Houston research: How social pressures are affecting digital product evaluations

houston voices

Serious product reviewers need peers and audiences to see them as credible. But new research indicates that pursuing credibility may compromise the objectivity of their evaluations. Photo via Getty Images

Theoretically, product evaluations should be impartial and unbiased. However, this assumption overlooks a crucial truth about product evaluators: They are human beings who are concerned about maintaining credibility with their audience, especially their peer evaluators.

Because evaluators must also care about being perceived as legitimate yet skillful themselves, certain social pressures are at play that potentially influence their product reviews.

Research by Minjae Kim (Rice Business) and Daniel DellaPosta (Penn State) takes up the question of how evaluators navigate those pressures. They find that in some cases, evaluators uphold majority opinion to appear legitimate and authoritative. In other contexts, they offer a contrasting viewpoint so that they seem more refined and sophisticated.

Pretend a movie critic gives an uplifting review of a widely overlooked film. By departing from the aesthetic judgments of cinema aficionados, the reviewer risks losing credibility with their audience. Not only does the reviewer fail to understand this specific film, the audience might say; they fail to understand film and filmmaking, broadly.

But it’s also conceivable, in other situations, that the dissenting evaluator will come across as uniquely perceptive.

What makes the difference between these conflicting perceptions?

Partly, it depends on how niche or mainstream the product is. With large-audience products, Kim and DellaPosta hypothesize, evaluators are more willing to contradict widespread opinion. (Without a large audience, contradicting opinions are like the sound of a tree that falls in a forest without anyone nearby to hear.)

The perceived classiness of the product can affect the evaluator’s approach, as well. It’s easier to dissent from majority opinion on products deemed “lowbrow” than those deemed “highbrow.” Kim and DellaPosta suggest it’s more of a risk to downgrade a “highbrow” product that seems to require more sophisticated taste (e.g., classical music) and easier to downgrade a highly rated yet “lowbrow” product that seems easier to appreciate (e.g., a blockbuster movie).

Thus, the “safe spot” for disagreeing with established opinion is when a product has already been thoroughly and highly reviewed yet appears easier to understand. In that case, evaluators might sense an opportunity to stand out, rather than try to fit in. But disagreeing with something just for the sake of disagreeing can make people think you’re not a fair or reasonable evaluator. To avoid that perception, it might be better to agree with the high rating.

To test their hypotheses, Kim and DellaPosta used data from beer enthusiast site BeerAdvocate.com, an online platform where amateur evaluators review beers while also engaging with other users. Online reviewers publicly rate and describe their impressions of a variety of beers, from craft to mainstream.

The data set included 1.66 million user-submitted reviews of American-produced beers, including 82,077 unique beers, 4,302 brewers, 47,561 reviewers and 103 unique styles of beer. The reviews spanned from December 2000 to September 2015.

When the researchers compared scores given to the same beer over time, they confirmed their hypothesis about the conditions under which evaluators contradict the majority opinion. On average, reviewers were more inclined to contradict the majority opinions for a beer that had been highly rated and widely reviewed. When reviewers considered a particular brew to be a “lowbrow,” downgrading occurred to an even greater extent.

Kim and DellaPosta’s research has implications for both producers and consumers. Both groups should be aware of the social dynamics involved in product evaluation. The research suggests that reviews and ratings are as much about elevating the people who make them as they are about product quality.

Making evaluators identifiable and non-anonymous may help increase accountability for what they say online — a seemingly positive thing. But Kim and DellaPosta reveal a potential downside: Knowing who evaluators are, Kim says, “might warp the ratings in ways that depart from true objective quality.”

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and was based on research from Minjae Kim, assistant professor of Management – Organizational Behavior at Rice Business, and Daniel DellaPosta, associate professor of Sociology and Social Data Analytics at Pennsylvania State University.

From Your Site Articles
When it comes to promoting social causes, corporations have to find a way to appear genuine over posturing. Photo via Getty Images

Navigating corporate challenge of genuinely supporting social causes, per Rice research

Houston Voices

It is becoming more and more common for companies to promote social causes such as human rights, LGBTQ+ rights, racial justice, and environmental sustainability. But organizations face a tricky dilemma when expressing commitments to helping address social issues: Stakeholders may interpret their words and deeds as shallow rhetoric or insincere posturing.

Terms like “greenwashing” (regarding environmentalism) or “pinkwashing” (regarding LGBTQ+ rights) are on the rise, and they signal heightened suspicions around companies doing something with ostensible objectives of bringing in positive social change.

