ligne sur un double canal où le fabricant distribue un produit via un canal de vente au détail et un canal Internet. Cette étude permet aux auteurs de développer des modèles théoriques de jeu pour capturer les décisions de tarification et les bénéfices des deux joueurs avec les avis en ligne, sous deux structures de canaux différentes. En particulier, dans le cadre du canal centralisé, les avis en ligne peuvent augmenter ou diminuer le prix direct mais toujours baisser le prix de détail. Sous le canal décentralisé, l’étude montre que le fabricant a une probabilité plus élevée de facturer un prix direct plus élevé que sous le canal centralisé, et le détaillant a également la possibilité d’améliorer le prix de détail.
Conclusion : Cette étude nous permet d’énoncer que, dans le cadre d’un canal centralisé, les avis en ligne ont l’influence nécessaire pour augmenter et/ou diminuer le prix direct de vente. Cependant ces mêmes faux avis n’ont qu’un effet de baisse sur le prix de vente de détail.
Cet article est en mesure d’indiquer que, cette fois dans un canal décentralisé, un fabricant a plus de chance d’augmenter son prix direct, comparé au canal centralisé. Le détaillant a également la possibilité d’améliorer son prix de détail. Les auteurs concluent leur étude par un conseil managérial. Celui-ci indique qu’il n’est pas nécessairement judicieux pour un fabricant de fournir lui-même des avis en ligne. La seule raison pourrait être que ces avis en ligne sont considérés comme insuffisants et ne sont donc pas suffisamment favorables, peu importe la structure du canal.
Sources :
[1] Hua G, Wang S, Cheng TE. Price and lead time decisions in dual-channel supply chains. Eur J Oper Res 2010;205(1):113–26. [2] Jiang B, Yang B. Quality and pricing decisions in a market with consumer information sharing. Manage Sci 2019;65(1):272–85. [3] Luo L, Sun J. New product design under channel acceptance: brick-and-mortar, online-exclusive, or brick-and-click. Prod Oper Manag 2016;25(12):2014–34. [4] Nelson P. Advertising as information. J Polit Econ 1974;82(4):729–54. [5] Chambers C, Kouvelis P, Semple J. Quality-based competition, profitability, and variable costs. Manage Sci 2006;52(12):1884–95. [6] Chen J, Liang L, Yao D-Q, Sun S. Price and quality decisions in dual-channel supply chains. Eur J Oper Res 2017;259(3):935–48. [7] Chiang W-yK, Chhajed D, Hess JD. Direct marketing, indirect profits: a strategic analysis of dual-channel supply-chain design. Manage Sci 2003;49(1):1–20. [8] Chen L, Jiang T, Li W, Geng S, Hussain S. Who should pay for online reviews? Design of an online user feedback mechanism. Electron Commer Res Appl 2017;23:38–44. [9] Dukes A, Geylani T, Liu Y. Dominant retailers incentives for product quality in asymmetric distribution channels. Mark Lett 2014;25(1):93–107. [10] Gao GG, Greenwood BN, Agarwal R, McCullough J. Vocal minority and silent majority: how do online ratings reflect population perceptions of quality? Mis Quart 2015;39(3):565–89. [11] Li X, Hitt LM. Self-selection and information role of online product reviews. Inf Syst Res 2008;19(4):456–74. [12] Cattani K, Gilland W, Heese HS, Swaminathan J. Boiling frogs: pricing strategies for a manufacturer adding a direct channel that competes with the traditional channel. Prod Oper Manag 2006;15(1):40–56. [13] Kumar N, Ruan R. On manufacturers complementing the traditional retail channel with a direct online channel. Quant Mark Econ 2006;4(3):289–323. [14] Dumrongsiri A, Fan M, Jain A, Moinzadeh K. A supply chain model with direct and retail channels. Eur J Oper Res 2008;187(3):691–718. [15] Hsiao L, Chen Y-J. Strategic motive for introducing internet channels in a supply chain. Prod Oper Manag 2014;23(1):36–47. [16] Chen J, Zhang H, Sun Y. Implementing coordination contracts in a manufacturer Stackelberg dual-channel supply chain. Omega 2012;40(5):571–83. [17] Duan W, Gu B, Whinston AB. Do online reviews matter? An empirical investigation of panel data. Decis Support Syst 2008;45(4):1007–16. [18] Liu M, Cao E, Salifou CK. Pricing strategies of a dual-channel supply chain with risk aversion. Transport Res Part E 2016;90:108–20. [19] Chevalier JA, Mayzlin D. The effect of word of mouth on sales: online book reviews. J Market Res 2006;43(3):345–54. [20] Zhu F, Zhang X. Impact of online consumer reviews on sales: the moderating role of product and consumer characteristics. J Mark 2010;74(2):133–48. [21] Godes D, Mayzlin D. Using online conversations to study word-of-mouth communication. Mark Sci 2004;23(4):545–60. [22] Zhang KZ, Cheung CM, Lee MK. Examining the moderating effect of inconsistent reviews and its gender differences on consumers online shopping decision. Int J Inf Manage 2014;34(2):89–98. [23] Maslowska E, Malthouse EC, Viswanathan V. Do customer reviews drive purchase decisions? The moderating roles of review exposure and price. Decis Support Syst 2017;98:1–9. [24] Guo M, Liao X, Liu J, Zhang Q. Consumer preference analysis: a data-driven multiple criteria approach integrating online information. Omega 2019:102074. [25] Li X, Hitt LM, Zhang ZJ. Product reviews and competition in markets for repeat purchase products. J Manag Inf Syst 2011;27(4):9–42. [26] Kwark Y, Chen J, Raghunathan S. Online product reviews: implications for retailers and competing manufacturers. Inf Syst Res 2014;25(1):93–110. [27] He Q-C, Chen Y-J. Dynamic pricing of electronic products with consumer reviews. Omega 2018;80:123–34. [28] Kacen JJ, Hess JD, Chiang W-yK. Bricks or clicks? Consumer attitudes toward traditional stores and online stores. Glob Econ Manag Rev 2013;18(1):12–21. [29] Jing B. Showrooming and webrooming: information externalities between online and offline sellers. Mark Sci 2018;37(3):469–83
He Q, Chen K, (2018), Dynamic pricing of electronic products with consumer reviews, Omega, Vol. 80, pp. 123-134
Mots clés : Tarification dynamique, Produits électroniques, Avis des consommateurs, Apprentissage bayésien, Approximation fluide
Résumé : Les avis des consommateurs sont devenus omniprésents dans le secteur du e-commerce notamment, en particulier pour l’achat de produits électroniques. Cet article, étudie les stratégies de prix optimales pour une plateforme vendant des produits électroniques lorsque les consommateurs apprennent de manière séquentielle la qualité des produits à partir des avis des consommateurs. L’étude est centrée sur l’analyse transitoire pour calibrer la façon dont les externalités de l’information à travers la dimension temporelle fausseraient les stratégies optimales de tarification du vendeur. Face au problème du « démarrage à froid », le vendeur de produits de haute qualité choisirait des prix plus bas pour accélérer le processus d’apprentissage des consommateurs. Par conséquent, les prix optimaux souffrent de distorsions à la baisse qui augmentent la qualité des produits dans ce régime de réputation.
