Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Çevrimiçi Yorumdan Algılanan Fayda: Ürün Kullanım Süresinin ve Yorumun İnandırıcılığının Rolü

Year 2020, Issue: 56, 97 - 122, 30.08.2020

Raife Meltem Yetkin Özbük

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.703697
Cited By: 1

Abstract

Ürün ve hizmetler hakkında çevrimiçi (online) yorum okuyanların, bu yorumların doğruluğu ve tarafsızlığına dair şüpheleri her geçen gün artmaktadır. Bu sebeple, tüketicilerin bu yorumlara inanmasını ve faydalı bulmasını sağlamak amacıyla firmalar, çevrimiçi yorum yazanlardan yorumun gerçekçi olduğuna dair ipuçları sunmalarını istemektedir. Bu ipuçlarından biri olan ürün kullanım süresinin çevrimiçi yorumda belirtilmesi mevcut araştırmada ele alınmıştır. Bu kapsamda, çevrimiçi yorumda ürün kullanım süresinin yer almasının, okuyucunun yorumdan algıladığı fayda üzerindeki etkileri, bu etkinin olumlu ve olumsuz yorumlar için nasıl farklılaştığı ve yorumun inandırıcılığının bu etkideki aracılık rolü incelenmiştir. Bu amaçla, üç ön-araştırma ile çevrimiçi yorumun manipülasyonu sağlanmış; sonrasında ise dört farklı senaryonun yer aldığı denekler arası faktöriyel tasarım modeli uygulanmıştır. Yapılan analizler sonucunda ürün kullanım süresinin çevrimiçi yorumda yer almasının yorumdan algılanan faydayı önemli ölçüde arttırdığı görülmüştür. Olumsuz çevrimiçi yorumlarda ürün kullanım süresinin belirtilmesi algılanan faydayı olumlu yorumlarda belirtilmesine göre daha az etkilemektedir. Ayrıca, ürün kullanım süresinin çevrimiçi yorumda belirtilmesi algılanan faydayı yorumun inandırıcılığı aracılıyla etkilemektedir.

Keywords

Çevrimiçi Yorum Fayda İnandırıcılık Aracılık Analizi Ürün Kullanım Süresi

Supporting Institution

Bu çalışma, 2017 yılında Raife Meltem YETKİN ÖZBÜK tarafından yazılan "Online Yorumda Ürün Kullanım Süresinin Algılanan Fayda Üzerindeki Etkileri" başlıklı doktora tezinden türetilmiştir.

