Are Critics More Credible? When Positivity Is Expected, Negative Reviewers Are Perceived to Be Less Credible

Abstract When writing a review, influencers market their credibility–a critical antecedent to consumers’ attitudes towards reviewers, reviews, and brands. This research examines how consumer reviews shape source credibility and subsequent word-of-mouth (WOM) of influencers. Nineteen studies (N = 7,330), across several product categories and situations, find that consumers perceive negative reviewers as less credible than positive reviewers due to an expectancy-violation of social norms: negativity violates prior expectations for positive reviews. Study 1 finds that while a negative review is viewed as more helpful, the reviewer is perceived as less credible. Studies 2-5 test the expectancy-violation account, finding that the effect on credibility is mediated by social norms (study 2), is mitigated when consumers have ambiguous prior expectations, and reverses when expectations are negative (studies 3-5). Studies 7A-7I replicate this effect across many domains. This reduction in source credibility has downstream consequences, decreasing consumers’ willingness to follow a subsequent recommendation and the source on social media (studies 6A and 6B). While criticism may be intended to damage a brand and/or to help other consumers, this research finds that criticism hinders WOM and the credibility of a reviewer/influencer. Thus, critics are less credible, and have less influence, when positivity is expected.