Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Who is That Masked Reviewer, Anyway?

If you're like me, you buy too many books on Amazon. And you probably scan the online reviews. I can't say I've ever been dissuaded from buying something by a review, but I have occasionally been slowed down in my headlong rush to acquire some more printed matter.

And, if you're like me, you've not given much thought to who those reviewers are. If you'd asked me, I would have guessed that they were customers like us, people who love books and sharing "finds", and who have way more time to read and comment than I do.

But that's not exactly the case.

Thanks to paidContent.org, and specifically Laura Hazard Owen, I've learned that "Amazon's customer reviewers -- particularly the top 1,000 reviewers -- do not always make independent decisions about which books and other products they write about." (Full article, here)

And those reviewers aren't exactly like you and me, either: "Seventy percent of the top reviewers are male, their median age is 51-60, and more than half hold a graduate degree."

Ms. Owen's information comes from research conducted by Cornell University professor Trevor Pinch, who surveyed 166 of Amazon's top 1,000 reviewers for his study.. (Cornell press release on the study, here).

Ms. Owen reports,
Respondents to Pinch's survey overwhelmingly mentioned "self-expression" and "enjoyment" as their motivations [for writing the unpaid reviews]. Many respondents also cited altruistic reasons for reviewing -- "hope to help others decide whether to buy," "wanting to share what I have liked with others," etc.
All this is great, but what I found most concerning among Prof. Pinch's key findings was this one: "85 percent [reported that they] had received free products from publishers, agents, authors, and manufacturers."

Why does that concern me? Not just because of my "transparency" mantra, but because we humans are so easy to influence, and so unaware of how we've been influenced.

Two years ago, I wrote a post about "gimme" pens and caps, suggesting that we should simply get rid of all of them. The post was based on findings reported in the New York Times, which asked:

Can a little promotional gift like a pen or a coffee mug inscribed with a drug’s name really make a difference in a doctor’s prescription patterns? It can, researchers say.

A study reports that students from a medical school where such gifts are allowed had a more favorable attitude toward a cholesterol drug than did students from a school where they are banned.
In fact, the research indicated that no gift is "too small" to have an effect on us. Even if we're not aware of it. My own hypothesis -- based on no research at all, but why should I let that stop me? -- is that we are hard-wired for reciprocity, and that as soon as you give me something, I'm going to try to find a way to "even" things up.

Among the comments posted to Ms. Owen's report is this one:

I'm in the 300s in the Amazon ranking.... I get some freebies through Amazon and some through a review site, but most items I purchase. None of the freebies are dependent on a positive review... And then I tell people what I really think. I know a lot of reviewers who won't rock the boat, but in my experience that's a personality trait based on not wanting to be a green meanie and nothing to do with swag.
I have no doubt that this reviewer believes this comment whole-heartedly. And maybe it's true. My point is that it's impossible for her to be sure of herself, and it's impossible for me reading her review to be sure.

No comments:

Post a Comment