Dans les extensions, l’auteur propose un cadre souple et flexible pour soutenir les processus décisionnels tant opérationnels que stratégiques. La valeur de la publicité persuasive et les résultats suggèrent que les avis des consommateurs et les efforts de marketing sont des substituts stratégiques. En termes de contrôle de la qualité, l’étude permet de dire qu’il serait optimal d’investir dans la qualité dès les premiers stades, mais de s’arrêter à un certain seuil de temps, ce qui se traduit par un modèle de renforcement de la réputation. Enfin, les auteurs étendent le cadre pour étudier un problème de prix duopole. Le vendeur de produits haute qualité pourrait accueillir stratégiquement le vendeur de mauvaise qualité dans les premiers stades, et déclencher une guerre des prix aux stades ultérieurs.
Conclusion : Cette étude a permis de définir un modèle de tarification dynamique intervenant lorsque les consommateurs apprennent de manière séquentielle sur la qualité des produits à partir seulement des avis de consommateurs. L’article définit également une analyse transitoire permettant de calibrer la façon dont les externalités d’une information fausseraient les stratégies de tarification optimales du vendeur.
Les auteurs définissent un cadre utilisant une approximation fluide soutenant les processus décisionnels opérationnels et stratégiques.
Sources :
[1] Bergemann D, Välimäki J. Dynamic pricing of new experience goods. J Political Econ 2006;114(4):713–43. [2] Bertsekas DP, Bertsekas DP, Bertsekas DP, Bertsekas DP. Dynamic programming and optimal control, vol. 2. Belmont, MA: Athena Scientific; 1995. [3] Bertsimas D, Mersereau AJ. A learning approach for interactive marketing to a customer segment. Oper Res 2007;55(6):1120–35. [4] Besbes O., Scarsini M.. On information distortions in online ratings. Available at SSRN 22660532015. [5] Board S, Meyer-ter Vehn M. Reputation for quality. Econometrica 2013;81(6):2381–462. [6] Bose S, Orosel G, Ottaviani M, Vesterlund L. Monopoly pricing in the binary herding model. Econ Theory 2008;37(2):203–41. [7] Campbell A. Word-of-mouth communication and percolation in social networks. Am Econ Rev 2013;103(6):2466–98. [8] Chen Y, Xie J. Online consumer review: word-of-mouth as a new element of marketing communication mix. Manag Sci 2008;54(3):477–91. [9] den Boer AV, Zwart B. Dynamic pricing and learning with finite inventories. Oper Res 2015;63(4):965–78. [10] Harrison JM, Keskin NB, Zeevi A. Bayesian dynamic pricing policies: learning and earning under a binary prior distribution. Manag Sci 2012;58(3):570–86. [11] Hendricks K, Sorensen A, Wiseman T. Observational learning and demand for search goods. Am Econ J: Microecon 2012;4(1):1–31. [12] Ifrach B. Market dynamics with many agents: applications in social learning and competition. ProQuest Information & Learning; 2013. Ph.D. thesis. [13] Ifrach B, Maglaras C, Scarsini M. Bayesian social learning with consumer reviews. ACM SIGMETRICS Perform Eval Rev 2014;41(4):28. [14] Jing B. Exogenous learning, seller-induced learning, and marketing of durable goods. Manag Sci 2011;57(10):1788–801. [15] Lauga DO. Persuasive advertising with sophisticated but impressionable consumers. San Diego, La Jolla: University of California; 2010. Working paper. [16] Li X, Hitt LM. Price effects in online product reviews: an analytical model andempirical analysis. MIS Q 2010;34(4):809–31. [17] Papanastasiou Y, Bakshi N, Savva N. Social learning from early buyer reviews: implications for new product launch. London Business School, UK; 2013. Working paper. [18] Peizer DB, Pratt JW. A normal approximation for binomial, F, beta, and other common, related tail probabilities, I. J Am Stat Assoc 1968;63(324):1416–56. [19] Wu C-C, Chen Y-J, Wang C-J. Is persuasive advertising always combative in a distribution channel. Mark Sci 2009;28(6):1157–63. [20] Yang N, Zhang R. Dynamic pricing and inventory management under inventory-dependent demand. Oper Res 2014;62(5):1077–94. [21] Zhao Y, Yang S, Narayan V, Zhao Y. Modeling consumer learning from online product reviews. Mark Sci 2013;32(1):153–69.
Kim S, Maslowska E, Tamaddoni A, (2019), The paradox of (dis)trust in sponsorship disclosure: The characteristics and effects of sponsored online consumer reviews, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 116, pp. 114-124
Mots clés : Bouche à oreille digital, Avis des consommateurs en ligne, Parrainage, Persuasion, Attitude, Intention d’achat.
Résumé : Les avis de consommateurs en ligne sont devenus l’un des messages et moyen majeur de persuasion en termes de décision d’achat, créant une influence certaine sur le consommateur. Dans cette mesure, les spécialistes en marketing ont commencé à inciter les consommateurs à rédiger des avis avec pour objectif d’augmenter le volume d’avis positifs. Cependant, peu de recherches existent sur les caractéristiques de contenu et les effets des avis sponsorisés. Cette étude examine les différentes caractéristiques et effets des avis sponsorisés et organiques, ainsi que les mécanismes par lesquels les consommateurs reconnaissent et traitent ces deux types d’avis, en utilisant notamment des méthodes mixtes dans deux études. Les résultats de l’analyse d’exploration de texte suggèrent que les revues sponsorisées fournissent un contenu considéré comme plus élaboré et évaluatif. Cependant, ces avis sont perçus comme moins utiles que les avis organiques. Les résultats d’une expérience aléatoire suggèrent que la divulgation de parrainage augmente les soupçons sur les arrière-pensées de l’examinateur/récepteur et diminue ainsi les attitudes et intentions d’achat des consommateurs lorsqu’un examen est positif. Par contre, divulgation de parrainage ne nuit pas aux attitudes ou aux intentions d’achat lorsque l’avis est négatif.
Conclusion : Cette étude a permis de démontrer l’effet du parrainage dans un contexte d’avis en ligne. De cet article a ainsi été conclu que les avis dits « sponsorisés » et les avis rédigés par les consommateurs mais percevant une compensation en échange, telle que du parrainage, sont considérés par le récepteur comme biaisés et/ou malhonnêtes. Cependant l’étude prouve également que les critiques sponsorisés sont généralement plus élaborées, développées, objectives, complexes, positives et moins extrêmes que les critiques dites « organiques ». Cependant ces avis sont tout de même perçus comme les moins utiles, dû à la mention « parrainage » décrédibilisant l’avis en lui-même, qui n’est pas sans intérêt. Les auteurs concluent ainsi que le système de parrainage, ça divulgation, engendre une augmentation des soupçons et nuit donc sur l’intention d’achat d’un consommateur.