References

  • Agnihotri, A. ve Bhattacharya, S. (2016). Online review helpfulness: Role of qualitative factors. Psychology and Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20934
  • Ansari, A., Essegaier, S. ve Kohli, R. (2000). Internet Recommendation Systems. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(3), 363–375. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.37.3.363.18779
  • Baron, R. M. ve Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
  • Benedicktus, R. L., Brady, M. K., Darke, P. R. ve Voorhees, C. M. (2010). Conveying trustworthiness to online consumers: reactions to consensus, physical store presence, brand familiarity, and generalized suspicion. Journal of Retailing, 86(4), 322–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2010.04.002
  • Bowerman, B. L., O'Connell, R. T. ve Hand, L. M. (2001). Business Statistics in Practice . McGraw-Hill.
  • Casaló, L. V., Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M. ve Ekinci, Y. (2015). Avoiding the dark side of positive online consumer reviews: Enhancing reviews’ usefulness for high risk-averse travelers. Journal of Business Research, 68(9), 1829–1835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.010
  • Chen, J., Teng, L., Yu, Y. ve Yu, X. (2016). The effect of online information sources on purchase intentions between consumers with high and low susceptibility to informational influence. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 467–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.05.003
  • Chen, Z. ve Lurie, N. H. (2013). Temporal Contiguity and Negativity Bias in the Impact of Online Word of Mouth. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(4), 463–476. https://doi.org/10.1509/0022-2437-50.4.463
  • Cheng, Y. H. ve Ho, H. Y. (2015). Social influence’s impact on reader perceptions of online reviews. Journal of Business Research, 68(4), 883–887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.046
  • Felbermayr, A. ve Nanopoulos, A. (2016). The Role of Emotions for the Perceived Usefulness in Online Customer Reviews. Journal of Interactive Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2016.05.004
  • Filieri, R. (2015). What makes online reviews helpful? A diagnosticity-adoption framework to explain informational and normative influences in e-WOM. Journal of Business Research, 68(6), 1261–1270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.006
  • Gershoff, A. D., Mukherjee, A. ve Mukhopadhyay, A. (2004). Consumer Acceptance of Online Agent Advice: Extremity and Positivity Effects. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(1–2), 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp13-1&2_14
  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. ve Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. Pearson Education.
  • Hamby, A., Daniloski, K. ve Brinberg, D. (2015). How consumer reviews persuade through narratives. Journal of Business Research, 68(6), 1242–1250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.004
  • Hamilton, R. W. ve Thompson, D. V. (2007). Is There a Substitute for Direct Experience? Comparing Consumers’ Preferences after Direct and Indirect Product Experiences. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.org/10.1086/520073
  • Hayes, A. (2013). Model Templates for PROCESS for SPSS and SAS. Nisan 13, 2017 tarihinde http://www.personal.psu.edu/jxb14/M554/specreg/templates.pdf adresinden alındı
  • Hoch, S. J. (2002). Product Experience Is Seductive. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.org/10.1086/344422
  • Ito, T. A., Larsen, J. T., Smith, N. K. ve Cacioppo, J. T. (1998). Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.75.4.887
  • Jiménez, F. R. ve Mendoza, N. A. (2013). Too popular to ignore: The influence of online reviews on purchase intentions of search and experience products. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27(3), 226–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2013.04.004
  • Koo, D. (2015). The strength of no tie relationship in an online recommendation: Focused on interactional effects of valence, tie strength, and type of service. European Journal of Marketing, 49(7/8), 1163–1183. https://doi.org/10.1179/str.2006.53.4.005
  • Lee, M., Rodgers, S. ve Kim, M. (2009). Effects of valence and extremity of eWOM on attitude toward the brand and website. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 31(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2009.10505262
  • Li, H., Daugherty, T. ve Biocca, F. (2001). Characteristics of virtual experience in electronic commerce: A protocol analysis. Journal of Interactive Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.1013
  • Li, L., Lee, K. Y., Lee, M. ve Yang, S.-B. (2020). Unveiling the cloak of deviance: Linguistic cues for psychological processes in fake online reviews. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 87(February), 102468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102468
  • MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis. Routledge.
  • Mafael, A., Gottschalk, S. A. ve Kreis, H. (2016). Examining Biased Assimilation of Brand-related Online Reviews. Journal of Interactive Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2016.06.002
  • Malhotra, N. K. (2007). Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, 5th Edition. Prentice-Hall, Inc, New Jersey, USA.
  • Mert, M. (2016). Yatay Kesit Veri Analizi Bilgisayar Uygulamaları. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
  • Moore, S. G. (2015). Attitude predictability and helpfulness in online reviews: The role of explained actions and reactions. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucv003
  • Munzel, A. (2016). Assisting consumers in detecting fake reviews: The role of identity information disclosure and consensus. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 32, 96–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.06.002
  • Nunnally, J. (1978), Psychometric Methods, New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Ozer, M. (2011). The moderating roles of prior experience and behavioral importance in the predictive validity of new product concept testing. Journal of Product Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00784.x
  • Pan, Y. ve Zhang, J. Q. (2011). Born Unequal: A Study of the Helpfulness of User-Generated Product Reviews. Journal of Retailing, 87(4), 598–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2011.05.002
  • Park, C. ve Lee, T. M. (2009a). Antecedents of Online Reviews’ Usage and Purchase Influence: An Empirical Comparison of U.S. and Korean Consumers. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23(4), 332–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2009.07.001
  • Park, C. ve Lee, T. M. (2009b). Information direction, website reputation and eWOM effect: A moderating role of product type. Journal of Business Research, 62(1), 61–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.11.017
  • Peng, L., Cui, G., Zhuang, M. ve Li, C. (2016). Consumer perceptions of online review deceptions: an empirical study in China. Journal of Consumer Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-01-2015-1281
  • Purnawirawan, N., De Pelsmacker, P. ve Dens, N. (2012). Balance and Sequence in Online Reviews: How Perceived Usefulness Affects Attitudes and Intentions. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4), 244–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2012.04.002
  • Purnawirawan, N., Eisend, M., Pelsmacker, P. De ve Dens, N. (2015). A Meta-analytic Investigation of the Role of Valence in Online Reviews. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 31, 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2015.05.001
  • Reimer, T. ve Benkenstein, M. (2016). Altruistic eWOM marketing: More than an alternative to monetary incentives. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.04.003
  • Rozin, P. ve Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2
  • Schlosser, A. E. (2011). Can including pros and cons increase the helpfulness and persuasiveness of online reviews? The interactive effects of ratings and arguments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(3), 226–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.04.002
  • Singh, J. P., Irani, S., Rana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., Saumya, S. ve Kumar Roy, P. (2017). Predicting the “helpfulness” of online consumer reviews. Journal of Business Research, 70, 346–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.008
  • Sussman, S. W. ve Siegal, W. S. (2003). Informational influence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Information Systems Research. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.14.1.47.14767
  • Tabachnick, B. ve Fidell, L. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics (International b.). New Jersey: Pearson.
  • Wu, P. F. (2013). In search of negativity bias: An empirical study of perceived helpfulness of online reviews. Psychology and Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20660
  • Wu, Y., Ngai, E. W. T., Wu, P. ve Wu, C. (2020). Fake online reviews : Literature review , synthesis , and directions for future research. Decision Support Systems, (February), 113280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2020.113280
  • Zhang, L., Gao, Y. ve Zheng, X. (2020). Let’s Talk About This in Public: Consumer Expectations for Online Review Response. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965519864864

