天美传媒

Seminar

Title & Abstract

Dr. Heeyoung Yoon
(Imperial College Business School)

21 Oct 2026

10:30-12:00

WBS 1.007

Title:

Going Green the 鈥淩ight鈥� Way: People favor low-tech over high-tech sustainability solutions

Abstract:

Consumers rank effectiveness as the most important criterion for evaluating sustainability solutions, yet their support does not reflect this stated priority. Across six studies, consumers systematically preferred low-technology solutions (e.g., reforestation, building insulation) over high-technology solutions (e.g., direct air capture, heat pumps). This preference emerged across various domains, persisted even when the high-technology option was objectively more effective, and extended to an incentive-compatible choice with a real donation. Providing effectiveness information attenuated this preference, but support still did not align with effectiveness. We propose that consumers evaluate climate solutions not primarily by what they achieve (i.e., outcome-based evaluation) but by how they achieve it (i.e., means-based evaluation). Consistent with this account, support corresponded to judgments of the appropriateness of the means, such as how safe and familiar the means are perceived to be, rather than to judgments of effectiveness. These findings suggest that communicating effectiveness alone is unlikely to close the gap between public support and the climate technologies that must scale.

Dr. Andreas Bayer
(Erasmus School of Economics)

19 November

10:30-12:00

Room: TBD

The Reviews We Never See: How Abandonment Amplifies Positivity in Online Ratings

Abstract:

Online reviews influence consumer decisions, yet published reviews capture only those opinions that survive the review-writing process. This research examines review abandonment, an overlooked stage of self-selection in which consumers begin sharing their experiences but discontinue before publication. Using proprietary data from a software review platform that records both published and abandoned reviews, including users鈥� initial ratings and subsequent progress, the authors document substantial and asymmetric abandonment. Only about one in six review attempts ultimately results in publication. Among users who provide an initial rating, those expressing negative opinions are substantially more likely to abandon their reviews than those expressing positive opinions. Consequently, published ratings present a more favorable picture of product experiences than the ratings initially entered by prospective reviewers. The authors further examine three moderators of this asymmetry: review incentives, reviewer experience, and requests for privacy-sensitive information. The abandonment gap between negative and positive reviews is smaller when reviews are incentivized and when reviewers have greater experience, but larger when reviewers encounter privacy-sensitive questions.