MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W612103079

An Exploratory Study of the Effects of Price Decreases on Online Product Reviews: Focusing on Amazon’s Kindle 2

2013· article· en· W612103079 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Jin, Sung‐Byung Yang, Cheul Rhee, Kyung Young Lee

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Asia Conference on Information Systems · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPurchasingProduct (mathematics)Amazon rainforestExploratory researchBusinessAdvertisingMarketingEconomicsSociologyMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As online shopping proliferates, online product reviews (OPRs) play a crucial role in online consumers’ purchasing decisions. Although prior research on the effects of price changes on consumer reactions has provided insightful implications, little is known about the impact of price changes on the characteristics of OPRs. With the growing importance of OPRs as a key social recommendation system for potential consumers’ decision-making, it is important to understand the dynamics of OPRs around price changes. We select the Kindle 2 from Amazon.com as our focal product and conduct an exploratory case study. By analyzing 6,714 reviews on the Kindle 2, we examine how consumers respond to price decreases using OPRs. The results show that all four characteristics of OPRs (star-rating, review depth, positive emotion, and negative emotion) are significantly influenced by price decreases. Moreover, we found that the impacts of price decreases on OPRs’ characteristics are different between the first and the second attempts at price reduction. Interestingly, the number of reviews per day significantly soars immediately after the first price decrease, while there is no significant change in the number of reviews after the second price cut. We conclude the paper with a discussion of our findings.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePacific Asia Conference on Information SystemsSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207