Perceived Helpfulness of Online Review: The Role of Product Usage Period and Review’s Credibility

Year 2020, Issue: 56, 97 - 122, 30.08.2020

Raife Meltem Yetkin Özbük

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.703697
Cited By: 1

Abstract

Consumers are increasingly suspicious of the accuracy and objectivity of online reviews of products and services. Therefore, to make the consumers to believe in the online reviews and to perceive online reviews useful, firms suggest their consumers provide clues while writing online reviews. One of these clues, stating the presence of product usage period in online reviews, is addressed in the current research. Thus, the effect of stating the product usage period on the perceived usefulness of online reviews; how this effect differs for positive and negative ones, and the mediating role of the review credibility in this relationship were examined. For this purpose, the online review was manipulated with three pre-studies; afterwards, a between-subjects factorial experimental design model was developed with four different scenarios. As a result of the analysis, it was observed that stating the product usage period in online review significantly increases the perceived usefulness. Stating the product usage period in negative online reviews is less effective on the perceived usefulness of online reviews than in positive online reviews. In addition, the presence of product usage period in online review affects perceived usefulness by affecting the credibility of online review.

Keywords

Online Review Helpfulness Credibility Mediation Analysis Product Usage Period

References

  • Agnihotri, A. ve Bhattacharya, S. (2016). Online review helpfulness: Role of qualitative factors. Psychology and Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20934
  • Ansari, A., Essegaier, S. ve Kohli, R. (2000). Internet Recommendation Systems. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(3), 363–375. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.37.3.363.18779
  • Baron, R. M. ve Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
  • Benedicktus, R. L., Brady, M. K., Darke, P. R. ve Voorhees, C. M. (2010). Conveying trustworthiness to online consumers: reactions to consensus, physical store presence, brand familiarity, and generalized suspicion. Journal of Retailing, 86(4), 322–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2010.04.002
  • Bowerman, B. L., O'Connell, R. T. ve Hand, L. M. (2001). Business Statistics in Practice . McGraw-Hill.
  • Casaló, L. V., Flavián, C., Guinalíu, M. ve Ekinci, Y. (2015). Avoiding the dark side of positive online consumer reviews: Enhancing reviews’ usefulness for high risk-averse travelers. Journal of Business Research, 68(9), 1829–1835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.010
  • Chen, J., Teng, L., Yu, Y. ve Yu, X. (2016). The effect of online information sources on purchase intentions between consumers with high and low susceptibility to informational influence. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 467–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.05.003
  • Chen, Z. ve Lurie, N. H. (2013). Temporal Contiguity and Negativity Bias in the Impact of Online Word of Mouth. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(4), 463–476. https://doi.org/10.1509/0022-2437-50.4.463
  • Cheng, Y. H. ve Ho, H. Y. (2015). Social influence’s impact on reader perceptions of online reviews. Journal of Business Research, 68(4), 883–887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.046
  • Felbermayr, A. ve Nanopoulos, A. (2016). The Role of Emotions for the Perceived Usefulness in Online Customer Reviews. Journal of Interactive Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2016.05.004
  • Filieri, R. (2015). What makes online reviews helpful? A diagnosticity-adoption framework to explain informational and normative influences in e-WOM. Journal of Business Research, 68(6), 1261–1270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.006
  • Gershoff, A. D., Mukherjee, A. ve Mukhopadhyay, A. (2004). Consumer Acceptance of Online Agent Advice: Extremity and Positivity Effects. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(1–2), 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp13-1&2_14
  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. ve Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. Pearson Education.
  • Hamby, A., Daniloski, K. ve Brinberg, D. (2015). How consumer reviews persuade through narratives. Journal of Business Research, 68(6), 1242–1250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.004
  • Hamilton, R. W. ve Thompson, D. V. (2007). Is There a Substitute for Direct Experience? Comparing Consumers’ Preferences after Direct and Indirect Product Experiences. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.org/10.1086/520073
  • Hayes, A. (2013). Model Templates for PROCESS for SPSS and SAS. Nisan 13, 2017 tarihinde http://www.personal.psu.edu/jxb14/M554/specreg/templates.pdf adresinden alındı
  • Hoch, S. J. (2002). Product Experience Is Seductive. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.org/10.1086/344422
  • Ito, T. A., Larsen, J. T., Smith, N. K. ve Cacioppo, J. T. (1998). Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.75.4.887
  • Jiménez, F. R. ve Mendoza, N. A. (2013). Too popular to ignore: The influence of online reviews on purchase intentions of search and experience products. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27(3), 226–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2013.04.004