It's critical for researchers and business leaders to investigate this duality of audience perception: actual virtue versus virtue-signaling. In an age of social media and polarization, consumers are increasingly likely to wonder: Does this company have ulterior motives? Are they trying to cover for their own wrongdoing? Are they actually walking the walk, or are they merely talking the talk?

When can companies avoid such suspicion of being pro-social imposters?

Minjae Kim of Rice Business and Ezra W. Zuckerman Sivan of MIT Sloan School of Management have taken a close look at the conditions under which upholding social norms will make firms appear to be “model citizens” and when it will make them seem like imposters.

Their theory is two-fold: First, those who follow through and do social good in response to an explicit “social mandate” are viewed as “model citizens.” Second, those who go out of their way to do social good without any prompts or social mandates are less likely to be trusted and will be widely viewed as imposters.

Think about the following situation. A “social mandate” is given to a politician when they are asked in an interview what they think about a particular cause. In that context, if they express support, audiences are less likely to suspect the politician of having ulterior motives or pandering to constituents. After all, if the politician does not express support in that situation, that is tantamount to expressing disapproval. Here, the interview question (i.e., “social mandate”) provides a cover of plausible deniability to any suspicions of ulterior motives. Law enforcement (e.g., police, prosecutors) often have this social mandate built into their professions.

But if the politician takes initiative — unprompted — to support the same cause, they will more likely be viewed with suspicion. They may instead appear to seek out social rewards associated with supporting the cause (e.g., good reputation), without the cover of plausible deniability.

To test their theory, Kim and Zuckerman launched a series of experiments involving 509 online participants based in the United States. The experiments sought to determine how respondents perceive individuals who encourage others to abide by social norms. Participants were specifically asked to identify which of two individuals they think are “model citizens” committed to the norm, or “imposters” who are uncommitted but trying to hide their own deviance.

The researchers found that people who encourage others to abide by social norms when prompted (“social mandate”) are perceived as “model citizens,” while those who do the same but without such prompts are more likely to appear as “imposters.” This duality provides a clear guideline for managers engaging in corporate social responsibility: When suspicions are rampant, launching pro-social campaigns without a plausible mandate may heighten suspicion regarding motives.

The larger question is how to build firms and societies where people can safely support norms (that we all support) without being suspected as imposters. After all, we want our own norms and moral principles to govern our lives. But in some situations, we may mistakenly vilify those who are trying to do good, based on the absence of some contextual “social mandate.”

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and was based on research from Minjae Kim, assistant professor of organizational behavior at Rice University Jones Graduate School of Business, and Ezra Zuckerman Sivan, the Alvin J. Siteman (1948) Professor of Strategy and Entrepreneurship at MIT Sloan School of Management.

Professionals are more likely to refer a friend, rather than an acquaintance, for a job. Photo via Getty Images

Houston research: Strong connections go a long way in job hunting

houston voices

Job hunting can feel like prying open a succession of elaborately padlocked doors, and making it through all of them might seem to require a miracle. In reality, though, you could know someone who has the right keys – and is willing to use them for you.

As layoffs and furloughs continue to transform the workplace, commentators often discuss whether job hunters are better served by a team of close friends or a wider, less intimate army of acquaintances. This discussion is especially relevant when about 20 percent of high-income workers appear to get jobs via firm-driven referral practices.

For years, research pointed toward the less intimate army. Casual acquaintances or friends-of-friends, the types of relationships known as "weak ties," seemed preferable because they offered a greater number of and more diverse job tips. Social media platforms such as LinkedIn, Facebook and other networking sites thrived on the notion that loosely connected groups were more effective networks than the concentrated energies of a few friends.

But Rice Business professor Minjae Kim and Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Roberto M. Fernandez have taken a fresh look at the matter, questioning whether weak ties are really that useful. In a recent paper, they analyzed when and why socially connected people share job opportunities they know about.

To gather their data, the team surveyed 196 first-year MBA students, asking half of them (randomly assigned) their willingness to help close friends and the other half about acquaintances. Both close friends and acquaintances were described as qualified for the opportunities.

Past research assumed that regardless of the strength of the ties, people would be equally likely to relay job information, thus focusing on the reach of weaker, more numerous ties. But in Kim and Fernandez' study, the participants, most of whom were former professionals, said they were more likely to help friends than people with distant, weaker connections.

