Online Product Reviews

Almost all products sold by online retailers can attract thousands of comments. Why are worth reading or writing? Are online reviews of products relevant and credible? Another way you could ask this question is to make confidence offline word of mouth from friends and acquaintances. And in comments online and offline as credible word of mouth? If a book on Amazon.com, the leading online retailer, already has hundreds of comments, it's worth adding another? Obviously, some people think it is. Peter Hoflich, a financial journalist based in Singapore, recently wrote the 3250th review of "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," for example. "I wonder if anyone will benefit from my analysis, especially because there are so many," he muses. Interestingly, someone could. This is because the number of comments or crude comments, and the proportion of positive and negative, to send signals to other people, although not all trawl through them. Consequently, web sites as easy as possible for people to add their comments.

Amazon was a pioneer in this respect: it has allowed customers to post reviews of books and other products for many years. Initially, publishers and authors were concerned that allowing negative comments hurt sales. Online retailers have generally been reluctant to allow users to leave comments. But a handful of bad reviews, it seems worth having. "No one trusts all the positive feedback," he says. So a small proportion of the negative comments, "just enough to recognize that the product can not be perfect," may actually make an item more attractive to potential buyers.

Oddly enough, somebody might. That is because the raw number of reviews or comments, and the proportion of positive and negative ones, send useful signals to other people, even if they do not trawl through all of them. Accordingly, websites make it as easy as possible for people to add their comments. Amazon was a pioneer in this regard: it has allowed customers to post reviews of books and other products for many years. Initially, publishers and authors were worried that allowing negative reviews would hurt sales. Online retailers have generally been reluctant to allow users to leave comments,.

But a handful of bad reviews, it seems, are worth having. "No one trusts all positive reviews," he says. So a small proportion of negative comments-"just enough to acknowledge that the product couldn't be perfect"-can actually make an item more attractive to prospective buyers. The sheer volume of reviews makes far more difference, It isn't enough to get people comfortable with making that purchase decision. But after about 20 reviews of a product are accelerated. Visitors are more reluctant to buy until a product attracts a reasonable number of reviews and picks up momentum. In a test with Kingston, a maker of computer memory, Bazaarvoice collected reviews of Kingston products from the firm's website and syndicated them to the website of Office Depot, a retailer. As a result there were more than ten reviews per product, compared with one or two for competitors' offerings. The result was a "drastically" higher conversion rate, which extended even to other Kingston products that lacked the additional reviews. Yet even when a product has attracted hundreds or even thousands of reviews, they keep coming in. Five reviews of the first book in the popular "Twilight" series, which was published in October 2005, were posted on Amazon.com on a typical day recently. Most retailers and comparison sites try to strike a balance between recent reviews and helpful ones. Allowing visitors to rate reviews allows the most informative to rise to the top. And displaying recent reviews indicates that people are still interested in the product. Some reviewers really do want to shape others' opinions. Example, "Someone out there is reading Harry Potter for the first time," she says. This prompts other readers who feel strongly about it "to debunk the hype, or to validate it." On Amazon, indeed, the most prolific reviewers are promoted almost as celebrities in their own right. This prompts reviewers to focus on quantity, not quality, however, so Amazon recently changed its ranking system. Now the "helpfulness" of reviews is taken into account, causing Harriet Klausner, the most prolific reviewer with over 18,000 reviews to her credit, to drop below 500th place in the rankings. Readers rated her reviews as helpful 71% of the time, compared with 95% for the new number-one reviewer, "Mark", who has written fewer than 500 reviews. What is true for reviews does not appear to apply to comments left on news stories or blogs, however. "You can probably have a decent discussion until you get to about 350 comments," says Markos Moulitsas, the founder of Daily Kos, a popular left-leaning political site. But after that, he says, "most outside people will stay away from the thread, and further growth will come from people already inside that thread carrying forth a discussion, debate, or argument." Such discussion threads are more of a conversation, and the page they inhabit usually has a limited lifespan during which people continue to post-unlike the Amazon pages for the "Harry Potter" books, which continue to attract reviews even today, years after the books' publication. Ultimately, the question for authenticity is relevant for online reviews. There is the possibility of shills, fraud, and 'astroturfing'. The truth is, with over 40 clients and hundreds of thousands reviews, we don't see much fraud (and we're getting pretty good at catching them). Of course, nothing is fool proof. With the growth of consumer-generated content, this will continue to be a focus for us to stay ahead. It's also why our solution includes several fields to add context to the review. In usability studies we find that provides shoppers with review relevance as well as *reviewer* relevance. The Edelman group found that 'trust in someone like me' has tripled over the last two years. The key phrase here is 'someone like me'. Shoppers identify with the reviewer based on the content of the review, user attributes, and product attribute ratings. I would also assert the community of customers and shoppers are the best judges of authenticity and relevance. With helpfulness votes (which is sortable) and abuse reporting, shoppers themselves can 'smell' fraud. We find many of our clients' customers are compelled to jump in with their own review when a review that is 'off' is posted. So between our content analysts (we read every review and review several factors for fraud) and customers, we can maintain a high standard of authenticity.

This prompted respondents focus on quantity, not quality, but it recently changed its Amazon ranking system. Now, the utility of the revisions are taken into account, causing Harriet Klausner, the most prolific author with more than 18,000 reviews to his credit, to drop below 500th place in the rankings. Readers comments rated its usefulness as 71% of the time, compared with 95% for the new number one reviewer, "Mark", who has written more than 500 comments. What is true for tests does not seem to apply to comments left on blogs or news, however. "You probably can have a discussion to nearly 350 comments," says Markos Moulitsas, founder of Daily Kos, a popular leftist politician of the site. But after that, he says, "out of most people stay away from the screw, and further growth will come from people already in this thread lead a discussion, debate or discussion." These are the threads of discussion more than a conversation, and that inhabit the site usually has a limited lifetime during which people remain after the Amazon as opposed to the pages of "Harry Potter" books, which continue to attract comments yet Today, years after the books publication.

With the votes (which is sortable) and abuse reporting, customers can smell fraud. We found many of our clients' customers are forced to jump to its own review, when a review is "off" is published. So among the analysts of our content (we read each review and revision of several factors, fraud) and clients, we maintain a high level of authenticity.