KOREASCHOLAR

This research aims to examine the interplay of fluency and framing in consumers’ perception of online review helpfulness. We propose to conduct three experiments to study how consumers evaluate a product review as presented in easy- vs. hard-to-read font and promotion vs. prevention frame.
INTRODUCTION
Nowadays consumers are often exposed to and influenced by online product reviews. These reviews are generated and posted by consumers on online shopping websites, such as Amazon.com. Obviously, the content of an online product review, either appraisal or criticism, would offer valuable information for consumers to make purchase decisions. The almost immediate and strong impact of product reviews on a prospective consumer’s decision would not be easily achieved by other marketing attempts (Daugherty, Eastin, & Bright, 2013; Ghose & Ipeirotis, 2006; Mahajan, Muller, & Kerin, 1984). In particular, past research has proposed that, if a review is believed to be more helpful it is more likely to add value for a future customer (Mudambi & Schuff, 2010; Yin, Bond, & Zhang, 2014). In this research, we would like to research what makes a review helpful. According to consumer psychology literature, metacognitive cues, such as fluency, would play an important role in consumer judgments (Lee, 2004; Schwarz, 2004). So, we first propose that fluency, the ease of information processing, could influence perceived review helpfulness. Moreover, a growing body of research has suggested some factors that could interact with fluency when influencing consumer decisions and judgments (Shah, Alter, & Oppenheimer, 2010; Tsai & McGill, 2010). For example, framing effect has been extensively studied in consumer decision making literature (Block & Keller, 1995; Rothman, Salovey, Antone, Keough, & Martin, 1993). Accordingly, we would like to study the effect of framing, emphasizing on gain vs. loss, on perceived review helpfulness. Specifically, we research whether framing a review as promotion- vs. prevention-focused would moderate fluency effect on consumers’ perception of online product reviews. To sum up, in this research we investigate how consumers’ evaluation on online product reviews is influenced by manipulating the review to be promotion- vs. preventionoriented and easy- vs. hard-to-read. To our best understanding, little of past research has directly examined the interplay of fluency and framing in consumer judgments, especially in social media contexts. We wish to collect further evidence regarding the underlying rationale involving fluency and framing effects on consumers’ perception of review helpfulness.
THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT AND HYPOTHESES
Researchers have defined online reviews as peer-generated product evaluations posted on a company or third party website (Mudambi & Schuff, 2010). To better understand how consumers evaluate online reviews, we propose to examine the effects of fluency and framing on perceived review helpfulness. First, fluency, defined as the ease of information processing, could make a strong impact on various judgments, including perceived risk, liking, and confidence (Alter & Oppenheimer, 2009; Novemsky, Dhar, & Schwarz, 2007; Reber, Winkielman, & Schwarz, 1998). We notice that limited empirical work has yet addressed the relationship between fluency and perceived review helpfulness, although fluency is easy to manipulate and could have overwhelming effect on judgments. Rather, marketing and social media researchers have long been focused on content- and emotion-based features of online reviews in relation to review helpfulness (Moore, 2015; Mudambi & Schuff, 2010). Therefore, this research aims to address this limitation by exploring fluency effect on review helpfulness. Second, we suggest that framing, by focusing on promotion vs. prevention, could influence consumers’ perception of online product reviews. In particular, regulatory focus literature has revealed that, message framing would influence the effectiveness of persuasion (Higgins, 1998; Meyerowitz & Chaiken, 1987; Tykocinski, Higgins, & Chaiken, 1994). To emphasize, past research has gained mixed results about promotionvs. prevention-focused messages in persuasion (Block & Keller, 1995; Rothman et al., 1993). In this research we will have a close look at framing and explore its effect on online review helpfulness. Third, we would like to test whether a gain (vs. loss) frame is more effective when disfluency (vs. fluency) is experienced. In a past study, Shah, Alter, and Oppenheimer (2010) argue that fluency (vs. disfluency) makes people feel they are close to (vs. distant from) a stimulus, and then become more likely to be engaged in low (vs. high) level thinking. According to construal level theory, when people think concretely they are more likely to focus on concrete, specific details; by contrast, when they think abstractly they are more likely to focus on abstract, global properties (Trope & Liberman, 2003). In addition, past research has found that mind-set, or thinking concretely vs. abstractly, could interact with framing in consumer judgments (White, MacDonnell, & Dhal, 2011). Regarding the interaction between fluency and framing, mixed results are found in literature. On the one hand, Shah and colleagues (2010) have suggested that, disfluency is related to high-level thinking, and thus would make a promotion frame more effective. On the other hand, researchers have proposed that, disfluency induces negative feelings, and thus would make a prevention frame more effective (White, MacDonnell, & Dhal, 2011). Given the disagreement in past findings, we would like to further examine the underlying mechanisms for consumers to perceive online product reviews presented in easy vs. hard font and promotion vs. prevention frame. Following these studies, we will conduct three experiments to test fluency and framing effects on perceived review helpfulness. Our hypotheses are listed below:
H1: Consumers perceive an online product review in easy-to-read font (vs. hard-to-read) as more helpful.
