It’s not fake, it’s biased: insights into morality of incentivized reviewers

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper was to uncover morality and dynamics of community of incentivized reviewers who primarily review products on Amazon.com. and, as of late, on various social media platforms. This study is important because it uncovers unknown dynamics that shapes consumer morality and drives reviewer’s ethics. Given the fact that consumers heavily rely on reviews, findings of this paper are of great values to practitioners, consumers and policymakers and highlight potential area of research particularly related to morality.

Design/methodology/approach

This study, conducted over a period of 1.5 years, relying on a netnography to collect data and thematic analysis to make sense of data, uncovered behaviors that contribute to the J-shape distribution of reviews on Amazon.com and questionable reviewer ethics.

Findings

Findings of this study suggest suppressed consumer morality driven by desire to gain benefits in form of free products and manipulation of the review system in an attempt to boost sales and the prevalence of biased reviews. The findings shed light on overconsumption driven by an opportunity to receive free products, introduction of review bias into the public domain and attempts to manipulate Amazon’s algorithms.

Research limitations/implications

Findings of this study carry tremendous implications for average consumer who relies on consumer-generated reviews without realizing the presence of bias. Furthermore, the findings shed light of unfair business practices of sellers who demand high ratings. Finally, the findings suggest that there is opportunity for policymakers to address a loophole because incentivized reviewers, regardless of Federal Trade Commission regulations, may be operating in gray area, much less controlled than advertising.

Originality/value

This study is unique because while other studies may conduct similar netnographies of reviewing communities, this community was examined during a span that covered the incentivized reviewing boom, Amazon’s ban on incentivized reviewing, and the revival of reviewing activity post ban. Given recent changes to Amazon’s Terms of Service, the researcher documented changes that future studies will not be able to examine unless data have already been collected. However, post ban activity continues and is likely affecting purchasing decisions of unsuspecting consumers all around.

Citation

Rynarzewska, A.I. (2019), "It’s not fake, it’s biased: insights into morality of incentivized reviewers", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 401-409. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-02-2018-2570