  • Koo, D. (2015). The strength of no tie relationship in an online recommendation: Focused on interactional effects of valence, tie strength, and type of service. European Journal of Marketing, 49(7/8), 1163–1183. https://doi.org/10.1179/str.2006.53.4.005
  • Lee, M., Rodgers, S. ve Kim, M. (2009). Effects of valence and extremity of eWOM on attitude toward the brand and website. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 31(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2009.10505262
  • Li, H., Daugherty, T. ve Biocca, F. (2001). Characteristics of virtual experience in electronic commerce: A protocol analysis. Journal of Interactive Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.1013
  • Li, L., Lee, K. Y., Lee, M. ve Yang, S.-B. (2020). Unveiling the cloak of deviance: Linguistic cues for psychological processes in fake online reviews. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 87(February), 102468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102468
  • MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis. Routledge.
  • Mafael, A., Gottschalk, S. A. ve Kreis, H. (2016). Examining Biased Assimilation of Brand-related Online Reviews. Journal of Interactive Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2016.06.002
  • Malhotra, N. K. (2007). Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, 5th Edition. Prentice-Hall, Inc, New Jersey, USA.
  • Mert, M. (2016). Yatay Kesit Veri Analizi Bilgisayar Uygulamaları. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
  • Moore, S. G. (2015). Attitude predictability and helpfulness in online reviews: The role of explained actions and reactions. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucv003
  • Munzel, A. (2016). Assisting consumers in detecting fake reviews: The role of identity information disclosure and consensus. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 32, 96–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.06.002
  • Nunnally, J. (1978), Psychometric Methods, New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Ozer, M. (2011). The moderating roles of prior experience and behavioral importance in the predictive validity of new product concept testing. Journal of Product Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00784.x
  • Pan, Y. ve Zhang, J. Q. (2011). Born Unequal: A Study of the Helpfulness of User-Generated Product Reviews. Journal of Retailing, 87(4), 598–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2011.05.002
  • Park, C. ve Lee, T. M. (2009a). Antecedents of Online Reviews’ Usage and Purchase Influence: An Empirical Comparison of U.S. and Korean Consumers. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23(4), 332–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2009.07.001
  • Park, C. ve Lee, T. M. (2009b). Information direction, website reputation and eWOM effect: A moderating role of product type. Journal of Business Research, 62(1), 61–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.11.017
  • Peng, L., Cui, G., Zhuang, M. ve Li, C. (2016). Consumer perceptions of online review deceptions: an empirical study in China. Journal of Consumer Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-01-2015-1281
  • Purnawirawan, N., De Pelsmacker, P. ve Dens, N. (2012). Balance and Sequence in Online Reviews: How Perceived Usefulness Affects Attitudes and Intentions. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4), 244–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2012.04.002
  • Purnawirawan, N., Eisend, M., Pelsmacker, P. De ve Dens, N. (2015). A Meta-analytic Investigation of the Role of Valence in Online Reviews. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 31, 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2015.05.001
  • Reimer, T. ve Benkenstein, M. (2016). Altruistic eWOM marketing: More than an alternative to monetary incentives. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.04.003
  • Rozin, P. ve Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2
  • Schlosser, A. E. (2011). Can including pros and cons increase the helpfulness and persuasiveness of online reviews? The interactive effects of ratings and arguments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(3), 226–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.04.002
  • Singh, J. P., Irani, S., Rana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., Saumya, S. ve Kumar Roy, P. (2017). Predicting the “helpfulness” of online consumer reviews. Journal of Business Research, 70, 346–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.008
  • Sussman, S. W. ve Siegal, W. S. (2003). Informational influence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Information Systems Research. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.14.1.47.14767
  • Tabachnick, B. ve Fidell, L. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics (International b.). New Jersey: Pearson.
  • Wu, P. F. (2013). In search of negativity bias: An empirical study of perceived helpfulness of online reviews. Psychology and Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20660
  • Wu, Y., Ngai, E. W. T., Wu, P. ve Wu, C. (2020). Fake online reviews : Literature review , synthesis , and directions for future research. Decision Support Systems, (February), 113280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2020.113280
  • Zhang, L., Gao, Y. ve Zheng, X. (2020). Let’s Talk About This in Public: Consumer Expectations for Online Review Response. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965519864864
There are 46 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Raife Meltem Yetkin Özbük 0000-0002-2014-1850

