Average product ratings are displayed on many major websites, including online retailers, search engines, and social media sites. Research in both academia and industry has shown that consumers rely heavily on product ratings when making purchase decisions. Websites may show customer ratings in different shapes, colors, or formats. For example, some websites present their rating in a numerical format (e.g., 4.0/5) while others utilize an analog format (e.g., ). The present research investigates how a website's rating presentation may influence magnitude perceptions of the rating, which subsequently affect choices and purchase intentions. The authors propose and find that when the average customer rating is at or above the midpoint (i.e., .5–.9) of each rating level (i.e., 1–5 on a five-point scale), the numerical (vs. analog) rating format is perceived to be lower in magnitude due to left-digit anchoring, leading to differences in choice likelihood, purchase intent, and ad click likelihood for products and services. Across nine experiments, including an eye-tracking study and a multiple-ad study without holdout, the findings show robust evidence for the proposed effect.
BraunMichaelDe LangheBartPuntoniStefanoSchwartzEric M. (2023), “Leveraging Digital Advertising Platforms for Consumer Research,” SSRN (October 25), https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4589567.
ChevalierJudith A.MayzlinDina (2006), “The Effect of Word of Mouth on Sales: Online Book Reviews,” Journal of Marketing Research, 43 (3), 345–54.
9.
ChoiJungsilLiYexin JessicaSamperAdriana (2019), “The Influence of Health Motivation and Calorie Ending on Preferences for Indulgent Foods,” Journal of Consumer Research, 46 (3), 606–19.
10.
CoulterKeith S.CoulterRobin A. (2005), “Size Does Matter: The Effects of Magnitude Representation Congruency on Price Perceptions and Purchase Likelihood,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15 (1), 64–76.
11.
CoulterKeith S.CoulterRobin A. (2010), “Small Sounds, Big Deals: Phonetic Symbolism Effects in Pricing,” Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (2), 315–28.
12.
DehaeneStanislas (1992), “Varieties of Numerical Abilities,” Cognition, 44 (1–2), 1–42.
13.
DehaeneStanislasBossiniSergeGirauxPascal (1993), “The Mental Representation of Parity and Number Magnitude,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122 (3), 371–96.
14.
DehaeneStanislasCohenLaurent (1995), “Towards an Anatomical and Functional Model of Number Processing,” Mathematical Cognition, 1 (1), 83–120.
15.
De LangheBartFernbachPhilip M.LichtensteinDonald R. (2016), “Navigating by the Stars: Investigating the Actual and Perceived Validity of Online User Ratings,” Journal of Consumer Research, 42 (6), 817–33.
16.
DellarocasChrysanthosZhangXiaoquan (Michael)AwadNeveen F. (2007), “Exploring the Value of Online Product Reviews in Forecasting Sales: The Case of Motion Pictures,” Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21 (4), 23–45.
17.
De WildeElsCookeAlan D.J.JaniszewskiChris (2008), “Attentional Contrast During Sequential Judgments: A Source of the Number-of-Levels Effect,” Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (4), 437–49.
FeigensonLisaDehaeneStanislasSpelkeElizabeth (2004), “Core Systems of Number,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8 (7), 307–14.
20.
FisherMatthewMormannMilica (2022), “The Off by 100% Bias: The Effects of Percentage Changes Greater Than 100% on Magnitude Judgments and Consumer Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 49 (4), 561–73.
21.
FisherMatthewNewmanGeorge E.DharRavi (2018), “Seeing Stars: How the Binary Bias Distorts the Interpretation of Customer Ratings,” Journal of Consumer Research, 45 (3), 471–89.
HagtvedtHenrikBraselS. Adam (2017), “Color Saturation Increases Perceived Product Size,” Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (2), 396–413.
25.
HayesAndrew F. (2017), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. Guilford Press.
26.
Ho-DacNga N.CarsonStephen J.MooreWilliam L. (2013), “The Effects of Positive and Negative Online Customer Reviews: Do Brand Strength and Category Maturity Matter?” Journal of Marketing, 77 (6), 37–53.
JiaHe (Michael)WanEcho WenZhengWanyi (2023), “Stars Versus Bars: How the Aesthetics of Product Ratings ‘Shape’ Product Preference,” Journal of Consumer Research, 50 (1), 142–66.
29.
KimJunghanLakshmananArun (2021), “Do Animated Line Graphs Increase Risk Inferences?” Journal of Marketing Research, 58 (3), 595–613.
30.
KyungEllie J.ThomasManojKrishnaAradhna (2017), “When Bigger Is Better (and When It Is Not): Implicit Bias in Numeric Judgments,” Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (1), 62–79.