Sources :
[1] The Nielsen Company, Global Trust in Advertising, Retrieved from, 2015. http:// www.nielsen.com/content/dam/corporate/us/en/reports-downloads/2015- reports/global-trust-in-advertising-report-sept-2015.pdf. [2] E. Dichter, How word-of-mouth advertising works, Harvard Business Review 44 (6) (1966) 147–166. [3] P. Chatterjee, Drivers of new product recommending and referral behaviour on social network sites, International Journal of Advertising 30 (1) (2011) 77–101. [4] P. Hugstad, J.W. Taylor, G.D. Bruce, The effects of social class and perceived risk on consumer, The Journal of Services Marketing 1 (1) (1987) 47–52. [5] I. Simonson, Mission (largely) accomplished: what’s next for consumer bdt-jdm researchers? Journal of Marketing Behavior 1 (1) (2015) 9–35, https://doi.org/10. 1561/107.00000001. [6] L.J. Abendroth, J.E. Heyman, Honesty is the best policy: the effects of disclosure in word-of-mouth marketing, Journal of Marketing Communications 19 (4) (2013) 245–257, https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2011.631567. [7] M. Petrescu, K. O’Leary, D. Goldring, S. Ben Mrad, Incentivized reviews: promising the moon for a few stars, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 41 (2018) 288–295, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.04.005. [8] W. Zhou, W. Duan, An empirical study of how third-party websites influence the feedback mechanism between online word-of-mouth and retail sales, Decision Support Systems 76 (2015) 14–23, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2015.03.010. [9] J. Kennett, S. Matthews, What’s the buzz? Undercover marketing and the corruption of friendship, Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (1) (2008) 2–18, https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1468-5930.2008.00391.x. [10] K.K. Coker, D.S. Smith, S.A. Altobello, Buzzing with disclosure of social shopping rewards, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing 9 (3) (2015) 170–189, https://doi.org/10.1108/jrim-06-2014-0030. [11] WOMMA, Word of Mouth Marketing Association Guide to Best Practices for Transparency and Disclosure in Gigital, Social, & Mobile Marketing, Retrieved from, http://www.womma.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/WOMMA-SocialMedia-Disclosure-Guidelines-2013.pdf. [12] R.B. Cialdini, 1st Collins business essentials (Ed.), Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, Collins, New York: New York, 2007. [13] J. Breitsohl, M. Khammash, G. Griffiths, E-business complaint management: perceptions and perspectives of online credibility, Journal of Enterprise Information Management 23 (5) (2010) 653–660, https://doi.org/10.1108/ 17410391011083083. [14] E.R. Spangenberg, J.L. Giese, An exploratory study of word-of-mouth communication in a hierarchy of effects context, Communication Research Reports 14 (1) (1997) 88–96. [15] T. Hennig-Thurau, K.P. Gwinner, G. Walsh, D.D. Gremler, Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: what motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing 18 (1) (2004) 38–52, https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.10073. [16] K. Bawa, R. Shoemaker, The effects of free sample promotions on incremental brand sales, Marketing Science 23 (3) (2004) 345–363, https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc. 1030.0052. [17] B.P. Buunk, W.B. Schaufeli, Reciprocity in interpersonal relationships: an evolutionary perspective on its importance for health and well-being, European Review of Social Psychology 10 (1) (1999) 259–291, https://doi.org/10.1080/ 14792779943000080. [18] A.W. Gouldner, The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement, American Sociological Review 25 (2) (1960) 161–178, https://doi.org/10.2307/2092623. [19] N. Hu, J. Zhang, P.A. Pavlou, Overcoming the J-shaped distribution of product reviews, Communications of the ACM 52 (10) (2009) 144–147, https://doi.org/10. 1145/1562764.1562800. [20] G. Askalidis, S.J. Kim, E.C. Malthouse, Understanding and overcoming biases in online review systems, Decision Support Systems 97 (2017) 23–30, https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.dss.2017.03.002. [21] V. Liljander, J. Gummerus, M. Söderlund, Young consumers’ responses to suspected covert and overt blog marketing, Internet Research 25 (4) (2015) 610–632, https:// doi.org/10.1108/IntR-02-2014-0041. [22] W.J. Carl, The role of disclosure in organized word-of-mouth marketing programs, Journal of Marketing Communications 14 (3) (2008) 225–241, https://doi.org/10. 1080/13527260701833839. [23] M.A. Tuk, P.W.J. Verlegh, A. Smidts, D.H.J. Wigboldus, Interpersonal relationships moderate the effect of faces on person judgments, European Journal of Social Psychology 39 (5) (2009) 757–767, https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.576. [24] J. Colliander, Socially acceptable? Exploring consumer responses to marketing in social media, Ph.D. Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden, 2012. [25] J. Colliander, S. Erlandsson, The blog and the bountiful: exploring the effects of disguised product placement on blogs that are revealed by a third party, Journal of Marketing Communications 21 (2) (2015) 110–124, https://doi.org/10.1080/
[26] M.C. Campbell, G.S. Mohr, P.W.J. Verlegh, Can disclosures lead consumers to resist covert persuasion? The important roles of disclosure timing and type of response, Journal of Consumer Psychology 23 (4) (2013) 483–495, https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jcps.2012.10.012. [27] C. Du Plessis, A.T. Stephen, Y. Bart, D. Goncalves, When in Doubt, Elaborate? How Elaboration on Uncertainty Influences the Persuasiveness of Consumer-generated Product Reviews When Reviewers are Incentivized, Saïd Business School WP, 2016 Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2821641. [28] M. Friestad, P. Wright, The persuasion knowledge model: how people cope with persuasion attempts, Journal of Consumer Research 21 (1) (1994) 1–31, https:// doi.org/10.1086/209380. [29] Y. Hwang, S.-H. Jeong, “This is a sponsored blog post, but all opinions are my own”: the effects of sponsorship disclosure on responses to sponsored blog posts, Computers in Human Behavior 62 (2016) 528–535, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb. 2016.04.026. [30] S.C. Boerman, E.A. van Reijmersdal, P.C. Neijens, Sponsorship disclosure: effects of duration on persuasion knowledge and brand responses, Journal of Communication 62 (6) (2012) 1047–1064, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01677.x. [31] B.W. Wojdynski, N.J. Evans, Going native: effects of disclosure position and language on the recognition and evaluation of online native advertising, Journal of Advertising 45 (2) (2016) 157–168, https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2015. 1115380. [32] M.C. Campbell, A. Kirmani, Consumers’ use of persuasion knowledge: the effects of accessibility and cognitive capacity on perceptions of an influence agent, Journal of Consumer Research 27 (1) (2000) 69–83, https://doi.org/10.1086/314309. [33] K.J. Main, D.W. Dahl, P.R. Darke, Deliberative and automatic bases of suspicion: empirical evidence of the sinister attribution error, Journal of Consumer Psychology 17 (1) (2007) 59–69, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1701_9. [34] H.H. Kelley, Causal Schemata and the Attribution Process, General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ, 1972. [35] Z.L. Tormala, P. Briñol, R.E. Petty, When credibility attacks: the reverse impact of source credibility on persuasion, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 42 (5) (2006) 684–691, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.10.005. [36] R.E. Petty, P. Briñol, Z.L. Tormala, Thought confidence as a determinant of persuasion: the self-validation hypothesis, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82 (5) (2002) 722–741, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.5.722. [37] V.F. Ordenes, S. Ludwig, K. De Ruyter, D. Grewal, M. Wetzels, Unveiling what is written in the stars: analyzing explicit, implicit, and discourse patterns of sentiment in social media, Journal of Consumer Research 43 (6) (2017) 875–894. [38] S. Ludwig, K. de Ruyter, M. Friedman, E.C. Brüggen, M. Wetzels, G. Pfann, More than words: the influence of affective content and linguistic style matches in online reviews on conversion rates, Journal of Marketing 77 (1) (2013) 87–103, https:// doi.org/10.1509/jm.11.0560. [39] J.W. Pennebaker, R.J. Booth, R.L. Boyd, M.E. Francis, Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count: LIWC2015, Pennebaker Conglomerates, Austin, TX, 2015. [40] N.T. Bendle, P. Farris, P.E. Pfeifer, D.J. Reibstein, Marketing Metrics: The Manager’s Guide to Measuring Marketing Performance, , Incorporated, 2016. [41] N. Hu, I. Bose, N.S. Koh, L. Liu, Manipulation of online reviews: an analysis of ratings, readability, and sentiments, Decision Support Systems 52 (3) (2012) 674–684, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2011.11.002. [42] T.L. Harris, R.E. Hodges, The Literacy Dictionary: The Vocabulary of Reading and Writing, (1995). [43] S. Banerjee, A.Y.K. Chua, J.