Advertisement

Perception of Source Credibility Within Touristic Virtual Communities: A Cross-Generational Examination

  • Aleksander GrothEmail author
  • Giulietta Constantini
  • Stephan Schlögl
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10290)

Abstract

Online reviews are an important factor in the pre-purchase phase of tourist products, but lack social cues to enable an evaluation of the source’s trustworthiness, leading to uncertainty towards the source itself. Drawing upon generational theory, generations differ in their attitudes towards the credibility of online information and their touristic purchase behaviors. A differentiation between actively and passively sought cues regarding source (e.g. profile pictures) and message characteristics (e.g. trustworthiness) is made, in order to better understand the attitudes towards online reviews. An eye tracking study with ten participants of Generation Y and seven of Generation Baby Boomer was conducted on the travel site Tripadvisor.com. Results show that Generation Y and Generation Baby Boomer differ significantly in their attitude towards user generated content. Generation Baby Boomer relies less frequently on reviews than Generation Y, reads reviews less frequently and seeks for elements indicating the level of source credibility. For both generations, message characteristics including factors such as the quality of the language, the length of a message and the congruence with personal interests represent the most important cues in the evaluation of source credibility. Generation BB does not pay attention to source characteristics at all but derives some of them, such as travel interests or the experience of a reviewer, from message characteristics.

