Added info to make Lazerer reviews more acceptable on LPF...

[lasersbee]

There was a Thread opened discussing the ethics of
a seller giving rewards for Reviews...
It was Closed while I was asleep....

http://laserpointerforums.com/f44/getting-sick-lazerer-com-pseduo-spam-67663.html

I don't want to re-open the discussion but would like
to add that if the Reward Program was not mentioned
on this Forum then Yes.. I could see your point RHD..

I still need to search the Forum for that info.. I was
sure that I read it here..

In the mean time so that the Reviews posted by those
Members are in accordance with total disclosure....
Here is a link to the Rewards Program that this seller
chose to share with his customers....

Reviews for Rewards

Now there are no secrets about the Reviews and we all
know...
This does not mean that ALL Reviewers were rewarded.
I know for a fact that not all Reviewers asked for a reward...


BTW... any Mods can Sticky this in the Reviews section
and Close this Thread..



Jerry

 

[rhd]

Re: Added info to make reviews acceptable on LPF...

Hey Jerry,

This is a great initiative. My applause

I would add that it takes more than just this thread existing to make future reviews ethical and in the spirit of full disclosure. The reviews themselves should state at the outset:

"Disclosure: I took advantage of ABC company's incentive program and received XYZ reward/compensation/incentive."

Or something like that. It can be brief, concise, one line - but it should be there, and it should be up front.

Further, the same policy should apply to any review conducted for an incentive, not just those relating to Lazerer. Lazerer happened to be the company that prompted this useful debate, but there's no reason that the same ethic/principal you've touched on here shouldn't apply to their competitors as well as any other companies that decide to do business in our community. Companies will come and go, but your thread will outlive them. The positive principal that you've articulated should serve us well for future companies that may decide to promote their wares in our community.

Apart from adding that one small point, I think this is a perfect/fantastic idea that you've come up with. Props.

 

[ShortyInCanada]

Re: Added info to make reviews acceptable on LPF...

After reading the previously mentioned thread, checking some of the links, and now following your comments here I might add a couple of things...(perhaps just being a bit technical.)

In this instance it would seem that the supplier is offering to possibly refund 5% for a review posted in accordance to their criteria.
I don't see how a person composing a review could include that they have been compensated for the review they are writing before they can even apply for the compensation. And they can't know for sure if they even will be getting anything until it happens. And with some of the time delays for getting e-mail responses from some of these Chinese based companies it could be weeks or months before anything is solidly confirmed.
So how would you be able to declare up front that you are being compensated ?

As far as there being a bias for products discounted I can't see much of a difference in the mindset of a reviewer who knows that they might get a coupon(s) worth $5 for each $100 worth of item(s) they paid for. Would that seriously change their opinion of a laser that arrived with poor optics or grossly underpowered or freight damaged from poor packing or whatever ? I can't see it making a noticeable difference, even in a fairly clinical review format.
Now if it were nearly 1/3 off the price it might be a much greater influence, agreed. If the person posting the review were to hope for any sort of credibility they should be including that as part of their review, as some people have been know to do. Granted this is usually only found in the somewhat less formal format that usually comes from more experienced reviewers but the person reading the review should be aware of the overall reliability of the posts they are reading.
For example : If the posting is the only one from a new member who doesn't have much else of value to say (by checking out their stats and other posts) then no matter what they say about an item being reviewed you should take their individual comments lightly.
But if they have the same thing to say as 20 more members of various levels of involvement here they might be considered as accurate. This would be regardless of their own "bias" from a discount received.

I can't see the offering of a possible refund discount as being a noticeable factor in a reliable review. Anybody that bases their decision to buy an expensive unproven product on a single unconfirmed "personal opinion" of a stranger should know the risks they are involved in.

As the reviews are unregulated by the supplier it would seem to be a valid marketing tool.
What would be really interesting to know is if they can prove that they provide the same discounts to negative reviews of their products. That would be a great indication of their business ethics at the time. (And also potentially great marketing.)

Perhaps just a simple sticky/posting here at LPF with the guidlines of posting a review which includes the pricing info (normal asking price versus paid price minus possible discounts/incentives.) along with the other data about an item ?

 

[daguin]

Re: Added info to make reviews acceptable on LPF...

For those who do not see the need for such disclosures, please read up a bit about:

1) the halo effect
2) tit-for-tat marketing and persuasion

These concepts and sub-conscious processes effect our perceptions of a product and thus WILL influence any subsequent review

In academic research we are "required by convention" to disclose ANY funding, rewards, and/or incentives earned or received to conduct any or based on the results of research

And yes. People will sign a multimillion dollar contract to receive a 'free" set of golf clubs.

I am NOT saying that people "consciously" decide to do a positive review. I am saying that their perception WILL be influenced on the knowledge that the supplier has ALREADY "given" them something OR that they will "earn" some reward after the fact.

In some cases the "after the fact" reward can be even more influential. When the reward is not guaranteed, the subconscious mind is MORE predisposed to work harder to "earn" the reward.