-J. Kim, Don’t be deceived: using linguistic analysis to learn how to discern online review authenticity, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 68 (6) (2017) 1525–1538, https://doi.org/10. 1002/asi.23784. [44] A.Y.K. Chua, S. Banerjee, Analyzing review efficacy on Amazon.com: does the rich grow richer? Computers in Human Behavior 75 (2017) 501–509, https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.047. [45] R. Gunning, The fog index after twenty years, Journal of Business Communication 6 (2) (1969) 3–13, https://doi.org/10.1177/002194366900600202. [46] R. Senter, E.A. Smith, Automated Readability Index, (1967). [47] M. Coleman, T.L. Liau, A computer readability formula designed for machine scoring, Journal of Applied Psychology 60 (2) (1975) 283–284, https://doi.org/10. 1037/h0076540. [48] N. Korfiatis, E. García-Bariocanal, S. Sánchez-Alonso, Evaluating content quality and helpfulness of online product reviews: the interplay of review helpfulness vs. review content, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 11 (3) (2012) 205–217, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2011.10.003. [49] S. Park, J.L. Nicolau, Asymmetric effects of online consumer reviews, Annals of Tourism Research 50 (2015) 67–83, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2014.10. 007. [50] S.M. Mudambi, D. Schuff, What Makes a Helpful Review? (2010) (A study of customer reviews on Amazon. com). [51] L.M. Willemsen, P.C. Neijens, F. Bronner, J.A. de Ridder, ‘Highly recommended!’ the content characteristics and perceived usefulness of online consumer reviews, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17 (1) (2011) 19–38, https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01551.x. [52] P.B. Goes, M. Lin, Au Yeung, C.-M., “Popularity effect” in user-generated content: evidence from online product reviews, Information Systems Research 25 (2) (2014) 222–238. [53] Q. Cao, W. Duan, Q. Gan, Exploring determinants of voting for the “helpfulness” of online user reviews: a text mining approach, Decision Support Systems 50 (2) (2011) 511–521, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.11.009. [54] S.-M. Kim, P. Pantel, T. Chklovski, M. Pennacchiotti, Automatically assessing
[55] N.J. Salkind, Encyclopedia of Research Design, (2010). [56] B. Derrick, D. Toher, P. White, Why Welch’s test is type I error robust, The Quantitative Methods in Psychology 12 (1) (2016) 30–38. [57] S. Brady, M. Lerigo-Jones, An examinination into consumer attitudes towards sponsored online content from social media influencers, Journal of Research Studies in Business and Management (2017) 3. [58] J. Wang, A. Ghose, P. Ipeirotis, Bonus, disclosure, and choice: what motivates the creation of high-quality paid reviews? Paper Presented at the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), 2012. [59] S.C. Boerman, L.M. Willemsen, E.P. Van Der Aa, “This post is sponsored”: effects of sponsorship disclosure on persuasion knowledge and electronic word of mouth in the context of Facebook, Journal of Interactive Marketing 38 (2017) 82–92, https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2016.12.002. [60] P.W.J. Verlegh, G. Ryu, M.A. Tuk, L. Feick, Receiver responses to rewarded referrals: the motive inferences framework, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 41 (6) (2013) 669–682, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-013-0327-8. [61] G. Reeder, Mindreading: judgments about intentionality and motives in dispositional inference, Psychological Inquiry 20 (1) (2009) 1–18, https://doi.org/10. 1080/10478400802615744. [62] H. Hong, D. Xu, G.A. Wang, W. Fan, Understanding the determinants of online review helpfulness: a meta-analytic investigation, Decision Support Systems (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2017.06.007. [63] S. Banerjee, S. Bhattacharyya, I. Bose, Whose online reviews to trust? Understanding reviewer trustworthiness and its impact on business, Decision Support Systems 96 (2017) 17–26, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2017.01.006. [64] Y.-S. Lim, B. Van Der Heide, Evaluating the wisdom of strangers: the perceived credibility of online consumer reviews on yelp, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 20 (1) (2015) 67–82, https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12093. [65] L. Bergkvist, J.R. Rossiter, Tailor-made single-item measures of doubly concrete constructs, International Journal of Advertising 28 (4) (2009) 607–621, https://doi. org/10.2501/S0265048709200783. [66] T.E. Decarlo, R.N. Laczniak, T.W. Leigh, Selling financial services: the effect of consumer product knowledge and salesperson commission on consumer suspicion and intentions, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 41 (4) (2013) 418–435, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-012-0319-0. [67] R.D. Ahuja, T.A. Michels, M.M. Walker, M. Weissbuch, Teen perceptions of disclosure in buzz marketing, Journal of Consumer Marketing 24 (3) (2007) 151–159, https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760710746157. [68] R.B. Cialdini, Influence: How and Why People Agree to Things, 1st ed., Morrow, New York, 1984. [69] D.S. Sundaram, K. Mitra, C. Webster, Word-of-mouth communications: a motivational analysis, Advances in Consumer Research 25 (1) (1998) 527–531. [70] M.R. Forehand, S. Grier, When is honesty the best policy? The effect of stated company intent on consumer skepticism, Journal of Consumer Psychology 13 (3) (2003) 349–356, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1303_15. [71] E. Nekmat, K.K. Gower, Effects of disclosure and message valence in online word-ofmouth (ewom) communication: implications for integrated marketing communication, International Journal of Integrated Marketing Communications 4 (1) (2012) 85–98.
[72] S.N. Ahmad, M. Laroche, Analyzing electronic word of mouth: a social commerce construct, International Journal of Information Management 37 (3) (2017) 202–213, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2016.08.004. [73] S.N. Ahmad, Uncovering the paths to helpful reviews using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis, Journal of Marketing Analytics 5 (2) (2017) 47–56, https:// doi.org/10.1057/s41270-017-0015-5. [74] C.T. Carr, R.A. Hayes, The effect of disclosure of third-party influence on an opinion leader’s credibility and electronic word of mouth in two-step flow, Journal of Interactive Advertising 14 (1) (2014) 38–50, https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019. 2014.909296. [75] Y. Trope, N. Liberman, Construal-level theory of psychological distance, Psychological Review 117 (2) (2010) 440–463, https://doi.org/10.1037/ a0018963. [76] Z. Liu, S. Park, What makes a useful online review? Implication for travel product websites, Tourism Management 47 (2015) 140–151, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tourman.2014.09.020. [77] S. Perez, Amazon Bans Incentized Reviews Tied to Free or Discounted Products, Retrieved from, Oct 3, 2016. https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/03/amazon-bansincentivized-reviews-tied-to-free-or-discounted-products/. [78] D.J. Bosman, C. Boshoff, G.-J. van Rooyen, The review credibility of electronic word-of-mouth communication on e-commerce platforms, Management Dynamics 22 (3) (2013) 29–44. [79] P.M. Herr, F.R. Kardes, J. Kim, Effects of word-of-mouth and product-attribute information on persuasion: an accessibility-diagnosticity perspective, Journal of Consumer Research 17 (4) (1991) 454–462, https://doi.org/10.1086/208570.