Keywords

Source credibility Electronic word-of-mouth Eye tracking 

References

  1. 1.
    Buhalis, D., Law, R.: Progress in information technology and tourism management: 20 years on and 10 years after the Internet—The state of eTourism research. Tour. Manag. (2008). doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2008.01.005 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ayeh, J.K., Au, N., Law, R.: “Do we believe in TripAdvisor?” examining credibility perceptions and online travelers’ attitude toward using user-generated content. J. Travel Res. (2013). doi: 10.1177/0047287512475217 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Xiang, Z., Gretzel, U.: Role of social media in online travel information search. Tour. Manag. (2010). doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.016 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Litvin, S.W., Goldsmith, R.E., Pan, B.: Electronic word-of-mouth in hospitality and tourism management. Tour. Manag. (2008). doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2007.05.011 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ye, Q., Law, R., Gu, B., Chen, W.: The influence of user-generated content on traveler behavior: an empirical investigation on the effects of e-word-of-mouth to hotel online bookings. Comput. Hum. Behav. (2011). doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.04.014 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K.P., Walsh, G., Gremler, D.D.: Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the Internet? J. Interact. Market. (2004). doi: 10.1002/dir.10073 Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Park, H.L., Xiang, Z., Josiam, B., Kim, H.M.: Personal profile information as cues of credibility in online travel reviews. In: Cantoni, L., Xiang, Z. (eds.) Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2013, pp. 230–241. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hovland, C.I., Janis, I.L., Kelley, H.H.: Communication and Persuasion. Psychological Studies of Opinion Change. Greenwood Press, Westport (1982). ©1953Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fogg, B.J., Tseng, H.: The elements of computer credibility. In: Williams, M.G., Altom, M.W. (eds.) The SIGCHI conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States, pp. 80–87. doi: 10.1145/302979.303001
  10. 10.
    Loda, M.D., Teichmann, K., Zins, A.H.: Destination websites‘ persuasiveness. Int. J. Culture Tourism Hosp. Res. (2009). doi: 10.1108/17506180910940351 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H.: The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust for management: a field quasi-experiment. J. Appl. Psychol. (1999). doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.84.1.123 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ohanian, R.: Impact of celebrity spokespersons’ perceived image on consumers’ intention to purchase. J. Advertising Res. 31, 46–54 (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kerstetter, D., Cho, M.-H.: Prior knowledge, credibility and information search. Ann. Tourism Res. (2004). doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2004.04.002 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lis, B.: In eWOM we trust. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. (2013). doi: 10.1007/s12599-013-0261-9 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    McGuire, W.J.: Attitudes and attitude change. In: Lindzey, G., Aronson, E. (eds.) Handbook of Social Psychology. Special fields and applications, 2nd edn., pp. 233–346. Random House, New York (1985)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Laumann, E.O.: Prestige and Association in an Urban Community: An Analysis of an Urban Stratification System. Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis (1966)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Brown, J., Broderick, A.J., Lee, N.: Word of mouth communication within online communities: conceptualizing the online social network. J. Interact. Mark. (2007). doi: 10.1002/dir.20082 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sussman, S.W., Siegal, W.S.: Informational influence in organizations: an integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Inf. Syst. Res. (2003). doi: 10.1287/isre.14.1.47.14767 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tidwell, L.C., Walther, J.B.: Computer-mediated communication effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations: getting to know one another a bit at a time. Hum. Commun. Res. (2002). doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00811.x Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Derlega, V.J.: Self-disclosure. Sage series on close relationships. Sage Publications, Newbury Park (1993)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee, H., Law, R., Murphy, J.: Helpful reviewers in TripAdvisor, an online travel community. J. Travel Tourism Market. (2011). doi: 10.1080/10548408.2011.611739 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Berger, C.R., Calabrese, R.J.: Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Hum. Commun. Res. (1975). doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W.: Trust and tam in online shopping: an integrated model. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 27, 51–90 (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Patzer, G.L.: Source credibility as a function of communicator physical attractiveness. J. Bus. Res. (1983). doi: 10.1016/0148-2963(83)90030-9 Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Flanagin, A.J., Metzger, M.J.: The perceived credibility of personal Web page information as influenced by the sex of the source. Comput. Hum. Behav. (2003). doi: 10.1016/S0747-5632(03)00021-9 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gretzel, U., Yoo, K.H.: Use and impact of online travel reviews. In: O’Connor, P., Höpken, W., Gretzel, U. (eds.) Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2008, pp. 35–46. Springer Vienna, Vienna (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Arsal, I., Baldwin, E.D., Backman, S.J.: Member reputation and its influence on travel decisions: an case study of an online travel community. J. IT Tourism 11, 235–246 (2009)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Münz, K., Sergiunaite, V.: Electronic word of mouth (eWom): The relationship between anonymous and semi-anonymous eWom and consumer attitudes (2015)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zacharia, G., Maes, P.: Trust management through reputation mechanisms. Appl. Artif. Intell. (2000). doi: 10.1080/08839510050144868 Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Metzger, M.J., Flanagin, A.J., Medders, R.B.: Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. J. Commun. (2010). doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01488.x Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Huang, L.-S.: Trust in product review blogs: the influence of self-disclosure and popularity. Behav. Inf. Technol. (2013). doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2014.978378 Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Moe, W.W., Schweidel, D.A.: Online product opinions: incidence, evaluation, and evolution. Market. Sci. (2012). doi: 10.1287/mksc.1110.0662 Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Moran, G., Muzellec, L.: eWOM credibility on social networking sites: a framework. J. Market. Commun. (2014). doi: 10.1080/13527266.2014.969756 Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Strauss, W., Howe, N.: The Fourth Turning. An American prophecy, 1st edn. Broadway Books, New York (1998). ©1997Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Strutton, D., Taylor, D.G., Thompson, K.: Investigating generational differences in e-WOM behaviours: for advertising purposes, does X = Y? Int. J. Adv. (2011). doi: 10.2501/IJA-30-4-559-586 Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lu, J., Yao, J.E., Yu, C.-S.: Personal innovativeness, social influences and adoption of wireless Internet services via mobile technology. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. (2005). doi: 10.1016/j.jsis.2005.07.003 Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Li, X., Li, X., Hudson, S.: The application of generational theory to tourism consumer behavior: an American perspective. Tour. Manag. (2013). doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2013.01.015 Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Parment, A.: Generation Y vs. baby boomers: shopping behavior, buyer involvement and implications for retailing. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. (2013). doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2012.12.001 Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Haynes, L.: Baby boomers. Brand Strategy 179, 31 (2004)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Brown, P.: Are the forties the new thirties? Brand Strategy 153, 26 (2001)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wolf, M., Carpenter, S., Qenani-Petrela, E.: A comparison of X, Y, and baby boomer generation wine consumers in California. J. Food Distrib. Res. 36(1), 186–191 (2005)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Beldona, S., Nusair, K., Demicco, F.: Online travel purchase behavior of generational cohorts: a longitudinal study. J. Hospitality Market. Man. (2009). doi: 10.1080/19368620902799627 Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wood, S.L.: Future fantasies: a social change perspective of retailing in the 21st century. J. Retail. (2002). doi: 10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00069-0 Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Eastman, J.K., Iyer, R.: The elderly’s uses and attitudes towards the Internet. J. Consum. Market. (2004). doi: 10.1108/07363760410534759 Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Leppel, K., McCloskey, D.W.: A cross-generational examination of electronic commerce adoption. J. Consum. Market. (2011). doi: 10.1108/07363761111143150 Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Liao, Q.V., Fu, W.-T.: Age differences in credibility judgments of online health information. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. (2014). doi: 10.1145/2534410
  47. 47.
    Rubin, J., Chisnell, D.: Handbook of usability testing. How to plan, design, and conduct effective tests, 2nd edn. Wiley Pub., Indianapolis, IN (2008)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Just, M.A., Carpenter, P.A.: A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychol. Rev. (1980). doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.87.4.329 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aleksander Groth
    • 1
    Email author
  • Giulietta Constantini
    • 1
  • Stephan Schlögl
    • 1
  1. 1.Interaction Lab, Department Management, Communication and ITManagement Center InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria

Personalised recommendations