Search results

The objective is to identify the effects of suspicion as well as knowledge gaps, especially in noninterpersonal contexts. This study aims to propose a robust framework for future research. The overarching goal is to foster a comprehensive understanding of consumer suspicion, its implications and its potential avenues in the ever-evolving field of consumer behavior.

Based on a focused review of the literature, this study synthesizes the effects of suspicion in interpersonal and noninterpersonal contexts to unveil its importance for consumer behavior.

The cognitive, affective and behavioral effects of suspicion are identified. Furthermore, a discernible imbalance is observed, as the predominant focus on interpersonal consumer contexts leaves a significant gap in the comprehension of how consumers navigate and perceive suspicion in noninterpersonal interactions. This topic is important especially in an era dominated by complex brand interrelationships and digital touchpoints. Also, the operationalization of the suspicion construct in a plethora of studies seems to be suboptimal, suggesting a need for improvements with respect to its dynamic nature. In this regard, this review provides insightful directions to advance research in the abovementioned domains.

The synthesis of the findings of the empirical articles did not focus on variations in consumer suspicion across different cultures or regions. In addition, the dynamic nature of suspicion and the evolving landscape of consumer behavior mean that findings and implications may require periodic reassessment to maintain relevance. Also, this review did not delve into the methodological diversities across the studies examined.

This review offers marketers and businesses critical insights into the consumer suspicion dynamics. By understanding these nuances, companies can tailor strategies to mitigate suspicion and optimize consumer relationships.

Through synthesizing the effects of suspicion and providing avenues for future research, this study significantly contributes to consumer behavior literature.

The purpose of this paper is to advance the understanding of sound branding by developing a new conceptual framework and providing an overview of the research literature on non-musical sound.

Using four mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive types of non-musical sound, the paper assesses and synthesizes 99 significant studies across various scholarly fields.

The overview reveals two areas in which more research may be warranted, that is, non-musical atmospherics and non-musical sonic logos. Moreover, future sound-branding research should examine in further detail the potentials of developed versus annexed object sounds, and mediated versus unmediated brand sounds.

The paper provides important insights into critical issues that suggest directions for further research on non-musical sound branding.

The paper identifies an unexploited terrain of possibilities for the use of sound in marketing and branding.

The paper identifies a subfield within sound-branding research that has received little attention despite its inevitability and potential significance.

This study aims to examine whether sport companies that promote gender equality through femvertising, an advertising trend that empowers women and confronts gender stereotypes, actually support women’s rights with institutionalized approaches to challenge gender issues. Some sport brands even have won awards for their femvertising efforts, however, not all of them have modified their policies and programs to support gender equality. Sport femvertising can be a new area for CSR-washing and this study investigated this potential.

Utilizing a content analysis, this study compared sport brands' (award-winning vs non-award-winning) level of engagement in internal and external CSR activities regarding gender equality. Sport brands’ CSR attempts and number of women in leadership positions were analyzed through companies’ CSR reports, annual reports and websites.

Only few differences between two groups (award-winning vs non-award-winning) of sport brands were observed regarding their gender equality CSR engagement. In some cases, non-award-winning sport brands had a greater percentage of women in leadership and practiced more internal gender equality CSR.

This paper provides valuable information about the potential of femvertising as an advertisement, as well as CSR strategy. Results of this study broaden our understanding of how sport companies embraced this advertising/CSR technique and the repercussions. Findings provide guidance for sport marketers who seek to improve their brand image through femvertising.

Chinese consumers’ cross-border internet shopping, so called “haitao” is an emerging popular trend in China. Haitao can be understood as service innovation process because it creates new market spaces and provides differentiated values for Chinese customers.

This study aims to explore the service innovation strategies and success factors of haitao business in the Chinese market. The authors selected two successful haitao sites of Amazon.cn and Gmarket.co.kr, as representatives of a global player and a niche player, and conducted a comparative case study to analyze their service innovation strategies and key success factors.

This comparative case analysis based on value chain framework revealed some common success factors such as trust, advanced system and alliances as well as their service innovation efforts. Amazon has advantages such as efficient logistics system and global sourcing, whereas Gmarket has advantages such as product category, sales promotions, and payment system.

This study provides some implications for managers with localization, alliances and platform strategies.

The purpose of this paper is to determine whether different scales and ways to collect reviews and ratings found on online travel agencies (OTAs) can affect hotels, and whether hotels obtain the same or different evaluations.

Hotel ratings from five OTAs in four European markets were collected and compared in pairs. An initial comparison was made with the hotel scores of each OTA to show what a typical user would see. Then, a rescaled score (0-10) was used to compare all the OTA scales appropriately and to distinguish between what customers observe and what the reality is.

The results reveal that Booking.com that uses a scale (2.5-10) and Agoda with a scale (2-10) seem to give higher rating scores than Atrapalo (1-10), Travel Republic (0-10) and hotel reservation service (1-10). However, when the scores are rescaled (0-10), the worst ratings are found on Booking.com followed by Agoda.

OTAs should include, next to the scores, the scale used to rate hotels so as to provide users with better and clearer information. Moreover, rating questionnaires should match the verbal denominations with their numerical values to avoid biased ratings.

OTAs and hotel managers are losing information provided by customers because customers are not aware of the scale when rating hotels. Moreover, hotel ratings are used by potential customers to obtain a clearer image of an establishment. However, if some hotels are being overrated by some scales, customers might have higher expectations, which may not be met.

The unique rating scales of Booking.com and Agoda provide additional insights into their hotel evaluations, which seem to be apparently higher when in fact they are not.

在线旅行评论评分量表及其对酒店得分和竞争力的影响

摘要

这项研究旨在研究在线旅行社（OTA）上评论和评级的不同量表和方式是否会影响酒店获得的评估。

本研究收集并比较了来自四个欧洲市场中五个OTA的酒店等级数据。研究首先对每个OTA的酒店得分进行了比较, 以显示一般用户会看到的内容。然后研究使用重新缩放的得分（0-10）来恰当地比较所有OTA的酒店等级, 并区分顾客观察到的内容和现实。

结果显示, Booking.com使用的量表（2.5-10）和Agoda的量表（2-10）, 似乎高于Atrapalo（1-10）, Travel Republic（0-10）和 hotel reservation service （1-10）的评分。但是, 当分数重新调整为（0-10）时, 最差的评分是在Booking.com上, 其次是Agoda。

OTA应在评分旁边注明用于对酒店进行评分的量表, 以便为用户提供更好, 更清晰的信息。此外, 评级问卷应使评价描述与其数值相匹配, 以避免评级出现偏差。

OTA和酒店经理正在丢失客户所提供的信息, 因为客户在对酒店进行评级时并不了解其使用的量表。此外, 潜在客户使用酒店评级来获得更清晰的企业形象。但是, 如果某些酒店被某些网站的评级量表高估, 那么客户可能会有偏高的期望, 而这些期望可能无法被满足。

Booking.com和Agoda的独特评分等级标准为酒店提供了更多见解, 而实际上酒店的情况可能并非如此。

Las escalas de calificación de las opiniones de los viajes online y sus efectos en la valoración y competitividad de los hoteles.

El objetivo de esta investigación es determinar si las diferentes escalas y formas de recopilar opiniones y valoraciones de las Agencias de Viajes Online (OTAs), pueden afectar a si los hoteles tienen las mismas o distintas calificaciones.

Las calificaciones de hoteles de cinco OTAs en cuatro mercados europeos, se recopilaron y compararon por pares. Se realizó una comparación inicial con las puntuaciones de los hoteles de cada OTA, para mostrar lo que vería un usuario típico. Luego, se utilizó una puntuación de reescalado (0-10), para comparar todas las escalas de las OTAs de manera apropiada y así poder diferenciar entre lo que los clientes observan y lo que es en realidad.

Los resultados revelan que Booking.com, que utiliza una escala (2.5-10) y Agoda con una escala (2-10), parecen puntuar con calificaciones más altas que Atrapalo (1-10), Travel Republic (0-10) y hotel reservation service (1-10). Sin embargo, cuando se vuelven a escalar las puntuaciones (0-10), las peores calificaciones se encuentran en Booking.com, seguida de Agoda.

Las OTAs deben incluir, junto a las puntuaciones, la escala utilizada para calificar los hoteles a fin de proporcionar a los usuarios una información mayor y más clara. Además, los cuestionarios de calificación deben hacer coincidir las denominaciones verbales con sus valores numéricos para evitar calificaciones sesgadas.

Por un lado las OTAs y los gerentes de hoteles, están perdiendo información proporcionada por los clientes, porque los clientes no son conscientes del tipo de escala utilizada cuando califican los hoteles. Por otro lado, los clientes potenciales utilizan las calificaciones de los hoteles para obtener una imagen más clara de un establecimiento. Por lo que en muchos casos, los clientes pueden tener expectativas más altas, que pueden no cumplirse, si los hoteles están siendo sobrevalorados por algunas escalas.

Las escalas de calificación únicas de Booking.com y Agoda, brindan información adicional sobre las evaluaciones de sus hoteles que parecen ser aparentemente más altas cuando en realidad no lo son.