Al-Natour S, Turetken O, (2020), A comparative assessment of sentiment analysis and star ratings for consumer reviews, International Journal of Information Management, Volume 54, October 2020, 102132
Mots clés : Analyse des sentiments, Bouche à oreille, Avis des consommateurs, Apprentissage automatique, Évaluation comparative
Résumé : Le bouche à oreille électronique est important et abondant dans les domaines de consommation. Les consommateurs et les fournisseurs de produits / services ont besoin d’aide pour comprendre et naviguer dans les espaces d’informations qui en résultent, qui sont vastes et dynamiques. Le ton général ou la polarité des avis, blogs ou tweets fournit une telle aide. Dans cet article, nous explorons la viabilité de l’analyse automatique des sentiments pour évaluer la polarité d’un produit ou d’un examen de service. Pour ce faire, nous examinons le potentiel des principales approches de l’analyse des sentiments, ainsi que les notes en étoiles, pour capturer le véritable sentiment d’un avis
Grandes lignes :
L’analyse des sentiments peut être utilisée pour déterminer le ton général d’un avis de consommateur.
Nous comparons la sortie de plusieurs outils d’analyse des sentiments entre eux et avec les notes en étoiles.
Les résultats montrent que l’analyse des sentiments peut remplacer, et surpasse souvent, les notes.
Facteurs contextuels, tels que le type de produit, une précision d’analyse des sentiments modérée.
Agarwal et al., 2011A. Agarwal, B. Xie, I. Vovsha, O. Rambow, R.J. PassonneauSentiment analysis of twitter dataProceedings of the Workshop on Language in Social Media (LSM 2011) (2011), pp. 30-38
Alaei et al., 2019A.R. Alaei, S. Becken, B. StanticSentiment analysis in tourism: Capitalizing on big dataJournal of Travel Research, 58 (2) (2019), pp. 175-191
Annett and Kondrak, 2008M. Annett, G. KondrakA Comparison of Sentiment Analysis Techniques: Polarizing Movie Blogs, Paper Presented at the Conference of the Canadian Society for Computational Studies of Intelligence (2008)
Appel et al., 2016O. Appel, F. Chiclana, J. Carter, H. FujitaA hybrid approach to the sentiment analysis problem at the sentence levelKnowledge-Based Systems, 108 (2016), pp. 110-124
Bulbul et al., 2014C. Bulbul, N. Gross, S. Shin, J. KatzWhen the path to purchase becomes the path to purposeThink with google (2014
Chang et al., 2017Y.-C. Chang, C.-H. Ku, C.-H. ChenSocial media analytics: Extracting and visualizing Hilton hotel ratings and reviews from TripAdvisorInternational Journal of Information Management (2017)
Chatterjee, 2019S. ChatterjeeExplaining customer ratings and recommendations by combining qualitative and quantitative user generated contentsDecision Support Systems, 119 (2019), pp. 14-22
Chen and Xie, 2008Y. Chen, J. XieOnline consumer review: Word-of-mouth as a new element of marketing communication mixManagement Science, 54 (3) (2008), pp. 477-491
Cheung and Lee, 2012C.M. Cheung, M.K. LeeWhat drives consumers to spread electronic word of mouth in online consumer-opinion platformsDecision Support Systems, 53 (1) (2012), pp. 218-225
Chopra et al., 2016D. Chopra, N. Joshi, I. MathurMastering natural language processing with pythonPackt Publishing Ltd. (2016)
Cicchetti, 1994D.V. CicchettiGuidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychologyPsychological Assessment, 6 (4) (1994), p. 284
Dang et al., 2009Y. Dang, Y. Zhang, H. ChenA lexicon-enhanced method for sentiment classification: An experiment on online product reviewsIEEE Intelligent Systems, 25 (4) (2009), pp. 46-53
Dang et al., 2010Y. Dang, Y. Zhang, H. ChenA lexicon-enhanced method for sentiment classification: An experiment on online product reviewsIEEE Intelligent Systems, 25 (4) (2010), pp. 46-53
De Maeyer, 2012P. De MaeyerImpact of online consumer reviews on sales and price strategies: A review and directions for future researchJournal of Product and Brand Management, 21 (2) (2012), pp. 132-139
Feldman, 2013R. FeldmanTechniques and applications for sentiment analysisCommunications of the ACM, 56 (4) (2013), pp. 82-89
Gao et al., 2015S. Gao, J. Hao, Y. FuThe Application and Comparison of Web Services for Sentiment Analysis in Tourism, Paper Presented at the 2015 12th International Conference on Service Systems and Service Management (ICSSSM) (2015)
Ghasemaghaei et al., 2018M. Ghasemaghaei, S.P. Eslami, K. Deal, K. HassaneinReviews’ length and sentiment as correlates of online reviews’ ratingsInternet Research, 28 (3) (2018), pp. 544-563
Giatsoglou et al., 2017M. Giatsoglou, M.G. Vozalis, K. Diamantaras, A. Vakali, G. Sarigiannidis, K.C. ChatzisavvasSentiment analysis leveraging emotions and word embeddingsExpert Systems with Applications, 69 (2017), pp. 214-224
Greco and Polli, 2019F. Greco, A. PolliEmotional text mining: Customer profiling in brand managementInternational Journal of Information Management (2019)
Griffin and Gonzalez, 1995D. Griffin, R. GonzalezCorrelational analysis of dyad-level data in the exchangeable casePsychological Bulletin, 118 (3) (1995), p. 430
Hasan et al., 2018A. Hasan, S. Moin, A. Karim, S. ShamshirbandMachine learning-based sentiment analysis for twitter accountsMathematical and Computational Applications, 23 (1) (2018), p. 11
Hu and Chen, 2016Y.-H. Hu, K. ChenPredicting hotel review helpfulness: The impact of review visibility, and interaction between hotel stars and review ratingsInternational Journal of Information Management, 36 (6) (2016), pp. 929-944
Hutto and Gilbert, 2014C.J. Hutto, E. GilbertVader: A Parsimonious Rule-Based Model for Sentiment Analysis of Social media Text, Paper Presented at the Eighth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social media (2014)
Jeong et al., 2017B. Jeong, J. Yoon, J.-M. LeeSocial media mining for product planning: A product opportunity mining approach based on topic modeling and sentiment analysisInternational Journal of Information Management, 48 (2017), pp. 280-290
Kirilenko et al., 2018A.P. Kirilenko, S.O. Stepchenkova, H. Kim, X. LiAutomated sentiment analysis in tourism: Comparison of approachesJournal of Travel Research, 57 (8) (2018), pp. 1012-1025
Koo and Li, 2016T.K. Koo, M.Y. LiA guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability researchJournal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15 (2) (2016), pp. 155-163
Kordzadeh, 2019N. KordzadehInvestigating bias in the online physician reviews published on healthcare organizations’ websitesDecision Support Systems, 118 (2019), pp. 70-82
Lak and Turetken, 2014P. Lak, O. TuretkenStar ratings versus sentiment analysis–a comparison of explicit and implicit measures of opinions2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE (2014), pp. 796-805
Lerner and Tiedens, 2006J.S. Lerner, L.Z. TiedensPortrait of the angry decision maker: How appraisal tendencies shape anger’s influence on cognitionJournal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19 (2) (2006), pp. 115-137
Liu, 2010B. LiuSentiment analysis and subjectivityHandbook of Natural Language Processing, 2 (2010) (2010), pp. 627-666
Liu, 2012B. LiuSentiment analysis and opinion miningSynthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies, 5 (1) (2012), pp. 1-167
Maqsood et al., 2020H. Maqsood, I. Mehmood, M. Maqsood, M. Yasir, S. Afzal, F. Aadil, M. Selim, K. MuhammadA local and global event sentiment based efficient stock exchange forecasting using deep learningInternational Journal of Information Management, 50 (2020), pp. 432-451
Mills and Law, 2004J.E. Mills, R. LawHandbook of consumer behavior, tourism, and the internetPsychology Press (2004)
Moraes et al., 2013R. Moraes, J.F. Valiati, W.P.G. NetoDocument-level sentiment classification: An empirical comparison between SVM and ANNExpert Systems with Applications, 40 (2) (2013), pp. 621-633
