Search

Research Question Reviews have emerged as a pivotal force in customer purchase decisions. While there is a plethora of research that supports how customer reviews influence the decision making of others, researchers have yet to explore how the act of writing a review affects the reviewer's subsequent consumption decisions. Drawing on the theory of reverse alliesthesia, which suggests that rewarding experiences may trigger impulsive behaviors, the central premise of this paper is that when reviewers post to a public audience they are triggered to behave impulsively. However, the type of information that is shared may have an impact on how rewarding the sharing experience is because people find sharing personal opinions more inherently valuable than sharing facts. Therefore, this paper investigates whether individuals who express emotional information to a public audience are more likely to engage in impulsive behaviors compared to when they express such information in private. Additionally, because social approval provides reviewers with rewards, this paper investigates whether praising reviewers immediately after their writing tasks satiates this effect. However, not all individuals may be equally affected; those who are more sensitive to social cues may be particularly more susceptible therefore this paper investigates whether self-monitoring moderates this effect. Method and Data Three empirical analyses were conducted using participants from MTurk. In study 1, participants were assigned to write either an emotional-or rational review on an online documentary, and they were either informed that their review would be shared with others (public condition) or that no one would read it (private condition). Afterwards, they participated in a task designed to measure impulsivity. In study 2, they were assigned to write a rational (emotional) review about a product that they had purchased on Amazon.com, and assigned to a private or public condition. Instructions on writing a rational (emotional) review were adapted from study 1. Participants in the public condition were instructed to post this review on Amazon.com, while those in the private condition were informed that an algorithm would evaluate their reviews, therefore no one would read them. Participants were then assigned to a praise- or no praisecondition. Those in the praise condition were praised on their performance on an anagram task, while those in the no praise condition did not participate in this task. Afterwards they participated in a task designed to measure impulsivity. Study 3 utilized the same procedure as study 1, however they also completed a self-monitoring scale. Summary of Findings Study 1 finds that sharing emotional information through customer reviews (vs. private expression) leads participants to engage in impulsive behaviors. This finding provides evidence for reverse alliesthesia: sharing emotional reviews can trigger a reward drive state as evidenced by impulsive choices. Study 2 further supports the presence of this theory. When no satiation was presented (i.e., no praise), participants experienced more impulsivity when they shared emotional information compared to when they expressed this information in private. However, when participants were exposed to another reward prior to the impulsivity measure (i.e., praise condition), the differences between sharing emotional information to a public and expressing this information in private disappeared. These findings are consistent with cross-domain satiation; we show an activated reward state can be satiated by the presence of another reward. Study 3 shows that not all consumers are vulnerable to the effects of sharing emotional information. High self-monitors were more likely to engage in impulsive behaviors after sharing emotional reviews to others; this was not the case for low self-monitors. High selfmonitors are more sensitive to social cues, which could make the presence of the audience more salient and the act of sharing emotional information more socially rewarding. Key Contributions In this research, we examine how sharing emotional information with others through customer reviews influences impulsive behaviors. This finding extends theory on reverse alliesthesia by showing the social rewards one accrues from sharing information to others lead to drive states similar to those previously documented. We examine two boundary conditions that have not been studied in this area. First, we investigate how praise serves as a strategy to offset behaviors that may result from review writing. As praise represents a positive feedback mechanism that communicates approval, it is socially rewarding, and therefore able to quench impulsive behaviors. These findings also provide new insights on how praise can be used to influence behavior in general. Second, our research highlights the importance of self-monitoring as a personality trait that determines the extent to which a reviewer acts impulsively. We provide additional support for the theory of reverse alliesthesia: individuals who are more sensitive to social cues are more likely to engage in impulsive behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]