We have seen some very experienced members, who are of unquestioned character, effected by these subconscious processes.

It is a valid marketing tool.
It is also a good thing to make people aware that the tool is being used

Peace,
dave

 

[lasersbee]

Re: Added info to make reviews acceptable on LPF...

Agreed...
Hence this Thread....:beer:

I still don't think that Lazerer.com did anything wrong
or that he spammed the Forum...as was originally eluded
to indirectly...

Jerry

 

[ShortyInCanada]

Re: Added info to make reviews acceptable on LPF...

We have seen some very experienced members, who are of unquestioned character, effected by these subconscious processes.

Couldn't that be affected ? (Just going by my own thought on it. Purposefully not looking it up to see the definitions. Ready for correction if wrong.)

OK. I see that a lot of people just might try a little harder to "earn" a possible reward. Even a small almost insignificant one on a subconscious level could prove to be desirable.
I just happen to be one of those unusual exceptions. I keep the processes completely apart and unrelated to each other.(Very "third person" orientated.) The act of purchasing is a complete and separate action from the rest. Once the payment is made, in my head, the process concerning the purchase is complete. No later refund, or exchange, or upgrade, or anything else plays a part of it, to me. I consider the money as spent and gone. Then its on to the next thing. It allows for any following benefits to be viewed as unique and bonus at the time of receipt. It also prevents you from getting hung up on unknown possibilities that might not even happen.
So, for me, composing a review is completely independant of the processes involved in the purchasing or aquisition of the item. How I got the item is only a footnote to how the item performs at what it is supposed to be doing. But that goes back to what I wrote earlier too. A good review would include all the information about an item.
If I found a top performing laser in a cereal box under a pile of soiled blankets in the alleyway behind a gunshop I would say so. (Even if just waiting for someone to ask just what the **** I was doing looking in that particular place under those conditions. I'm weird that way. )
For a select few the discount would be meaningless. Worth noting, sure. BUT perhaps it comes down to the right offer though ? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
:thinking:

 

[daguin]

Re: Added info to make reviews acceptable on LPF...

We have seen some very experienced members, who are of unquestioned character, effected by these subconscious processes.

Couldn't that be affected ? (Just going by my own thought on it. Purposefully not looking it up to see the definitions. Ready for correction if wrong.)
:thinking:

Maybe <shrug>

Merriam-Webster Online

Peace,
dave

 

[MegaWattson]

Re: Added info to make reviews acceptable on LPF...

For those who do not see the need for such disclosures, please read up a bit about:

1) the halo effect
2) tit-for-tat marketing and persuasion

These concepts and sub-conscious processes effect our perceptions of a product and thus WILL influence any subsequent review

In academic research we are "required by convention" to disclose ANY funding, rewards, and/or incentives earned or received to conduct any or based on the results of research

And yes. People will sign a multimillion dollar contract to receive a 'free" set of golf clubs.

I am NOT saying that people "consciously" decide to do a positive review. I am saying that their perception WILL be influenced on the knowledge that the supplier has ALREADY "given" them something OR that they will "earn" some reward after the fact.

In some cases the "after the fact" reward can be even more influential. When the reward is not guaranteed, the subconscious mind is MORE predisposed to work harder to "earn" the reward.

We have seen some very experienced members, who are of unquestioned character, effected by these subconscious processes.

It is a valid marketing tool.
It is also a good thing to make people aware that the tool is being used

Peace,
dave

Hi Dave,
I just wanted to say that you make some excellent points. There are considerations beyond the obvious, and they are not necessarily recognized by the average buyer.

Anyway, I just wanted to add that. There needn't be a an actual quid-pro-quo for there to be a conflict of interest.

See ya 'round......


-mega

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

All very fair and valid points.

Just one thought... maybe this thread should be moved and stickied in the Reviews section

 

[bennett326]

I also vote sticky

As Dave said you may not think something has influenced your opinion but it very well could have
For example today I got a new DMM it does the.same exact thing as my old one but I like it better, why because I paid 10$ less for it ..........

 

[Isoleucine]

I write not that many reviews, but I expect to do so in the future. I have new toys to play with... lol

But none of the 'toys' i.e Lasers, New DMM, clamps, and so forth are non-compensated. I do not get returns. I like to make guides for others to enlighten them, to use rational thought and application of knowledge. The usage of monetary incentives undermines this unique property of SOME people, and I guess it sorta makes them 'sell out' on such. Humans are so gullible, fallible, marred with mistakes...

Properly made reviews should be done without monetary information and/or disclosure, and should be objective as possible. Subjectivity should only be used when a value is too difficult to determine at the moment of its usage.

Glad to see things are changing

 

[MaxLZR]

Dear all forum members,

Sorry for the inconvenience caused. We don't want to see the review broad is flood of our products as well. However I don't see the situation is bad when comparing to our companies's review so far. But in case any mod of the forum think this is not an appropriate maketing method we would be glad stop such offer. I once again apoligized for that.

Max,