H2-a: Consumers perceive an online product review in easy-to-read font and a promotion (vs. prevention) frame as more helpful.
H2-b: Consumers perceive an online product review in easy-to-read font and a prevention (vs. promotion) frame as more helpful.
H3-a: Consumers perceive an online product review in hard-to-read font and a prevention (vs. promotion) frame as more helpful.
H3-b: Consumers perceive an online product review in hard-to-read font and a promotion (vs. prevention) frame as more helpful.
RESEARCH METHOD
We propose three experiments to examine fluency and framing effects on perceived review helpfulness, by using an actual product review collected from Amazon.com. Two hundred undergraduate students from a public university in mainland China will participate in our experiments. In Experiment 1, we will investigate the main effect of fluency on review helpfulness. It is expected that, fluency would have significant effect on perceived review helpfulness. A review on a home speaker – Amazon Echo Dot is selected, and then rated by three individual researchers as relatively neutral and objective. We manipulate fluency by displaying the review in an easy- vs. hard-to-read font, respectively. After reading the review, using 7-point scales participants rate fluency (1 = very difficult, 7 = very easy) and review helpfulness (1 = not helpful at all, 7 = very helpful). To test fluency effect as predicted in H1, we will conduct a t-test. Also, using t-test we will check if the manipulation is successful. In Experiments 2 and 3, we will examine the main effect of framing on review helpfulness, as well as the interaction between fluency and framing. As discussed earlier, past research suggests two opposing expectations. As stated in H2-a and H3-a, promotion (vs. prevention) frame is more effective when a review is shown in easy (vs. hard) font. However, H2-b and H3-b are holding the contradictory predictions. Here, the review is modified to be more focused on promotion vs. prevention respectively, shown in either easy- or hard-to-read font. In each experiment, half of the participants read the Amazon Echo Dot’s review in a promotion frame and the other half will process the review in a prevention frame. In both promotion and prevention conditions, participants are randomly assigned to read the review in an easy- or hard-to-read font. To test our hypotheses, we will employ a 2 (easy vs. hard) x 2 (promotion vs. prevention) ANOVA. In addition, to understand the rationale of consumers’ making evaluation on reviews, we ask participants to use information contained in the review to write a short description of the product. So that, we will be able to capture participants’ thinking mode. Also, we ask participants to rate review valence (1 = very negative, 7 = very positive) and describe their feelings after reading the review, in order to examine if framing would result in different feelings. Then, we analyze these self-reported responses, in attempts to determine either participants’ mind-set (concrete vs. abstract) or their feelings (positive vs. negative) would be more prevalent when they process and evaluate the review. A mediational analysis will be conducted to explore the mechanisms underlying consumers’ perception of review helpfulness.
DISCUSSION
The aim of this research is to test whether fluency and framing would influence perceived online review helpfulness. Also, our research is designed to explore the interplay of fluency and framing in review perception. The completed work will present empirical results to demonstrate the roles of fluency and framing in consumers’ review evaluations, through the three experiments as proposed. Theoretically, our research will contribute to existing literature by addressing the effects of fluency and framing on consumer decision making, in the context of online marketing communications. Practically, our research will provide insights for marketers and consumers to engage in communications via online review systems. Given that fluency and framing are considered as salient cues to influence consumer decisions, marketers should learn how to leverage these factors while shaping the framework in which online product information is created and shared by consumers.

• Rongjuan Chen(Wenzhou-Kean University, China)
• Jiameng Zhang(London School of Economics and Political Science, UK)