This was true even when the students being surveyed were offered a hypothetical financial bonus. Offering money for referrals is a time-honored practice in many industries, and indeed, when a bonus was offered, participants in the study were more willing to give a job tip to an acquaintance.

But the study also revealed that money isn't always enough to make people pass along job information, which other recent research confirms. For some people, Kim and Fernandez found, helping a good friend is more important than gaining professional or social benefit by helping a mere acquaintance.

In fact, even when an acquaintance was known to be qualified for a job, and even with referral bonuses as an incentive, when it came to passing on job tips, most participants surveyed favored close friends over people with whom they only had weak ties.

Praising the weak tie is still de rigueur in many employment think pieces. But, the team concluded, landing a job requires more than simply knowing people who know about possible job opportunities. In many cases, someone needs to make an effort for you. We all have a range of motivations, only some of them financial, for sharing information. Friendship, Kim and Fernandez discovered, is a surpassingly strong motivator for relaying job information.

Having an intricate network can be a highly effective way to learn what's out there. But because individuals have such a strong bias toward friends, big networks should not be a job hunters' lone strategy. Keeping your friends close, it turns out, offers professional benefits. The person with the key to your next job may be standing nearer than you think.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and is based on research from Minjae Kim, an assistant professor of management at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Houston bio-based materials startup breaks into footwear

cleaner shoes

A more sustainable shoe can’t be built on a single material swap. From the hard plastics hidden inside a heel to the material covering a sneaker’s upper, footwear is a collection of components—and each presents a different challenge for companies trying to move away from conventional, petroleum-based materials.

Houston-based Rheom Materials wants to change that equation. The biomaterials company has launched a sustainable footwear platform featuring two of its bio-based alternatives: Benree, a biodegradable plastic designed for hard internal components, and ShoraiDura, a durable leather alternative for footwear uppers.

“A shoe is not one material; it is multiple parts working together as a system. Substituting a single material has never moved the needle,” Rheom founder and CEO Zimri Hinshaw said in a news release. “Rheom wants to make it easier for brands to make a positive impact. By providing an assortment of bio-based materials, brands can change the system, not just a swatch of it.”

Benree is Rheom’s alternative to conventional hard plastics used in footwear construction. The company says it is a 100 percent USDA-certified bio-based, biodegradable material with performance comparable to acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), a widely used engineering plastic.

The material has passed SATRA testing for high-heel applications with Bared Footwear, an Australian footwear brand.

“At Bared, we're constantly on a journey to remove plastic from our shoes. At the same time, our brand won't compromise on quality for the end customer,” Millie Richards, Bared’s head of sustainability, added in the release. “From samples and testing, Rheom has proven to be solving both of those problems for us. We look forward to seeing how they develop as a company and would love to use them in our shoes.”

Rheom says it is also exploring Benree for additional internal components, including toe puffs and heel counters.

Rheom's Benree material was used for a high-heel prototype. Photo courtesy Rheom Materials

The company’s ShoraiDura material addresses another major part of shoe construction: the upper, which must withstand repeated flexing, friction and wear while maintaining its appearance.

Containing about 80 percent bio-based content, ShoraiDura is engineered as a durable leather alternative for footwear. Rheom says the material’s molecular structure is designed to deliver the strength and durability required for demanding applications.

To demonstrate how the material could be used in finished products, Rheom worked with a Los Angeles-based footwear manufacturer to create two prototypes: an athletic sneaker and a textured skater shoe, both featuring ShoraiDura uppers.

The two offerings reflect the company’s broader strategy. Rather than asking brands to evaluate a single material in isolation, Rheom is positioning its platform as a way to explore alternatives across different parts of footwear construction.

The next step is broader industry adoption. Benree’s testing with Bared Footwear and ShoraiDura’s footwear prototypes offer early examples of how the materials could be applied, while commercial use will depend on manufacturers’ evaluations and product-development decisions.

Rheom Materials is a Houston-based biomaterials company developing bio-based alternatives to petrochemical plastics. Its product portfolio includes Shorai, a leather alternative, and Benree, a hard plastic alternative.

The company debuted Shorai at the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo in 2025 and showed a bio-based "leather" collection in Milan earlier this year. Read more here.

Houston's Rice University named the No. 1 best Texas college for 2027

We're No. 1

With early application season in full swing, a local university is racking up accolades on a new list of the 10 best Texas colleges for 2027.

