The Impact of Ambivalent Attitudes on the Helpfulness of Web-Based Reviews: Secondary Analysis of Data From a Large Physician Review Website

BackgroundPreviously, most studies used 5-star and 1-star ratings to represent reviewers’ positive and negative attitudes, respectively. However, this premise is not always true because individuals’ attitudes have more than one dimension. In particular, given the credence tra...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Wei Dong, Yongmei Liu, Zhangxiang Zhu, Xianye Cao
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: JMIR Publications 2023-05-01
Series:Journal of Medical Internet Research
Online Access:https://www.jmir.org/2023/1/e38306
_version_ 1797734139200274432
author Wei Dong
Yongmei Liu
Zhangxiang Zhu
Xianye Cao
author_facet Wei Dong
Yongmei Liu
Zhangxiang Zhu
Xianye Cao
author_sort Wei Dong
collection DOAJ
description BackgroundPreviously, most studies used 5-star and 1-star ratings to represent reviewers’ positive and negative attitudes, respectively. However, this premise is not always true because individuals’ attitudes have more than one dimension. In particular, given the credence traits of medical service, to build durable physician-patient relationships, patients may rate their physicians with high scores to avoid lowering their physicians’ web-based ratings and help build their physicians’ web-based reputations. Some patients may express complaints only in review texts, resulting in ambivalence, such as conflicting feelings, beliefs, and reactions toward physicians. Thus, web-based rating platforms for medical services may face more ambivalence than platforms for search or experience goods. ObjectiveOn the basis of the tripartite model of attitudes and uncertainty reduction theory, this study aims to consider both the numerical rating and sentiment of each web-based review to explore whether there is ambivalence and how ambivalent attitudes influence the helpfulness of web-based reviews. MethodsThis study collected 114,378 reviews of 3906 physicians on a large physician review website. Then, based on existing literature, we operationalized numerical ratings as the cognitive dimension of attitudes and sentiment in review texts as the affective dimension of attitudes. Several econometric models, including the ordinary least squares model, logistic regression model, and Tobit model, were used to test our research model. ResultsFirst, this study confirmed the existence of ambivalence in each web-based review. Then, by measuring ambivalence through the inconsistency between the numerical rating and sentiment for each review, this study found that the ambivalence in different web-based reviews has a different impact on the helpfulness of the reviews. Specifically, for reviews with positive emotional valence, the higher the degree of inconsistency between the numerical rating and sentiment, the greater the helpfulness is (βpositive 1=.046; P<.001). For reviews with negative and neutral emotional valence, the impact is opposite, that is, the higher the degree of inconsistency between the numerical rating and sentiment, the lesser the helpfulness is (βnegative 1=−.059, P<.001; βneutral 1=−.030, P=.22). Considering the traits of the data, the results were also verified using the logistic regression model (θpositive 1=0.056, P=.005; θnegative 1=−0.080, P<.001; θneutral 1=−0.060, P=.03) and Tobit model. ConclusionsThis study confirmed the existence of ambivalence between the cognitive and affective dimensions in single reviews and found that for reviews with positive emotional valence, the ambivalent attitudes lead to more helpfulness, but for reviews with negative and neutral emotion valence, the ambivalence attitudes lead to less helpfulness. The results contribute to the web-based review literature and inspire a better design for rating mechanisms in review websites to enhance the helpfulness of reviews.
