Revealing or Non-Revealing: The Impact of Review Disclosure Policy on Firm Profitability

نویسنده

  • Xinxin Li
چکیده

Collecting and displaying product reviews written by consumers is a common practice for many retail websites. These websites, however, differ in their choice to reveal aggregate review statistics on the product list displayed while consumers browse or search to make initial product selections. This study proposes an analytical model to examine the conditions in which revealing average star ratings on the product list is more profitable than not revealing this information. Noting that consumers differ in their valuations of products sold on a firm’s website, this study finds that if a firm sets prices to maximize total profits, it suffers less profitability from disclosing average star ratings if two products do not differ significantly in their average value and consumers’ valuation of the low-value product is more heterogeneous. If products sold on the website instead are priced by third-party sellers that seek to maximize each product’s own profit, it is less profitable for the firm to reveal average rating information when the two products do not differ significantly in average value and consumers’ valuation of the high-value product is more heterogeneous. These results suggest guidelines that retail websites can use to evaluate their information revelation policies, based on three important factors: the difference in the average value of different products, relative heterogeneity in consumers’ valuation of different products, and the firm’s ability to coordinate prices across products.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

The Paradox of Health Policy: Revealing the True Colours of This ‘Chameleon Concept’; Comment on “The Politics and Analytics of Health Policy”

Health policy has been termed a ‘chameleon concept’, referring to its ability to take on different forms of disciplinarity as well as different roles and functions. This paper extends Paton’s analysis by exploring the paradox of health policy as a field of academic inquiry—sitting across many of the boundaries of social science but also marginalised by them. It situates contemporary approaches ...

متن کامل

Revealing Power in Truth; Comment on “Knowledge, Moral Claims and the Exercise of Power in Global Health”

Jeremy Shiffman’s editorial appropriately calls on making all forms of power more apparent and accountable, notably productive power derived from expertise and claims to moral authority. This commentary argues that relationships based on productive power can be especially difficult to reveal in global health policy because of embedded notions about the nature of power and politics. Yet, it is e...

متن کامل

Optimal Disclosure as a Trade-off between Capital and Product Market Considerations: Theory and Evidence

We study how firms’ disclosure decisions are related to their existing financing and production policies. We develop a rational expectations model in which a firm trades off the benefits of more precise disclosure in reducing its cost of capital against the costs of more precise disclosure in potentially revealing confidential information to competitors. Using abnormal return variance and tradi...

متن کامل

Multiple Audiences and Corporate Disclosure

Title of Dissertation: MULTIPLE AUDIENCES AND CORPORATE DISCLOSURE Jing-Wen Yang, Doctor of Philosophy, 2007 Dissertation Directed By: Professor Oliver Kim Department of Accounting and Information Assurance This study contributes to literature in three ways: first, it draws a full picture about the determinants of a firm’s voluntary disclosure decision; second, it aims at tackling the mixed res...

متن کامل

Reporting of Financial and Non-financial Conflicts of Interest in Systematic Reviews on Health Policy and Systems Research: A Cross Sectional Survey

Background Systematic reviews are increasingly used to inform health policy-making. The conflicts of interest (COI) of the authors of systematic reviews may bias their results and influence their conclusions. This may in turn lead to misguided public policies and systems level decisions. In order to mitigate the adverse impact of COI, scientific journals require authors to disclose their COIs. ...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • MIS Quarterly

دوره 41  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2017