Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent to which textual characteristics of online reviews help identify authentic entries from manipulative ones across positive and negative comments.

A theoretical framework is proposed to identify authentic online reviews from manipulative ones based on three textual characteristics, namely, comprehensibility, informativeness, and writing style. The framework is tested using two publicly available data sets, one comprising positive reviews to hype own offerings, and the other including negative reviews to slander competing offerings. Logistic regression is used for analysis.

The three textual characteristics offered useful insights to identify authentic online reviews from manipulative ones. In particular, the differences between authentic and manipulative reviews in terms of comprehensibility and informativeness were more conspicuous for negative entries. On the other hand, the differences between authentic and manipulative reviews in terms of writing style were more conspicuous for positive entries.

The findings of this paper are somewhat constrained by the scope of the data sets used for analysis.

The paper represents one of the earliest attempts to develop a theoretical framework to identify authentic online reviews. Prior research has shed light on ways to classify reviews as authentic or manipulative. However, literature on specific differences between the two in terms of textual characteristics is relatively limited. Moreover, by suggesting differences between authentic and manipulative reviews across positive and negative comments, the findings offer nuanced insights into a research area that is growing in importance.

Mathematics can be a challenging content area for all students and especially for students with disabilities. Assistive technology can support the access, participation and achievement of students with disabilities in mathematics in general and in inclusive mathematics settings in particular. In this chapter, assistive technology to academic and functional mathematics will be discussed; particularly, manipulatives, calculators and other technology-mediated mathematics interventions (e.g., apps or computer programs) will be highlighted.

This study aims to investigate how judgments of firms’ underlying motives are affected by corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication which features percentages of profit allocations to CSR causes. It also examines how firm size interacts with CSR spending allocations affecting motive attributions for firms of different sizes.

Two experiments were carried out manipulating CSR spending allocations (smaller vs larger percentage of profit) and firm size (small vs large firm).

A larger percentage of profits allocated to CSR enhanced value-driven motives and inhibited inferences of manipulative intent, which produced lower egoistic-driven motives. Large firms allocating smaller percentages to CSR were judged as less value-driven and were more prone to elicit manipulative intent.

Two routes of motive attributions were identified – a direct route, contingent on CSR spending allocations and firm size; and an indirect route via inferences of manipulative intent, which inhibited favorable motives and prompted unfavorable ones. Both routes resulted from numerical cognition associated with the processing of numbers. Managerial implications include suggestions for firms wishing to overcome negative consumer bias arising from communication featuring CSR spending allocations and firm size.

The purpose of this article is to show how consumers’ inferences of manipulative intent mediate the effects of in-store arousal on pleasure and approach behavior.

A qualitative study identifies arousal as a dimension of the store environment that may lead to inferences of manipulative intent. An experiment manipulating arousal tests the mediating effect of inferences of manipulative intent on the relationship of arousal with pleasure and approach behavior.

A qualitative study and the results of an experiment suggest that arousing store environments lead to negative outcomes when consumers infer that such environments are manipulative. The experimental study results show that high in-store arousal increases inferences of manipulative intent, which in turn negatively affect pleasure and approach behaviors. The results also indicate that the effects of in-store arousal on inferences of manipulative intent vary with age.

The study results recommend that practitioners carefully design their store environments, such that arousal they create does not lead consumers to believe that the environment is manipulative.

This article contributes to extant literature by emphasizing the crucial role of inferences of manipulative intent in the effects of in-store arousal.

The purpose of this paper is to present how lesson study can be instrumental in improving the use of physical manipulatives that are used in teaching elementary science topics.

Objectives are achieved through the following means: first, planning a research lesson in the workshop; second, presentation and critiquing in a seminar workshop; third, implementing the research lesson with observation of co-teachers and knowledgeable other; fourth, post lesson discussion; and fifth, revising the research lesson.

The research lesson improved significantly after the first post lesson discussion as the concrete to abstract approach was used and the defect of the physical manipulative (eardrum model) was addressed to avoid possible misconceptions from pupils during discussions as part of the formative assessment portion of the lesson.

The lesson study process was not further extended to the third and fourth implementation to see other problems in the use of their physical manipulative (eardrum) model.

The need for teachers to use the physical manipulative as an analogical model in teaching science concepts.

The paper shows the effectiveness of lesson study in the development of manipulative models in instruction.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate short‐selling around private investment in public equity (PIPE) issuances, for evidence of manipulative short‐selling by hedge funds.

