Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose Prominent travel platforms like Booking, TripAdvisor and Hotels.com increasingly publish electronic word of mouth (eWOM) worldwide, with reviewers' information including country of origin (COO). However, research that analyzes the role of culture in the context of e-WOM remains scarce. Our study addresses this gap by investigating the effects of reviewers' COO and the country stereotypes evoked – based on the degree of a nation's development and culture – on eWOM adoption. Design/methodology/approach Two quantitative studies were conducted using a 3X2 between-subjects factorial design. The manipulated factors were reviewer category according to country-of-origin (COO) culture and level of development (same nationality, developed country with a different culture, developing country with a different culture) and positive or negative eWOM valence. In Study 1, 323 American participants were randomly assigned to one of the experimental conditions. Study 2 extends Study 1 by examining the moderating role of national identification with a sample of 303 British participants. Findings Across both studies, the results demonstrate that for reviewers from other countries, COO positively influences perceptions of reviewer competence when the latter is from a developed country and is perceived as an outgroup member, thereby increasing eWOM adoption. Additionally, Study 2 shows that at higher levels of national identification, ingroup members are perceived as more competent than outgroup members from developed countries. These findings offer valuable insights for both marketing researchers and practitioners. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to empirically examine how COO stereotypes shape perceptions of reviewer competence and eWOM adoption. It also breaks new ground by investigating the moderating role of national identification in shaping perceptions of reviewer competence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hashish et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: