Search results

This paper aims to evaluate and structure the basic heuristics consumers use in evaluating word-of-mouth (WOM) about luxury hotel brands while analyzing the impact of deception in online consumer reviews.

The research used a two-study mixed-methods approach, using interpersonal deception theory and social proof theory as lenses to conduct our analysis. For the first study, a qualitative conceptual mapping analysis was conducted, examining online consumer reviews to identify key concepts and their relationships in the context of luxury hotel brands. In the second study, the themes were further examined using a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to analyze their causal complexity and association between variables to determine how they influence the perceived helpfulness of online reviews for luxury hotel brands.

The results underline the importance of functional, objective variables, such as the number of reviews and stars, as social proof heuristics and other factors, including clout, authenticity and analytic tone, as interpersonal communication heuristics. Therefore, consumers use a combination of social and interpersonal communication heuristics to extract information from reviews and manage deception risk.

The paper contributes to the consumer–brand relationship literature by assessing the heuristics consumers use in evaluating online reviews and provides additional information for research in online reputation management.

This study’s results can help marketing practitioners and brand managers manage their online reputations better. It can also aid managers in improving their messaging on hotel websites to entice consumers to complete bookings. Heuristics play an essential role in such messaging and understanding them can help marketers appeal directly to their target market.

This study contributes to the literature on consumer–brand relationships by providing a framework of heuristics that consumers use when evaluating luxury service brands and contributes to WOM and online reputation research by highlighting factors that may make online reviews more helpful.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

THE central question of librarianship now and in the past is that which occupies some of our pages this month. Reading with purpose and with system, Matthew Arnold declared, was the last service to be rendered to education; and in various manner librarians and their committees have been endeavouring to do this for many years; it has indeed been a guiding principle of the best libraries that they presented to the community only good book's. Lately, however, more generous (or lax, according to the standpoint) ideas have been allowed to condition the admission of books; there are not wanting those who object to any exercise of judgment on the part of the librarian; if people want certain books they must be served, as they pay for them. This argument was exploded long ago, but its revival is justified if the librarians are unequal to their pretentions as guides to readers. And to be guides requires ever‐increasing knowledge, not only of all work done in bibliographies and reference books, but, as our writers indicate, of people and their manifold relations and reactions to books. This is enormously difficult in any community but is manifestly so in large cities. As a small illustration we may point to a librarian who, when a branch librarian was appointed to his staff, gave him a month of freedom from library work proper in which he was to walk every street of his branch area, interview the clergy, teachers, leading traders, and the secretaries and committees of local societies. He thus came to his work with at least an elementary notion of the community he had to serve. Such study must have its effect on book‐service; and this is the sort of study that must be pursued in the manner Dr. Waples has advocated and practiced (or some such manner) if we are to arrive at a science of book‐selection applicable to the areas a library serves.

SEPTEMBER sees most librarians again at the daily round, although some, including those of the universities and schools, are still scattered on mountains, golf‐courses, beaches and oceans for a short while yet. To older men there is a curious feeling aroused by the knowledge that there is no Library Association Conference this month. They may, in a measure, find compensation in attending the annual meeting of the London and Home Counties Branch of the Association, which will be at St. Albans, or that of A.S.L.I.B., which has Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, as its venue. Both, by some lack of care which might have been avoided, occur on the same week‐end, September 24–26. Quite clearly the special problems of librarianship technique, such as processes, book‐selection and purchase, classification, catalogues, fines, publicity, salaries, hours, and so on almost infinitely, can no longer be discussed profitably at the Annual Meeting of the Library Association; smaller gatherings, such as these, are their fitting place. We make a suggestion to the L.A. Council, for what it is worth and without pretence to being original. It is that it should indicate to all its branches and sections the main questions to which they should devote attention, and that in due course they should produce their conclusions on them. These, being pooled, would form the basis of the L.A. Annual Meeting. This would make a purposeful programme for all, and the results of the Conference might then be considered definite and practical.

OUR New Year number continues the article on Library Planning so well begun by Mr. J. P. Lamb in our last issue. The excellent views and plans included will do something to show a really individual mind at work on our common problem, and the articles to follow will show that librarians are feeling about carefully, and in some cases experimenting boldly, in the direction of libraries which are to combine the qualities of what may be called the standard public library with those of the community centre. There is much in this that must interest all librarians. The old club ventures, fostered by churches, political groups and similar agencies, are disappearing to an extent, but the community needs a substitute: an intellectual centre and meeting place. This the modern library is attempting to supply.

OUR various accounts of the Portsmouth Conference, and the official record of it which is now in the hands of readers shows that it may be regarded as a successful one. It was specially notable for the absence of those bickerings and differences which must inevitably come to the surface at times. There may be something in the suggestion of one of our writers that the weather was a main factor. However that may be, there was uniform good temper, and we came away with the belief that a good week's work for librarianship had been done.