The authors use the Regulation SHO short‐selling data in combination with information about hedge fund participation in traditional stock PIPE offerings from Sagient Research, and share price and trading volume data from the Center for Research in Security Prices (CRSP) to examine the relations among hedge fund participation, short‐selling levels and stock returns surrounding such offerings.

It is found that significantly less pre‐deal short‐selling occurs when hedge funds are included in the PIPE investor group, and adjusted returns for firms with hedge funds as investors are positive in the pre‐deal period and negative in the post‐deal period. Both of these findings are opposite of the patterns expected given manipulative short‐selling by hedge funds. Pre‐deal and post‐deal adjusted returns and PIPE discount are unrelated to pre‐deal short‐selling by hedge funds, findings inconsistent with manipulative short‐selling by these investors. The evidence suggests that most hedge funds that invest in traditional stock PIPEs do not engage in manipulative short‐selling around these deals.

This paper is the first, to the authors' knowledge, to examine hedge fund participation and daily short‐selling around traditional stock PIPE issuances. Previous studies focus on structured PIPE deals, which do not represent the majority of the PIPE market at present. The daily short selling data used in this study allow for detailed investigation of market behavior not afforded by monthly short interest data used in previous studies.

Guilt appeals are increasingly being used in road safety campaigns, despite recent research that has raised doubts about their effectiveness and the potential for triggering defensive responses. Building on the extended parallel process model, this study aims to add to this growing body of research by evaluating whether combining a hope message with guilt appeals can solve this problem.

An online experiment with a 2 (Appeal type: Guilt vs Guilt+hope) × 2 (Language intensity: Low vs High) between-subjects design was conducted. A total of 399 participants recruited from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk were randomized to view one of the four advertisements discouraging texting while driving (TWD). Their affective responses, perceptions about the advertisements and intentions to not TWD were measured.

The results showed that compared to guilt-only appeals, guilt+hope appeals directly reduced defensive responses (i.e. perceived manipulative intent and anger) across varying levels of language intensity. In addition, guilt+hope appeals mitigated the negative impacts of manipulative intent on intended emotions and intentions to not TWD.

Findings of this study mark the first to support the idea that communicating hope within guilt appeals is a promising social marketing strategy to discourage TWD.

Extant research on comparative advertising has focused only on “market leader” comparisons (a brand targeting the market leader), whereas in the marketplace, “multi-brand” comparisons are more prevalent (Kalro et al., 2010). Moreover, most research focuses on direct comparisons only. Hence, this research aims to investigate the interplay between comparison ad strategy (“market leader”/“multi-brand” comparisons) and comparison ad format (direct/indirect comparisons) on the effectiveness of comparative advertising.

This paper uses four 2 × 2 fully crossed factorial designs (comparison ad format: direct vs indirect and comparison ad strategy: market leader vs multi brand) with established and new brands in two categories: powdered detergents and smart phones. All studies were conducted in metropolitan cities of India.

By and large, the experiments indicated that direct (indirect) comparisons lowered (heightened) perceived manipulative intent and enhanced (reduced) attitude-toward-the-ad for multi-brand (market leader) comparisons.

Findings suggest that when advertisers use comparative advertising, they may use direct ads when using multi-brand comparisons and use indirect ones when using market leader comparisons. It could also be argued that when advertisers use multi-brand comparisons because of fragmentation in the marketplace, they may directly compare against these multiple brands. When advertisers need to compare against a market leader, they may do so indirectly.

This research is among the first to investigate multi-brand comparisons that are widely used in the industry and that too in the context of both direct and indirect comparison formats.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s new regulation, Limit Up–Limit Down (LULD), against the background of manipulative high-frequency trading (HFT).

This paper examines the background of HFT and related manipulative tactics by reviewing 43 articles of empirical research. It also examines areas in which LULD is effective and those in which LULD fails. The assessment of LULD is completed with a comparison between computerized regulation and legal enforcement in the contemporary reality of electronic trading platforms.

The paper points out the effectiveness of LULD in regulating wild price volatility as well as its insufficiency when facing orderly but fast price momentum ignited by manipulative HFT such as “spoofing”.

The findings may provide assistance to lawmakers and regulators to improve LULD regulation.

This paper is the first attempt to assess LULD regulation against a comprehensive background of manipulative HFT. The paper is of value to other researchers concerned about the instability to the equity market that manipulative HFT can create. The paper is also of interest to policymakers in designing effective regulation in the high-frequency era.