Mudambi and Schuff, 2010S.M. Mudambi, D. SchuffWhat makes a helpful review? A study of customer reviews on Amazon. comMIS Quarterly, 34 (1) (2010), pp. 185-200CrossRef
Nasukawa and Yi, 2003T. Nasukawa, J. YiSentiment Analysis: Capturing Favorability Using Natural Language Processing, Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Knowledge Capture (2003)
Nelson, 1970P. NelsonInformation and consumer behaviorThe Journal of Political Economy, 78 (2) (1970), pp. 311-329
Nielsen, 2015M.A. NielsenNeural networks and deep learning, Vol. 2018, Determination press, San Francisco, CA, USA (2015)Pang and Lee, 2005B. Pang, L. LeeSeeing stars: Exploiting class relationships for sentiment categorization with respect to rating scalesProceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Computational Linguistics (2005), pp. 115-124
Pavlou and Dimoka, 2006P.A. Pavlou, A. DimokaThe nature and role of feedback text comments in online marketplaces: Implications for trust building, price premiums, and seller differentiationInformation Systems Research, 17 (4) (2006), pp. 392-414
Payne et al., 1993J.W. Payne, J.R. Bettman, E.J. JohnsonThe adaptive decision makerCambridge University Press (1993)
Philander and Zhong, 2016K. Philander, Y. ZhongTwitter sentiment analysis: Capturing sentiment from integrated resort tweetsInternational Journal of Hospitality Management, 55 (2016) (2016), pp. 16-24
Pirolli, 2007P. PirolliInformation foraging theory: Adaptive interaction with informationOxford University Press (2007)Google Sch
olarPozzi et al., 2016F.A. Pozzi, E. Fersini, E. Messina, B. LiuSentiment analysis in social networksMorgan Kaufmann (2016)
Prabowo and Thelwall, 2009R. Prabowo, M. ThelwallSentiment analysis: A combined approachJournal of Informetrics, 3 (2) (2009), pp. 143-157
Pradhan et al., 2016V.M. Pradhan, J. Vala, P. BalaniA survey on Sentiment Analysis Algorithms for opinion miningInternational Journal of Computer Applications, 133 (9) (2016), pp. 7-11
Qiu et al., 2012L. Qiu, J. Pang, K.H. LimEffects of conflicting aggregated rating on eWOM review credibility and diagnosticity: The moderating role of review valenceDecision Support Systems, 54 (1) (2012), pp. 631-643
Ragini et al., 2018J.R. Ragini, P.R. Anand, V. BhaskarBig data analytics for disaster response and recovery through sentiment analysisInternational Journal of Information Management, 42 (2018), pp. 13-24
Rathore and Ilavarasan, 2020A.K. Rathore, P.V. IlavarasanPre-and post-launch emotions in new product development: Insights from twitter analytics of three productsInternational Journal of Information Management, 50 (2020), pp. 111-127
Ribeiro et al., 2016F.N. Ribeiro, M. Araújo, P. Gonçalves, M.A. Gonçalves, F. BenevenutoSentibench-a benchmark comparison of state-of-the-practice sentiment analysis methodsEPJ Data Science, 5 (1) (2016), p. 23
Roussinov and Turetken, 2009D. Roussinov, O. TuretkenExploring models for semantic category verificationInformation Systems, 34 (8) (2009), pp. 753-765
Saif et al., 2016H. Saif, Y. He, M. Fernandez, H. AlaniContextual semantics for sentiment analysis of TwitterInformation Processing & Management, 52 (1) (2016), pp. 5-19
Schuckert et al., 2015M. Schuckert, X. Liu, R. LawHospitality and tourism online reviews: Recent trends and future directionsJournal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 32 (5) (2015), pp. 608-62
Schumaker et al., 2012R.P. Schumaker, Y. Zhang, C.-N. Huang, H. ChenEvaluating sentiment in financial news articlesDecision Support Systems, 53 (3) (2012), pp. 458-464
Taboada et al., 2011M. Taboada, J. Brooke, M. Tofiloski, K. Voll, M. StedeLexicon-based methods for sentiment analysisComputational Linguistics, 37 (2) (2011), pp. 267-307
Thavasimani and Missier, 2016P. Thavasimani, P. MissierFacilitating Reproducible Research by Investigating Computational Metadata, Paper Presented at the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data) (2016)
Valdivia et al., 2017A. Valdivia, M.V. Luzón, F. HerreraSentiment analysis in tripadvisorIEEE Intelligent Systems, 32 (4) (2017), pp. 72-77
Vijayarani and Janani, 2016S. Vijayarani, R. JananiText mining: Open source tokenization tools-an analysisAdvanced Computational Intelligence: An International Journal (ACII), 3 (1) (2016), pp. 37-47
Wang et al., 2015Y. Wang, J. Yuan, J. LuoAmerica Tweets China: A Fine-Grained Analysis of the State and Individual Characteristics Regarding Attitudes Towards China, Paper Presented at the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data). (2015)
Wilson et al., 2005T. Wilson, J. Wiebe, P. HoffmannRecognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysisProceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (2005), pp. 347-354
Wu et al., 2019P. Wu, X. Li, S. Shen, D. HeSocial media opinion summarization using emotion cognition and convolutional neural networksInternational Journal of Information Management (2019)
Ye et al., 2009Q. Ye, Z. Zhang, R. LawSentiment classification of online reviews to travel destinations by supervised machine learning approachesExpert Systems with Applications, 36 (3) (2009), pp. 6527-6535
Zhang et al., 2011Z. Zhang, Q. Ye, Z. Zhang, Y. LiSentiment classification of Internet restaurant reviews written in CantoneseExpert Systems with Applications, 38 (6) (2011), pp. 7674-7682
Zhao et al., 2012J. Zhao, L. Dong, J. Wu, K. XuMoodlens: An Emoticon-Based Sentiment Analysis System for Chinese Tweets, Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (2012)
Zhu and Zhang, 2010F. Zhu, X. ZhangImpact of online consumer reviews on sales: The moderating role of product and consumer characteristicsJournal of Marketing, 74 (2) (2010), pp. 133-148
Eslami S, Ghasemaghaei M, Hassanein K, (2018), Which online reviews do consumers find most helpful? A multi-method investigation, Decision Support Systems, Volume 113, September 2018, Pages 32-42
Mots clés : Avis des consommateurs en ligne, Réseau neuronal artificiel, Analyse des sentiments, Durée de l’examen, Note d’évaluation
Résumé : Bien qu’il existe des preuves que la longueur de l’examen, le score de l’examen et le cadre d’argumentation peuvent avoir une incidence sur les perceptions des consommateurs concernant l’utilité des évaluations des consommateurs en ligne, les études n’ont pas encore identifié les niveaux les plus appropriés de ces facteurs en termes de maximisation de l’utilité perçue de ces évaluations. En nous appuyant sur les théories du biais de négativité et de la sommation des indices, nous proposons un modèle théorique qui explique l’utilité des revues en ligne en fonction des caractéristiques spécifiques de ces revues (c.-à-d. La longueur, le score, la trame d’argument). Le modèle est validé empiriquement à l’aide de deux ensembles de données d’avis de consommateurs en ligne liés aux produits et services d’Amazon.com et Insureye.com respectivement. De plus, nous utilisons un réseau neuronal artificiel comme approche pour prédire l’utilité d’un examen donné en fonction de ses caractéristiques. Les résultats révèlent que les avis de consommateurs en ligne les plus utiles sont ceux qui sont associés à une longueur moyenne, à des notes d’avis plus faibles et à un cadre d’arguments négatif ou neutre. Les résultats révèlent également qu’il n’y a pas de différence majeure entre les caractéristiques des avis de consommateurs en ligne les plus utiles concernant les produits ou services. Enfin, les résultats révèlent que le facteur le plus utile pour prédire l’utilité d’un avis de consommateur en ligne est la longueur de l’avis. Les contributions théoriques et pratiques sont décrites.
