Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10356/84164
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBanerjee, Snehasishen
dc.contributor.authorChua, Alton Yeow Kuanen
dc.date.accessioned2017-08-07T05:54:47Zen
dc.date.accessioned2019-12-06T15:39:38Z-
dc.date.available2017-08-07T05:54:47Zen
dc.date.available2019-12-06T15:39:38Z-
dc.date.issued2017en
dc.identifier.citationBanerjee, S., & Chua, A. Y. K. (2017). Theorizing the textual differences between authentic and fictitious reviews: Validation across positive, negative and moderate polarities. Internet Research, 27(2), 321-337.en
dc.identifier.issn1066-2243en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10356/84164-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The purpose of this paper is twofold: to build a theoretical model that identifies textual cues to distinguish between authentic and fictitious reviews, and to empirically validate the theoretical model by examining reviews of positive, negative as well as moderate polarities. Design/methodology/approach: Synthesizing major theories on deceptive communication, the theoretical model identifies four constructs – comprehensibility, specificity, exaggeration and negligence – to predict review authenticity. The predictor constructs were operationalized as holistically as possible. To validate the theoretical model, 1,800 reviews (900 authentic + 900 fictitious) evenly spread across positive, negative and moderate polarities were analyzed using logistic regression. Findings: The performance of the proposed theoretical model was generally promising. However, it could better discern authenticity for positive and negative reviews compared with moderate entries. Originality/value: The paper advances the extant literature by theorizing the textual differences between authentic and fictitious reviews. It also represents one of the earliest attempts to examine nuances in the textual differences between authentic and fictitious reviews across positive, negative as well as moderate polarities.en
dc.description.sponsorshipMOE (Min. of Education, S’pore)en
dc.format.extent36 p.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesInternet Researchen
dc.rights© 2017 Emerald Publishing Limited. This is the author created version of a work that has been peer reviewed and accepted for publication by Internet Research, Emerald Publishing Limited. It incorporates referee’s comments but changes resulting from the publishing process, such as copyediting, structural formatting, may not be reflected in this document. The published version is available at: [http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IntR-11-2015-0309].en
dc.subjectElectronic commerceen
dc.subjectInformation scienceen
dc.titleTheorizing the textual differences between authentic and fictitious reviews: Validation across positive, negative and moderate polaritiesen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.contributor.schoolWee Kim Wee School of Communication and Informationen
dc.identifier.doi10.1108/IntR-11-2015-0309en
dc.description.versionAccepted versionen
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextopen-
Appears in Collections:WKWSCI Journal Articles
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Theorizing the textual differences between authentic and fictitious reviews.pdf322.78 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open

SCOPUSTM   
Citations 20

8
Updated on Mar 5, 2021

PublonsTM
Citations 20

7
Updated on Mar 8, 2021

Page view(s) 50

254
Updated on Apr 16, 2021

Download(s) 20

220
Updated on Apr 16, 2021

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Plumx

Items in DR-NTU are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.