ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Shopping for others: how does inconsistency in online reviews affect purchase intentions differently?
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- How Cross-Cue Inconsistency Weakens the Adoption of AI-Generated Review Summaries: The Roles of Diagnosticity, Authenticity, and Review Dispersion.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The product reviews on e-commerce platforms often exhibit inconsistencies in consumer opinions. This raises the question: when consumers purchase products for others, do they place greater importance on inconsistent online reviews? To address this issue, this study explores the impact of online review consistency, social distance, and product type on consumer purchase intentions, based on the theories of psychological distance and construal level. It focuses on examining the moderating roles of social distance and product type in this process. Methods: A scenario-based experimental design was employed to test the hypotheses, with analysis of variance and simple effects tests used for data analysis. Study 1 utilized a 2 (inconsistency of online reviews: inconsistent/consistent) × 2 (social distance: close/remote) between-subjects design. Study 2 employed a 2 (inconsistency of online reviews: inconsistent/consistent) × 2 (social distance: close/remote) × 2 (product type: experience/search) design. Participants in each group were exposed to different experimental conditions and evaluations to assess the impact of online review consistency, social distance, and product type on consumer purchase intentions. Results: The study finds that inconsistency in online reviews significantly negatively impacts consumers' purchase intentions, with ambivalent attitudes serving as a mediating factor. Under the influence of social distance matching effects, consumers exhibit lower purchase intentions when purchasing for a distant social relationship (i.e., with a remote social distance) compared to when purchasing for a close social relationship (i.e., with a close social distance), in situations involving inconsistent reviews. However, no significant difference is found in situations with consistent reviews. Product type further moderates the impact of social distance on the effect of online review inconsistency on consumers' purchase intentions. Specifically, when consumers face inconsistent online reviews and the product recipient is a close relationship, their purchase intention for experience products (vs. search products) is lower. In contrast, when the recipient is a distant relationship, the difference in purchase intention is not significant. Discussion: The findings of this study provide support for the mechanism through which online review inconsistency affects consumer purchase intentions, offering a new perspective for future research on the impact of review inconsistency. Additionally, it provides theoretical support for businesses and companies engaged in online marketing on e-commerce platforms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.