first_indexed 2024-03-12T12:38:56Z
format Article
id doaj.art-fe6135d85244401a9479eb23be9a7cf9
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1438-8871
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-12T12:38:56Z
publishDate 2023-05-01
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format Article
series Journal of Medical Internet Research
spelling doaj.art-fe6135d85244401a9479eb23be9a7cf92023-08-28T23:59:22ZengJMIR PublicationsJournal of Medical Internet Research1438-88712023-05-0125e3830610.2196/38306The Impact of Ambivalent Attitudes on the Helpfulness of Web-Based Reviews: Secondary Analysis of Data From a Large Physician Review WebsiteWei Donghttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-9906-5426Yongmei Liuhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-0139-5900Zhangxiang Zhuhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-4917-3274Xianye Caohttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-9819-6958 BackgroundPreviously, most studies used 5-star and 1-star ratings to represent reviewers’ positive and negative attitudes, respectively. However, this premise is not always true because individuals’ attitudes have more than one dimension. In particular, given the credence traits of medical service, to build durable physician-patient relationships, patients may rate their physicians with high scores to avoid lowering their physicians’ web-based ratings and help build their physicians’ web-based reputations. Some patients may express complaints only in review texts, resulting in ambivalence, such as conflicting feelings, beliefs, and reactions toward physicians. Thus, web-based rating platforms for medical services may face more ambivalence than platforms for search or experience goods. ObjectiveOn the basis of the tripartite model of attitudes and uncertainty reduction theory, this study aims to consider both the numerical rating and sentiment of each web-based review to explore whether there is ambivalence and how ambivalent attitudes influence the helpfulness of web-based reviews. MethodsThis study collected 114,378 reviews of 3906 physicians on a large physician review website. Then, based on existing literature, we operationalized numerical ratings as the cognitive dimension of attitudes and sentiment in review texts as the affective dimension of attitudes. Several econometric models, including the ordinary least squares model, logistic regression model, and Tobit model, were used to test our research model. ResultsFirst, this study confirmed the existence of ambivalence in each web-based review. Then, by measuring ambivalence through the inconsistency between the numerical rating and sentiment for each review, this study found that the ambivalence in different web-based reviews has a different impact on the helpfulness of the reviews. Specifically, for reviews with positive emotional valence, the higher the degree of inconsistency between the numerical rating and sentiment, the greater the helpfulness is (βpositive 1=.046; P<.001). For reviews with negative and neutral emotional valence, the impact is opposite, that is, the higher the degree of inconsistency between the numerical rating and sentiment, the lesser the helpfulness is (βnegative 1=−.059, P<.001; βneutral 1=−.030, P=.22). Considering the traits of the data, the results were also verified using the logistic regression model (θpositive 1=0.056, P=.005; θnegative 1=−0.080, P<.001; θneutral 1=−0.060, P=.03) and Tobit model. ConclusionsThis study confirmed the existence of ambivalence between the cognitive and affective dimensions in single reviews and found that for reviews with positive emotional valence, the ambivalent attitudes lead to more helpfulness, but for reviews with negative and neutral emotion valence, the ambivalence attitudes lead to less helpfulness. The results contribute to the web-based review literature and inspire a better design for rating mechanisms in review websites to enhance the helpfulness of reviews.https://www.jmir.org/2023/1/e38306
spellingShingle Wei Dong
Yongmei Liu
Zhangxiang Zhu
Xianye Cao
The Impact of Ambivalent Attitudes on the Helpfulness of Web-Based Reviews: Secondary Analysis of Data From a Large Physician Review Website
Journal of Medical Internet Research
title The Impact of Ambivalent Attitudes on the Helpfulness of Web-Based Reviews: Secondary Analysis of Data From a Large Physician Review Website
title_full The Impact of Ambivalent Attitudes on the Helpfulness of Web-Based Reviews: Secondary Analysis of Data From a Large Physician Review Website
title_fullStr The Impact of Ambivalent Attitudes on the Helpfulness of Web-Based Reviews: Secondary Analysis of Data From a Large Physician Review Website
title_full_unstemmed The Impact of Ambivalent Attitudes on the Helpfulness of Web-Based Reviews: Secondary Analysis of Data From a Large Physician Review Website
title_short The Impact of Ambivalent Attitudes on the Helpfulness of Web-Based Reviews: Secondary Analysis of Data From a Large Physician Review Website
title_sort impact of ambivalent attitudes on the helpfulness of web based reviews secondary analysis of data from a large physician review website
url https://www.jmir.org/2023/1/e38306
work_keys_str_mv AT weidong theimpactofambivalentattitudesonthehelpfulnessofwebbasedreviewssecondaryanalysisofdatafromalargephysicianreviewwebsite
AT yongmeiliu theimpactofambivalentattitudesonthehelpfulnessofwebbasedreviewssecondaryanalysisofdatafromalargephysicianreviewwebsite
AT zhangxiangzhu theimpactofambivalentattitudesonthehelpfulnessofwebbasedreviewssecondaryanalysisofdatafromalargephysicianreviewwebsite
AT xianyecao theimpactofambivalentattitudesonthehelpfulnessofwebbasedreviewssecondaryanalysisofdatafromalargephysicianreviewwebsite
AT weidong impactofambivalentattitudesonthehelpfulnessofwebbasedreviewssecondaryanalysisofdatafromalargephysicianreviewwebsite
AT yongmeiliu impactofambivalentattitudesonthehelpfulnessofwebbasedreviewssecondaryanalysisofdatafromalargephysicianreviewwebsite
AT zhangxiangzhu impactofambivalentattitudesonthehelpfulnessofwebbasedreviewssecondaryanalysisofdatafromalargephysicianreviewwebsite
AT xianyecao impactofambivalentattitudesonthehelpfulnessofwebbasedreviewssecondaryanalysisofdatafromalargephysicianreviewwebsite