Research problem: Increasingly, professional and technical communicators analyze, synthesize, and respond to user-generated content, including online consumer reviews of products, as the influence of user-generated content on consumers' purchasing decisions grows. But product reviews vary in the degree to which people perceive them to be credible. Research questions: (1) To what extent does a product review's environment-a retailer or brand site-affect review users' ratings of that review's credibility? (2) To what extent does review valence (positive versus negative) affect review users' ratings of review credibility? (3) What is the strength of the relationship among credibility and its two main components, trustworthiness and expertise? Literature review: Recent research has made clear the spread and the influence of user-generated comments and, thus, the need for sophistication in handling it. Review credibility has two main components: trustworthiness (which equates to honesty or sincerity) and expertise (which equates to accuracy). Prior research also shows the effects of valence (positivity or negativity) in reviews, noting that negative reviews have more influence than positive reviews on readers' perceptions of review credibility and purchasing decisions. Methodology: We tested the effect of a consumer review's environment (brand or retailer site) and the effect of review valence (positive or negative) on the perceived credibility of that review, as well the degree of correlation among credibility, trustworthiness, and expertise. Through an online survey, we exposed respondents to the same review text with different star ratings (4-star and 2-star) in two types of sites: brand and retailer. We asked participants to evaluate the review's credibility, trustworthiness, and expertise. In half of the exposures, participants evaluated a review in the site of a high-credibility company (Apple or Amazon), and in the other half of exposures, participants evaluated a review in the site of a midlevel-credibility company (Dell or Walmart). Results and conclusions: Credibility strongly correlated with both trustworthiness and expertise. Participants rated 4-star reviews as more credible than 2-star reviews on high-credibility sites, but star ratings had no impact on midlevel credibility sites. We found no difference between ratings of reviews displayed on brand and retailer sites for midlevel-credibility companies but a small difference between reviews displayed on brand and retailer sites for high-credibility companies. Professional communicators should attend to reviews posted both to retailer and brand sites. Conclusions: Professional communicators charged with managing user-generated content need not spend resources on channeling it into retailer and other independent review site environments as opposed to brand site environments. Our findings indicate that professional communicators looking to identify credible reviews should attend to review valence, or the positivity or negativity of a review. When managing user-generated product reviews, they should try to make credible content more noticeable to review users.

Research problem: Gauging the quality of product reviews through helpfulness votes is problematic for a variety of reasons. We examine potential characteristics of review quality that span review credibility, informativeness, and readability to contribute to better ways of assessing review quality. Research question: Do specific review characteristics improve reviewer users' perceptions of review quality? Literature review: Studies from information systems, electronic marketing and commerce, and technical and professional communication suggest that characteristics of reviews fall into three areas, each with specific characteristics of quality. Findings from these studies suggest the 11 characteristics of review quality within those three areas as potential contributors to review quality. The first area is credibility, a construct consisting (in part) of expertise; we tested these potential specific characteristics of credibility: an assertion of a relevant role, of use of a prior model, of other products in the brand, of a similar product, of having conducted research on the product, and of having tested the product. The second area is informativeness, which is a review's diagnosticity. We tested these potential specific characteristics: a general recommendation, a specific recommendation, a statement about the product's value, and a statement about the extent to which the product met expectations. The third area is readability, which is (in part) comfort of reading, and has this specific characteristic: the use of headings. Methodology: We conducted a quantitative study using a survey distributed though SurveyMonkey Audience, a service that samples from a pool of 30 million respondents. Using control and experimental versions of 11 product reviews, we gauged participants' perceptions of review quality on a five-point scale. We looked for significant differences in participants' perceptions of quality using Pearson's chi square. Results and conclusions: We received 829 responses to include in the analysis. We found the following significant at the p > 0.05 level: a statement about reviewer's prior experience with a similar product (credibility). We found the following significant at the p > 0.01 level: A statement about researching the product, for example, online research (credibility), a general recommendation about the product (informativeness), and formatting with headings (readability). We found the following significant at the p > 0.001 level: a statement about the extent to which the product met expectations (informativeness) and a specific recommendation about the product (informativeness). Using these results, companies can better locate quality reviews; reviewers can increase the quality and, therefore, salience of their reviews; and communication specialists can help reviewers write and revise reviews for improved quality. Future research on review quality could investigate other potential characteristics of credibility, informativeness, and readability.

This article provides an account of the academic location of 142 technical communication programs as reported on program Web sites as well as in an online survey sent to technical communication program coordinators. According to the findings, most technical communication programs are located in departments of English, but programs outside of English are more likely to offer graduate degrees and a more technically oriented program focus.

This collection takes a broad look at the issue of outsourcing technical writing jobs and would help anyone who is interested in current themes and concerns to catch up on the conversation. The collection is organized into three parts: "Outsourcing Practices by Region"; "Management and Cross-Cultural Communication Issues"; and "Legal, Ethical, and Political Issues." The only drawback to the book is that some of the conclusions and references were already out of date when the book went to press. Overall, the book gives readers a well-rounded look at the history, perspectives, and issues that are important to the ongoing phenomenon of outsourcing in the technical communication field.