Grandes lignes :
Plusieurs méthodes ont été utilisées, notamment l’analyse des sentiments.
Les avis utiles ont une longueur moyenne, des scores inférieurs et un cadre d’arguments négatif.
Il n’y a aucune différence entre les avis les plus utiles sur les produits ou services.
Le facteur le plus utile pour prédire l’utilité d’un avis de consommateur est la longueur.
[1] M. Salehan, D.J. Kim, Predicting the performance of online consumer reviews: a
sentiment mining approach to big data analytics, Decision Support Systems 81
(2016) 30–40.
[2] N. Amblee, T. Bui, Freeware downloads: an empirical investigation into the impact
of expert and user reviews on demand for digital goods, AMCIS 2007 Proceedings,
2007, p. 21.
[3] J.A. Chevalier, D. Mayzlin, The effect of word of mouth on sales: online book reviews, Journal of Marketing Research 43 (3) (2006) 345–354.
[4] R. Kohli, S. Devaraj, M.A. Mahmood, Understanding determinants of online consumer satisfaction: a decision process perspective, Journal of Management
Information Systems 21 (1) (2004) 115–136.
[5] F. Zhu, X. Zhang, Impact of online consumer reviews on sales: the moderating role
of product and consumer characteristics, Journal of Marketing 74 (2) (2010)
133–148.
[6] D.D. Chaudhari, R.A. Deshmukh, A.B. Bagwan, P.K. Deshmukh, Feature based approach for review mining using appraisal words, Emerging Trends in
Communication, Control, Signal Processing & Computing Applications (C2SPCA),
2013 International Conference On, IEEE, 2013, pp. 1–5.
[7] J.P. Singh, S. Irani, N.P. Rana, Y.K. Dwivedi, S. Saumya, P.K. Roy, Predicting the
‘Helpfulness’ of online consumer reviews, Journal of Business Research 70 (2017)
346–355.
[8] K. Shrestha, 50 Important Online Reviews Stats You Need to Know [Infographic],
2016 Vendasta Blog, 2016 August 29 https://www.vendasta.com/blog/50-statsyou-need-to-know-about-online-reviews , Accessed date: 24 February 2018.
[9] M. Ghasemaghaei, S.P. Eslami, K. Deal, K. Hassanein, Consumers’ Attitude toward
Insurance Companies: A Sentiment Analysis of Online Consumer Reviews, (2016).
[10] S.S. Srinivasan, R. Anderson, K. Ponnavolu, Customer loyalty in e-commerce: an
exploration of its antecedents and consequences, Journal of Retailing 78 (1) (2002)
[12] C. Pongpatipat, Y. Liu-Thompkins, Beyond information: how consumers use online
reviews to manage social impressions, Let’s Get Engaged! Crossing the Threshold of
Marketing’s Engagement Era, Springer, 2016, pp. 103–104.
[13] A. Minnema, T.H. Bijmolt, S. Gensler, T. Wiesel, To keep or not to keep: effects of
online customer reviews on product returns, Journal of Retailing 92 (3) (2016)
253–267.
[14] Q. Cao, W. Duan, Q. Gan, Exploring determinants of voting for the ‘Helpfulness’ of
online user reviews: a text mining approach, Decision Support Systems 50 (2)
(2011) 511–521.
[15] X. Liu, M. He, F. Gao, P. Xie, An empirical study of online shopping customer satisfaction in China: a holistic perspective, International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management 36 (11) (2008) 919–940.
[16] D. Yin, S. Bond, H. Zhang, Anxious or Angry? Effects of Discrete Emotions on the
Perceived Helpfulness of Online Reviews, (2013).
[17] R. Filieri, What makes online reviews helpful? A diagnosticity-adoption framework
to explain informational and normative influences in e-WOM, Journal of Business
Research 68 (6) (2015) 1261–1270.
[18] L. Qiu, J. Pang, K.H. Lim, Effects of conflicting aggregated rating on EWOM review
credibility and diagnosticity: the moderating role of review valence, Decision
Support Systems 54 (1) (2012) 631–643.
[19] A. Ghose, P.G. Ipeirotis, Estimating the helpfulness and economic impact of product
reviews: mining text and reviewer characteristics, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge
and Data Engineering 23 (10) (2011) 1498–1512.
[20] N. Korfiatis, E. García-Bariocanal, S. Sánchez-Alonso, Evaluating content quality
and helpfulness of online product reviews: the interplay of review helpfulness vs.
review content, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 11 (3) (2012)
205–217.
[21] N. Hu, N.S. Koh, S.K. Reddy, Ratings lead you to the product, reviews help you
clinch it? The mediating role of online review sentiments on product sales, Decision
Support Systems 57 (2014) 42–53.
[22] S.M. Mudambi, D. Schuff, What Makes a Helpful Review? A Study of Customer
Reviews on Amazon.com. (2010).
[23] A. Qazi, K.B.S. Syed, R.G. Raj, E. Cambria, M. Tahir, D. Alghazzawi, A concept-level
approach to the analysis of online review helpfulness, Computers in Human
Behavior 58 (2016) 75–81.
[24] K.Z. Zhang, S.J. Zhao, C.M. Cheung, M.K. Lee, Examining the influence of online
reviews on consumers’ decision-making: a heuristic–systematic model, Decision
Support Systems 67 (2014) 78–89.
[25] M. Kim, J.-H. Kim, S.J. Lennon, Online service attributes available on apparel retail
web sites: an ES-QUAL approach, Managing Service Quality: An International
Journal 16 (1) (2006) 51–77.
[26] S.-M. Kim, E. Hovy, Automatic identification of pro and con reasons in online
reviews, Proceedings of the COLING/ACL on Main Conference Poster Sessions,
Association for Computational Linguistics, 2006, pp. 483–490.
