Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34608343›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science2022

Salient knowledge that others are also evaluating reduces judgment extremity.

Claire I Tsai, Min Zhao, Dilip Soman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Claire I TsaiRotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3E6 Canada.
Min ZhaoCarroll School of Management, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9539-5038
Dilip SomanRotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3E6 Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As companies increasingly conduct marketing research online (e.g., through social networking sites or their brand community platforms), the knowledge that others are also filling out the same surveys becomes increasingly salient to respondents. This research examines how the salience of this knowledge influences consumer judgments. Two important characteristics of our research paradigm are especially relevant to digital contexts: (1) judgements made by the consumers are neither observable nor subject to others' disapproval; and (2) consensus is not observable or verifiable. Nevertheless, in six main studies and one auxiliary study (Web Appendix), we found that high knowledge salience of others also evaluating reduced judgment extremity. Judgment extremity is quantified by the degree or strength of an evaluation or numeric estimate about a judgment target. This effect was driven by consumers' tendency to predict a moderate consensus and to conform to this perception. Implications for marketing research and crowdsourcing are discussed. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11747-021-00807-w.

Indexed as

ConformityCrowdsourcingDigital surveyMarketing researchPresence of othersSocial normWeb surveys

Identifiers

PMID34608343
PMCPMC8480460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.