Our newsletterPeople who reviewed products more analytically got their confidence back sooner
Buyer behaviour
- Reader Note:
- This pattern was reported across all four field studies: wine, BeerAdvocate beer, RateBeer beer, and Sephora cosmetics. The paper quantified analytical processing with LIWC's analytic measure, based on each experience and a running average of the last three experiences, then mean-centered it within person. The source reports direction only; the size of the interaction differs by study and the exact analytic score is not intuitive outside the paper's method.
- Evidence:
- Observed behaviour
- Vendor interest:
- None
- Sample:
- Multimethod source: 1,046,922 wine notes from 30,141 CellarTracker users; 1,451,766 BeerAdvocate reviews from 32,563 users; 984,573 RateBeer reviews from 19,679 users; 229,267 Sephora reviews from 11,994 users with at least 10 reviews; plus an experiment with 801 Mechanical Turk participants.
Reader Note:
Evidence:
Vendor interest:
Sample:Good for
Comparing yourself against a similar segment, and choosing what to test next.
Not for
- Saying that one thing caused another, or predicting what you would get.
- This was measured in one market. It may not hold where you are.
- This is an aggregated or average number that covers very different cases. Real results in a particular segment may differ.
- The source never says how this number was measured.
Related cards
Buyer behaviourTrend
Trend
Open full graphGemini and ChatGPT lead AI shopping research in the U.S.; 64.0% of AI shoppers use two or more assistants
Buyer behaviourTrend
89.9% of U.S. AI shoppers check an AI recommendation elsewhere before buying, up from 85.7% in June 2026Buyer behaviourTrend
Price explains 60% to 90% of perceived value; the rest comes from other factors
Go deeper on this topic
Our Substack turns the data behind these cards into full breakdowns: what changed, why, and what to do about it.
Buyer behaviourIdea
A calmer, simpler Smart ID rollout lifted adoption 38% among older users
Idea