Publication Date August 30, 2020
Acceptance Date May 30, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020 Issue: 56

Cite

APA Yetkin Özbük, R. M. (2020). Çevrimiçi Yorumdan Algılanan Fayda: Ürün Kullanım Süresinin ve Yorumun İnandırıcılığının Rolü. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi(56), 97-122. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.703697

Cited By

Deneysel Araştırma Tasarımı ve Pazarlama Araştırmalarında Deneysel Araştırma Tasarımı Kullanan Yayınların İncelenmesi
TroyAcademy
https://doi.org/10.31454/troyacademy.1235967

Ethical Principles and Ethical Guidelines

The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences places great emphasis on publication ethics, which serve as a foundation for the impartial and reputable advancement of scientific knowledge. In this context, the journal adopts a publishing approach aligned with the ethical standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and is committed to preventing potential malpractice. The following ethical responsibilities, established based on COPE’s principles, are expected to be upheld by all stakeholders involved in the publication process (authors, readers and researchers, publishers, reviewers, and editors).

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors
Make decisions on submissions based on the quality and originality of the work, its alignment with the journal's aims and scope, and the reviewers’ evaluations, regardless of the authors' religion, language, race, ethnicity, political views, or gender.
Respond to information requests from readers, authors, and reviewers regarding the publication and evaluation processes.
Conduct all processes without compromising ethical standards and intellectual property rights.
Support freedom of thought and protect human and animal rights.
Ensure the peer review process adheres to the principle of double-blind peer review.
Take full responsibility for accepting, rejecting, or requesting changes to a manuscript and ensure that conflicts of interest among stakeholders do not influence these decisions.
Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
Submitted works must be original. When utilizing other works, proper and complete citations and/or references must be provided.
A manuscript must not be under review by another journal simultaneously.
Individuals who have not contributed to the experimental design, implementation, data analysis, or interpretation should not be listed as authors.
If requested during the review process, datasets used in the manuscript must be provided to the editorial board.
If a significant error or mistake is discovered in the manuscript, the journal’s editorial office must be notified.
For studies requiring ethical committee approval, the relevant document must be submitted to the journal. Details regarding the ethical approval (name of the ethics committee, approval document number, and date) must be included in the manuscript.
Changes to authorship (e.g., adding or removing authors, altering the order of authors) cannot be proposed after the review process has commenced.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
Accept review assignments only in areas where they have sufficient expertise.
Agree to review manuscripts in a timely and unbiased manner.
Ensure confidentiality of the reviewed manuscript and not disclose any information about it, during or after the review process, beyond what is already published.
Refrain from using information obtained during the review process for personal or third-party benefit.
Notify the journal editor if plagiarism or other ethical violations are suspected in the manuscript.
Conduct reviews objectively and avoid conflicts of interest. If a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the review.
Use polite and constructive language during the review process and avoid personal comments.
Publication Policy
The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences is a free, open-access, peer-reviewed academic journal that has been in publication since 1981. The journal welcomes submissions in Turkish and English within the fields of economics, business administration, public finance, political science, public administration, and international relations.

No submission or publication fees are charged by the journal.
Every submitted manuscript undergoes a double-blind peer review process and similarity/plagiarism checks via iThenticate.
Submissions must be original and not previously published, accepted for publication, or under review elsewhere.
Articles published in the journal can be cited under the Open Access Policy and Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is given.
The journal is published three times a year, in April, August, and December. It includes original, high-quality, and scientifically supported research articles and reviews in its listed fields. Academic studies unrelated to these disciplines or their theoretical and empirical foundations are not accepted. The journal's languages are Turkish and English.

Submissions are first subject to a preliminary review for format and content. Manuscripts not meeting the journal's standards are rejected by the editorial board. Manuscripts deemed suitable proceed to the peer review stage.

Each submission is sent to at least two expert reviewers. If both reviews are favorable, the article is approved for publication. In cases where one review is positive and the other negative, the editorial board decides based on the reviews or may send the manuscript to a third reviewer.

Articles published in the journal are open access and can be cited under the Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is made.