The vast majority of consumers read product reviews before making an online purchase, suggesting that most of us understand the value of honest, accurate reviews. Nevertheless, new research suggests that if you offer a financial incentive to customers in exchange for writing the review, they’re significantly more likely to write a positive review — even though the incentive is not at all contingent on the content of the review. Based on a series of studies, the authors found that offering an incentive as low as $0.20 or $1.00 increased the positivity of reviews by 40 to 70%. That said, the authors also note some situations in which incentives aren’t effective: Specifically, they won’t work to counteract negative sentiment in the face of a major public scandal, and they can also backfire if new customers feel that the reviews are positive to the point of inaccuracy. But in general, this research suggests that offering a financial incentive can be an effective strategy to help companies source more positive reviews.
If someone paid you to review a product, would you be more likely to write a positive review or a negative one? You might think that a financial incentive shouldn’t have any impact. After all, the purpose of product reviews is to provide honest feedback. Ninety-three percent of U.S. adults read reviews before making online purchases, suggesting that the vast majority of consumers understand the benefits of reliable reviews and would be motivated to write accurate ones themselves.
Nevertheless, when companies pay customers to write reviews, it changes those reviews in two key ways. First, previous research has shown that providing an incentive increases the number of reviews a company is likely to receive. Second, our recent research suggests that customers who receive an incentive are more likely to write positive reviews, regardless of their experience with the product.
To examine whether and how incentives change what consumers write, we conducted a series of experiments in which we recruited customers to write reviews, both in person and through an online survey platform. After people agreed, they were randomly assigned to receive or not receive an incentive. This allowed us to isolate the incentive’s effect on the content of reviews without influencing who chose to write one.
In our first experiment, we recruited almost 800 users of video-streaming services such as Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime through a survey platform and asked them to review their service for potential future customers. After agreeing, participants were randomly divided into four groups. Those in the first group were told they would receive a small financial incentive ($0.20); those in the second group were told they would be entered into a lottery for a larger financial prize ($200); and those in the third group were told they would be entered into a lottery for a nonmonetary prize (Apple AirPods worth $200). A control group was not offered any incentive. After writing their reviews, participants answered questions about how interesting and enjoyable they found the process.
We then used a standard textual analysis tool — the Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC) — to determine the percentage of words with positive and negative emotional connotations in each group of reviews. This revealed that participants who were offered any of the incentives wrote reviews containing 40% more positive language than the reviews written by members of the control group, and they found the process more interesting and enjoyable. Follow-up studies showed that this greater enjoyment was the main driver of positive emotional content.
In another experiment, we recruited diners to take a short survey after finishing their meals. Once they agreed to review their experience, half were told they would receive a $1 Amazon gift card; the other half were not offered anything. Our LIWC analysis showed that the incentive increased positive language by 55%. We also asked human judges to assess the reviews. They rated those written by the incentivized group as 70% more positive than those written by the control group.
Importantly, in all our experiments the incentive was offered after customers had completed their experience with the product in question. And we explicitly directed them to provide accurate, honest descriptions. Because there was no reason for incentivized customers to have had a different experience with the products than their non-incentivized counterparts, one might expect that the incentives would not influence the content of reviews — but our experiments demonstrated otherwise. Simply knowing you’ll receive a reward for writing a review makes the process more enjoyable, which makes you more likely to write a positive review.
Does this mean that all companies should offer incentives to write reviews? Not necessarily. Our research suggests that although offering incentives is generally a net positive, there are circumstances in which they can be less effective. For example, a company going through a public scandal might be tempted to use incentives to quickly source positive reviews — but a follow-up experiment showed that in such a situation, offering an incentive is unlikely to yield better results.
In that experiment, we recruited customers to write reviews of a breakfast cereal sold by a company that had engaged in unethical activities, such as using palm oil from rain forests and targeting advertising to young children. Half of the customers read about the unethical practices before writing their reviews; the other half did not read anything beforehand. We then told half of the customers in each group that they would receive an incentive for writing their review. Among the customers who didn’t read about the company’s unethical behavior, the incentive increased review positivity. But those who read about the bad behavior wrote similarly negative reviews regardless of whether they were offered an incentive. This suggests that if people feel they are being bribed by a company that doesn’t deserve their support, they’re unlikely to leave a positive review even if offered an incentive.
And maximizing review positivity at all costs isn’t always a good idea. In our final experiment, we asked potential customers to evaluate a series of reviews — some written by incentivized reviewers, some by non-incentivized reviewers — and then indicate their interest in buying the product. As we expected, people were more interested in buying the product after reading a review from an incentivized reviewer, most likely because the incentivized reviews had more positive content. Interested buyers are generally a good thing, of course — but if positive reviews are inaccurate, they can generate disappointment and backlash. So managers should be transparent about whether customers received incentives for writing reviews. And they should consider encouraging writers to be accurate in their reviews even when receiving an incentive.
***
When it comes to designing review incentive programs, there’s no one-size-fits-all solution. But by recognizing the impact that incentives can have, you’ll be more likely to develop a rewards system that creates the results you’re looking for. As long as you take steps to limit inaccurate reviews and don’t try to use incentives to cover up a scandal, offering incentives can be an effective strategy for improving customers’ review-writing experience and increasing the positive content in your product reviews.