Why are peer-to-peer ratings almost always positive? How market contextual factors can systematically affect consumer motivations for eWOM

Sharing economy consumers rely on ratings and reviews as a source of trust. But peer-to-peer ratings are overwhelmingly positive, which can limit their informational value and erode trust. We use a mixed-method approach to investigate whether and why peer-to-peer ratings are more positive than ratings for comparable commercial services, including a large-scale analysis of Airbnb listings, as well as preregistered surveys and experiments. We find that peer-to-peer consumers both inflate the ratings they provide and selectively withhold low ratings through two motivational pathways: a promotion-focused motivation to help non-professional providers and a prevention-focused motivation for self-protection from retaliation, respectively. We show how the peer-to-peer context systematically shifts consumers toward these motivations, identifying self-protection as a distinct, avoidance-based motive that contrasts with traditional gain-focused eWOM motivations. Finally, we identify platform interventions to reduce rating positivity by attenuating self-protection concerns and redirecting consumers’ desire to help providers toward alternative forms of support.