31.
LaceteraNicolaPopeDevin G.SydnorJustin R. (2012), “Heuristic Thinking and Limited Attention in the Car Market,” American Economic Review, 102 (5), 2206–36.
32.
LaiMaxineZaxAlexandraBarthHilary (2018), “Digit Identity Influences Numerical Estimation in Children and Adults,” Developmental Science, 21 (5), e12657.
33.
LembregtsChristophePandelaereMario (2013), “Are All Units Created Equal? The Effect of Default Units on Product Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (6), 1275–89.
34.
LembregtsChristopheVan Den BerghBram (2019), “Making Each Unit Count: The Role of Discretizing Units in Quantity Expressions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 45 (5), 1051–67.
MaceSandrine (2012), “The Impact and Determinants of Nine-Ending Pricing in Grocery Retailing,” Journal of Retailing, 88 (1), 115–30.
39.
MixKelly S.PratherRichard W.SmithLinda B.StocktonJerri DaSha (2014), “Young Children’s Interpretation of Multidigit Number Names: From Emerging Competence to Mastery,” Child Development, 85 (3), 1306–19.
40.
MonroeKent B.LeeAngela Y. (1999), “Remembering Versus Knowing: Issues in Buyers’ Processing of Price Information,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27 (2), 207–25.
41.
MorwitzVicki G.GreenleafEric A.JohnsonEric J. (1998), “Divide and Prosper: Consumers’ Reactions to Partitioned Prices,” Journal of Marketing Research, 35 (4), 453–63.
42.
OlenskiAndrew R.ZimermanAndreCoussensStephenJenaAnupam B. (2020), “Behavioral Heuristics in Coronary-Artery Bypass Graft Surgery,” New England Journal of Medicine, 382, 778–79.
43.
ParkJoonkooBrannonElizabeth M. (2013), “Training the Approximate Number System Improves Math Proficiency,” Psychological Science, 24 (10), 2013–19.
SchoenmuellerVerenaNetzerOdedStahlFlorian (2020), “The Polarity of Online Reviews: Prevalence, Drivers and Implications,” Journal of Marketing Research, 57 (5), 853–77.
47.
ShohamMeyravMoldovanSaritSteinhartYael (2018), “Mind the Gap: How Smaller Numerical Differences Can Increase Product Attractiveness,” Journal of Consumer Research, 45 (4), 761–74.
SokolovaTatianaSeenivasanSatheeshThomasManoj (2020), “The Left-Digit Bias: When and Why Are Consumers Penny Wise and Pound Foolish?” Journal of Marketing Research, 57 (4), 771–88.
50.
SunMonic (2012), “How Does the Variance of Product Ratings Matter?” Management Science, 58 (4), 696–707.
51.
ThomasManojMorwitzVicki (2005), “Penny Wise and Pound Foolish: The Left-Digit Effect in Price Cognition,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (1), 54–64.
52.
WatsonJaredGhoshAnastasiya PocheptsovaTrusovMichael (2018), “Swayed by the Numbers: The Consequences of Displaying Product Review Attributes,” Journal of Marketing, 82, 109–31.
53.
WilsonAnna J.RevkinSusannah K.CohenDavidCohenLaurentDehaeneStanislas (2006), “An Open Trial Assessment of ‘The Number Race’, an Adaptive Computer Game for Remediation of Dyscalculia,” Behavioral and Brain Functions, 2 (1), 20.
54.
WiltermuthScott S.GublerTimothyPierceLamar (2022), “Anchoring on Historical Round Number Reference Points: Evidence from Durable Goods Resale Prices,” Organization Science, 34 (5), 1839–63.
55.
YanDengfengSenguptaJaideep (2021), “The Effects of Numerical Divisibility on Loneliness Perceptions and Consumer Preferences,” Journal of Consumer Research, 47 (5), 755–71.
56.
ZhuFengZhangXiaoquan (Michael) (2010), “Impact of Online Consumer Reviews on Sales: The Moderating Role of Product and Consumer Characteristics,” Journal of Marketing, 74 (2), 133–48.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
). The present research investigates how a website's rating presentation may influence magnitude perceptions of the rating, which subsequently affect choices and purchase intentions. The authors propose and find that when the average customer rating is at or above the midpoint (i.e., .5–.9) of each rating level (i.e., 1–5 on a five-point scale), the numerical (vs. analog) rating format is perceived to be lower in magnitude due to left-digit anchoring, leading to differences in choice likelihood, purchase intent, and ad click likelihood for products and services. Across nine experiments, including an eye-tracking study and a multiple-ad study without holdout, the findings show robust evidence for the proposed effect.