Purpose

Keeping in mind the growing significance of online reviews, management of responses to the customer reviews – webcare – is becoming important in recent times. How a firm responds to online reviews can send a signal to the readers of the reviews contributing to their brand evaluations. From a strategic perspective, a firm should decide if they should respond to all reviews or respond to only a select few reviews. This study aims to provide an understanding of how exhaustive and selective webcare influence brand evaluations. It also explores the role of review balance and review frame, which potentially act as moderators, on such influences.

Design/methodology/approach

Three scenario-based experiments were used to manipulate the webcare strategy (exhaustive-selective) and the potential moderators (review balance and review frame). The 910 participants of the single-stage experiments were identified using an online panel managed by UK-based Prolific Academic.

Findings

Exhaustive webcare is found to be the most effective strategy for influencing brand evaluations in all conditions. Also, two interesting results were found, which can have practical implications. A selective negative strategy is as effective as an exhaustive webcare in almost all cases, and a selective positive webcare is as good as not having a webcare in nearly all cases. Changes in webcare effectiveness due to the influence of review balance and review frame were established.

Research limitations/implications

With the review reader perspective and focus on brand management, this study may trigger enquiries into effects of webcare strategies on brand evaluations and other outcomes such as word-of-mouth. The interaction effects of the various strategies adopted together on brand evaluation and loyalty have not been explored and would be of interest to academicians and managers.

Practical implications

Firms need to plan a careful resource deployment while responding to the online consumer reviews as responding to a select few reviews may yield the same effects as that of exhaustive webcare. Brand managers may find responding only to positive reviews futile, as it could be as good as having no webcare. Also, the strategy of responding to reviews needs to be adapted based on the online review platform where the set in which the review is read is different.

Originality/value

This is one of the few studies focusing on the effects of webcare on brand evaluations from a review reader perspective as against the dominant reviewer perspective. This research also presents hitherto unexplored effects of an exhaustive-selective webcare strategy on brand evaluations.

中文翻译：

---

Webcare的信号：详尽的选择性Webcare战略和品牌评估

目的

牢记在线评论的重要性越来越高，对顾客评论的响应进行管理-webcare-在最近变得越来越重要。公司对在线评论的回应方式可以向评论的读者发送信号，从而有助于其品牌评估。从战略角度来看，公司应决定是否应对所有评论或仅对部分评论进行回应。这项研究旨在提供详尽而详尽的网络护理如何影响品牌评估的理解。它还探讨了审查平衡和审查框架在此类影响上的潜在作用，这些作用可能充当主持人。

设计/方法/方法

使用了三个基于方案的实验来操纵Webcare策略（穷举-选择性）和潜在的主持人（审阅平衡和审阅框架）。使用英国的Prolific Academic管理的在线小组，确定了910名单阶段实验的参与者。

发现

发现详尽的网络维护是在所有情况下影响品牌评估的最有效策略。此外，还发现了两个有趣的结果，它们可能具有实际意义。选择性消极策略在几乎所有情况下都与穷举性Webcare一样有效，而选择性阳性积极Webcare几乎在所有情况下都与没有Webcare一样好。建立了由于评论平衡和评论框架的影响而导致的Webcare有效性的变化。

研究局限/意义

从评论读者的角度出发，并专注于品牌管理，这项研究可能会引发对网络护理策略对品牌评估和其他结果（如口碑）的影响的询问。尚未探讨将各种策略共同用于品牌评估和忠诚度的相互作用，这将引起院士和管理人员的兴趣。

实际影响

公司在回应在线消费者评论时需要计划仔细的资源部署，因为对精选的少数评论做出回应可能会产生与详尽的Webcare相同的效果。品牌经理可能会发现仅对正面评价做出回应是徒劳的，因为这可能与没有网络服务一样好。另外，需要根据在线评论平台（其中阅读评论的集合不同）来调整响应评论的策略。

创意/价值

这是为数不多的从评论阅读者角度而非主要评论者角度关注网络护理对品牌评价影响的研究之一。这项研究还提出了详尽无遗的网络护理策略对品牌评估的迄今未曾探索的效果。