[27] R.M. Schindler, B. Bickart, Perceived helpfulness of online consumer reviews: the
role of message content and style, Journal of Consumer Behaviour 11 (3) (2012)
[39] N.E. Miller, Graphic communication and the crisis in education, Audio Visual
Communication Review (1957) 1–120.
[40] J.-K. Hsieh, Y.-C. Hsieh, Y.-C. Tang, Exploring the disseminating behaviors of
EWOM marketing: persuasion in online video, Electronic Commerce Research 12
(2) (2012) 201–224.
[41] G. Wang, X. Liu, W. Fan, A Knowledge Adoption Model Based Framework for
Finding Helpful User-generated Contents in Online Communities, (2011).
[42] L.M. Willemsen, P.C. Neijens, F. Bronner, J.A. De Ridder, ‘Highly Recommended!’
The content characteristics and perceived usefulness of online consumer reviews,
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17 (1) (2011) 19–38.
[43] D.E. Kanouse, L.R. Hanson Jr., Negativity in evaluations, Preparation of This Paper
Grew out of a Workshop on Attribution Theory Held at University of California, Los
Angeles, Aug 1969, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 1987.
[44] P. Rozin, E.B. Royzman, Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion,
Personality and Social Psychology Review 5 (4) (2001) 296–320.
[45] S. Sen, D. Lerman, Why are you telling me this? An examination into negative
consumer reviews on the web, Journal of Interactive Marketing 21 (4) (2007)
76–94.
[46] P.M. Herr, F.R. Kardes, J. Kim, Effects of word-of-mouth and product-attribute information on persuasion: an accessibility-diagnosticity perspective, Journal of
Consumer Research 17 (4) (1991) 454–462.
[47] M. Lee, S. Youn, Electronic word of mouth (EWOM) how EWOM platforms influence consumer product judgement, International Journal of Advertising 28 (3)
(2009) 473–499.
[48] Z. Zhang, Q. Ye, R. Law, Y. Li, The impact of e-word-of-mouth on the online popularity of restaurants: a comparison of consumer reviews and editor reviews,
International Journal of Hospitality Management 29 (4) (2010) 694–700.
[49] M.S. Eastin, Credibility assessments of online health information: the effects of
source expertise and knowledge of content, Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication 6 (4) (2001) (0–0).
[50] C. Park, T.M. Lee, Antecedents of online reviews’ usage and purchase influence: an
empirical comparison of US and Korean consumers, Journal of Interactive
Marketing 23 (4) (2009) 332–340.
[51] M.-A. Reinhard, S.L. Sporer, Content versus source cue information as a basis for
credibility judgments, Social Psychology 41 (2010) 93–104.
[52] C. Park, T.M. Lee, Information direction, website reputation and EWOM effect: a
moderating role of product type, Journal of Business Research 62 (1) (2009) 61–67.
[53] P. Racherla, W. Friske, Perceived ‘Usefulness’ of online consumer reviews: an exploratory investigation across three services categories, Electronic Commerce
Research and Applications 11 (6) (2012) 548–559.
[54] X. Bai, Predicting consumer sentiments from online text, Decision Support Systems
50 (4) (2011) 732–742.
[55] S. Brody, N. Elhadad, An unsupervised aspect-sentiment model for online reviews,
Human Language Technologies: The 2010 Annual Conference of the North
American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for
Computational Linguistics, 2010, pp. 804–812.
[56] Y. Jo, A.H. Oh, Aspect and sentiment unification model for online review analysis,
Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data
Mining, ACM, 2011, pp. 815–824.
[57] N. Li, D.D. Wu, Using text mining and sentiment analysis for online forums hotspot
detection and forecast, Decision Support Systems 48 (2) (2010) 354–368.
S.P. Eslami et al. Decision Support Systems 113 (2018) 32–42
41
[58] I. Maks, P. Vossen, A lexicon model for deep sentiment analysis and opinion mining
applications, Decision Support Systems 53 (4) (2012) 680–688.
[59] Q. Ye, R. Law, B. Gu, The impact of online user reviews on hotel room sales,
International Journal of Hospitality Management 28 (1) (2009) 180–182.
[60] J.B. Walther, K.P. D’Addario, The impacts of emoticons on message interpretation in
computer-mediated communication, Social Science Computer Review 19 (3) (2001)
324–347.
[61] N. Hu, I. Bose, N.S. Koh, L. Liu, Manipulation of online reviews: an analysis of
ratings, readability, and sentiments, Decision Support Systems 52 (3) (2012)
674–684.
[62] T.A. Ito, J.T. Larsen, N.K. Smith, J.T. Cacioppo, Negative information weighs more
heavily on the brain: the negativity bias in evaluative categorizations, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 75 (4) (1998) 887.
[63] R.F. Baumeister, E. Bratslavsky, C. Finkenauer, K.D. Vohs, Bad is stronger than
good, Review of General Psychology 5 (4) (2001) 323.
[64] B. Rimé, Emotion elicits the social sharing of emotion: theory and empirical review,
Emotion Review 1 (1) (2009) 60–85.
[65] B. Rimé, C. Finkenauer, O. Luminet, E. Zech, P. Philippot, Social sharing of emotion:
new evidence and new questions, European Review of Social Psychology 9 (1)
(1998) 145–189.
[66] C.E. Osgood, P.H. Tannenbaum, The principle of congruity in the prediction of
[67] T.M. Newcomb, Interpersonal balance, Theories of Cognitive Consistency: A
Sourcebook, 1968, pp. 28–51.
[68] M. Ghasemaghaei, S.P. Eslami, K. Deal, K. Hassanein, Reviews’ length and sentiment
as correlates of online reviews’ ratings, Internet Research 28 (3) (2018) 544–563.
[69] R. He, J. McAuley, VBPR: Visual Bayesian Personalized Ranking From Implicit
Feedback, AAAI, 2016, pp. 144–150.
[70] J. McAuley, R. Pandey, J. Leskovec, Inferring networks of substitutable and complementary products, Proceedings of the 21th ACM SIGKDD International
Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, ACM, 2015, pp. 785–794.
[71] Y. Yu, W. Duan, Q. Cao, The impact of social and conventional media on firm equity
value: a sentiment analysis approach, Decision Support Systems 55 (4) (2013)
919–926.
[72] J. Berger, A.T. Sorensen, S.J. Rasmussen, Positive effects of negative publicity:
[73] W. Duan, B. Gu, A.B. Whinston, Do online reviews matter?—an empirical investigation of panel data, Decision Support Systems 45 (4) (2008) 1007–1016.
[74] S.R. Das, M.Y. Chen, Yahoo! for Amazon: sentiment extraction from small talk on
the web, Management Science 53 (9) (2007) 1375–1388.
[75] A. Collomb, C. Costea, D. Joyeux, O. Hasan, L. Brunie, A study and comparison of
sentiment analysis methods for reputation evaluation, Rapport de Recherche RRLIRIS-2014-002, 2014.
[76] B. Liu, Sentiment analysis and subjectivity, Handbook of Natural Language
Processing, 2 2010, pp. 627–666.
[77] E. Cambria, B. Schuller, Y. Xia, C. Havasi, New avenues in opinion mining and
sentiment analysis, IEEE Intelligent Systems 28 (2) (2013) 15–21.
[78] B. Pang, L. Lee, Opinion mining and sentiment analysis, Foundations and Trends® in
Information Retrieval 2 (1–2) (2008) 1–135.
[79] M. Taboada, J. Brooke, M. Tofiloski, K. Voll, M. Stede, Lexicon-based methods for
