eWOM Credibility Scale

What it measures

Measures the perceived credibility of online consumer reviews and electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) across three dimensions: the quality and strength of the arguments made in the review, the perceived credibility of the reviewer, and the degree to which the review confirms prior beliefs. eWOM credibility is a key determinant of whether online reviews influence purchase decisions.

Response format

Likert (1–7, strongly disagree to strongly agree)

Scale items

Argument Strength — quality and persuasiveness of the review content (Likert 1–7, strongly disagree to strongly agree)

• The online review provides convincing information.
• The online review provides strong arguments.
• The online review provides relevant information.
• The online review provides accurate information.

Source Credibility — perceived trustworthiness and expertise of the reviewer

• I think the reviewer is trustworthy.
• I think the reviewer is credible.
• I think the reviewer is an expert on this product/service.
• I think the reviewer has experience with this product/service.

Confirmation of Prior Beliefs — consistency with existing knowledge

• The information in the review is consistent with what I already know.
• The review confirms my prior beliefs about this product/service.
• The review is consistent with information I have encountered elsewhere.
• The review aligns with other things I have read about this product/service.

Full scale items shown. Always cite the original source when using this scale in research.

Usage notes & scoring

Three subscale scores. Score = mean per dimension. Argument strength and source credibility are the primary drivers of eWOM adoption. Confirmation bias means consumers weight reviews that confirm prior attitudes more heavily. Widely used in research on review platforms, social commerce, and fake review detection.

Recommended companion scales

Citation

Cheung, C.M.K., Lee, M.K.O., & Rabjohn, N. (2008). The impact of electronic word-of-mouth: The adoption of online opinions in online customer communities. Internet Research, 18(3), 229–247.

Keywords