Trust and the don't‐want‐to‐complain bias in peer‐to‐peer platform markets

Abstract

This paper addresses peer‐to‐peer (P2P) digital platform markets, often associated with the “sharing economy” or the “collaborative economy”. Such digital platforms, facilitating new purchasing channels for consumers by matching P2P supply and demand, can be considered new market places challenging the conventional markets. How are P2P platform markets evaluated by the consumers? Based on a comprehensive survey‐data material, five different P2P service markets are considered by peer buyers and the results compared to consumers’ evaluations from similar conventional service markets according to trust, comparability and consumers’ satisfaction with the transactions. Comparability seems to be one advantage for the platform markets, while trust could become a problem. Conditions for trust in P2P platform markets is particularly interesting to study because contrary to conventional markets P2P transactions cannot rely on governmental laws, regulations and security net. This trust problem has been solved by a trust‐generating rate and review system. Our data material, however, distinguishes a mechanism that we have coined as the don't‐want‐to‐complain bias. More precisely, people do not like to complain, hence buyers of P2P services often hesitate to give negative ratings when they are discontent with a service or a supplier. Therefore, positive ratings become overestimated. If consumers recognize this bias, ratings and reviews will lose credibility and no longer be considered trustworthy. Eventually, this may threaten the well‐functioning of P2P markets.

Trust barriers to online shopping: Investigating and prioritizing trust barriers in an intuitionistic fuzzy environment

“…Since the website quality influences trust and consequently increases the intention to purchase and pay price premiums (Gregg & Walczak, 2010; Jones & Kim, 2010), and as establishing a trusted website is a key issue for brands (Bilgihan, 2016), the e‐vendors should consider website interface, including ease of navigation, clear terms and conditions, return and exchange policy (Chang et al., 2013; Kaur & Madan, 2013), accurate, comprehensive information about the products/services, order tracking, online chat room and customer reviews and ratings about the e‐vendor and products (Cheung & lee, 2006; Kaur & Madan, 2013). Although the ratings and reviews of the consumer can help other people to know about the e‐vendors, it may lose credibility due to the fact that some consumers do not tend to give negative reviews and this leads to overestimating of positive ratings and reviews (Berg et al., 2020).…”

Home sharing in marketing and tourism at a tipping point: What do we know, how do we know, and where should we be heading?

“… Third party 4 Garau-Vadell et al, 2019 , Liang et al, 2018a , Liang et al, 2018b . CATI 1 Berg, Slettemeås, Kjørstad, and Rosenberg (2020) . Prolific Academic 1 Jiang et al (2019) .…”

Consumer confidence and conspicuous consumption: A conservation of resources perspective

“…To further reveal the nomological network of consumer confidence and its boundary conditions, we encourage research on salient aspects of luxury consumer behaviour types hitherto not studied in the consumer confidence literature (for a review of luxury goods consumption, see Dhaliwal et al (2020). These include (but are by no means limited to) inconspicuous luxury consumption (Berger & Ward, 2010), financial consumption behaviours (Barbić et al, 2019), anti-consumption (Casabayó et al, 2020) and consumption in the peer-to-peer economy (Berg et al, 2020).…”