Rice University topped the list as the No. 1 best university in Texas in WalletHub's annual "College & University Rankings" report, showing Houston students don't have to travel out of state to earn a top-notch degree.

WalletHub analyzed 738 colleges and universities in the U.S. using 30 relevant metrics, including factors like student-faculty ratios, graduation rates, and many more. Universities were ranked nationally, regionally, and across seven key dimensions: student selectivity; cost and financing; faculty resources; campus safety; campus experience; educational outcomes; and career outcomes.

Rice also ranked No. 2 in the regional comparison of best universities in the South, and appeared No. 11 nationwide.

Across the seven main categories, the university performed best for its faculty resources (No. 4), education outcomes (No. 11), and student selectivity (No. 16), and earned top-100 rankings for its career outcomes (No. 28) and campus experience (No. 58).

Rice only lagged behind in the national rankings for campus safety (No. 632) and cost and financing (No. 666), but neither category swayed the university's top-performing overall position.

Meanwhile, the University of Houston ranked 75th regionally and 339th nationally. UH's cost and financing rank among the top 200 nationally, landing 177th, and it ranked 284th for its campus safety.This is how the report ranked UH in the five remaining categories out of all 738 schools:
  • No. 306 – Career outcomes
  • No. 324 – Student selectivity
  • No. 343 – Education outcomes
  • No. 383 – Campus experience
  • No. 715 – Faculty resources
Four more local schools ranked among the best universities in the South: Houston Christian University (No. 204), Prairie View A&M University (No. 245), University of Houston-Downtown (No. 251), and Texas Southern University (No. 254).The Houston-area universities, including their graduate and online programs, have earned heaps of national and worldwide praise this year from prestigious educational reviewing authorities U.S. News & World Report and The Princeton Review. Rice University also topped Niche's list of the best Texas universities for 2027.

These are WalletHub's top 10 best colleges and universities in Texas for 2027:

  • No. 1 – Rice University
  • No. 2 – Trinity University
  • No. 3 – The University of Texas at Austin
  • No. 4 – Texas A&M University-College Station
  • No. 5 – Southwestern University
  • No. 6 – University of Dallas
  • No. 7 – Austin College
  • No. 8 – Texas Christian University
  • No. 9 – LeTourneau University
  • No. 10 – The University of Texas at Dallas
---

This article first appeared on CultureMap.com.

UH expands Medical Center footprint with $77M research facility

breaking ground

The University of Houston broke ground on a brand new $77.5 million Medical Research Building last week that will host clinical trials and a virtual reality behavioral health suite, among other laboratories. Designed by SmithGroup, it will be the second building on the UH Medical Center campus after the Fertitta College of Medicine opened in 2022.

“The Medical Research Building was designed to foster collaboration and discovery while creating a welcoming environment for students, researchers and the community,” Kalman Nagy, higher education studio design leader for SmithGroup, said in a news release. “As the second building on the University of Houston’s medical campus, we wanted to create a strong connection to the College of Medicine and the surrounding woodlands, with outdoor terraces, shared learning spaces and natural views that inspire interaction and innovation.”

Located just behind the Fertitta building at 5150 Medical Service Drive, the 57,000-square-foot building will house wet laboratories, computational research spaces and specialized facilities for clinical research. The virtual reality behavioral health suite will use immersive technology to deliver care through manufactured audio and visual environments. It’s part of the college’s vision for developing new medical advancements in the heart of Houston’s medical community. The groundbreaking comes on the heels of the launch of the university's cross-disciplinary academic venture, UH Health, this summer.

“This groundbreaking marks an important next step in the growth of the Fertitta College of Medicine and UH Health,” Dr. Jonathan McCullers, vice president for health affairs at UH, added in the release. “We are building the research capacity to match our ambitions—bringing together scientists, physicians and experts from across the University to accelerate discovery and turn promising ideas into solutions that improve people’s lives.”

UH’s journey to establish a significant presence alongside the University of Texas and Baylor in the Medical Center started in 2009 when it became an official full institutional member. The university launched its plans for the Fertitta building in 2013, and is pursuing Health Science Center designation from the Texas Legislature in the next year’s session.

“The research that will take place here will directly benefit our community,” UH President Renu Khator added. “Diseases do not recognize disciplinary silos, and neither should our research. This building will bring together experts from across UH to break down those barriers, work across disciplines and tackle some of our most complex health challenges.”

The building is slated to open in 2028.

View All Listings