Metadiscourse and persuasion in expert-written online product reviews
As online shopping becomes more widespread, consumers often rely on expert reviews to sift through countless product options and make smart purchasing decisions. Expert-written reviews, particularly those from reputable sources like Wirecutter, are viewed as more authoritative and trustworthy...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | en |
| Published: |
Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
2025
|
| Online Access: | http://journalarticle.ukm.my/26075/1/Gema_25_2_13.pdf http://journalarticle.ukm.my/26075/ https://ejournal.ukm.my/gema/issue/view/1824 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | As online shopping becomes more widespread, consumers often rely on expert reviews to sift
through countless product options and make smart purchasing decisions. Expert-written reviews,
particularly those from reputable sources like Wirecutter, are viewed as more authoritative and
trustworthy compared to user-generated reviews, making them a significant genre for analysis.
This corpus-based study investigates the use of metadiscourse in expert-written online product
reviews from The New York Times’ Wirecutter, focusing on how reviewers construct persuasive
appeals through credibility (ethos), emotion (pathos), and rational (logos). Employing Hyland’s
(2005a) Interpersonal Model of Metadiscourse, the analysis examines interactive markers
(transitions, code glosses, endophoric markers, evidentials, frame markers) and interactional
markers (self-mentions, attitude markers, hedges, boosters, engagement markers). The findings
reveal a predominance of interactional metadiscourse, with self-mentions occurring most
frequently, followed by engagement markers, attitude markers, hedges, and boosters. Among
interactive markers, transitions were most common, followed by code glosses, evidentials, frame
markers, and endophoric markers. This distribution highlights the dual focus of expert reviewers:
establishing a credible authorial presence through self-mentions and ensuring coherence through
transitions. The strategic use of self-mentions not only enhances credibility (ethos) but also fosters
a sense of connection with readers, projecting the reviewers as authoritative yet relatable voices.
Transitions aid in comparing products and structuring evaluations, ensuring clarity and rational
appeal (logos). These findings shed light on the rhetorical strategies in expert reviews, contributing
to linguistic and metadiscourse analysis. This study also offers practical guidance for crafting
persuasive digital content, highlighting how metadiscourse supports effective persuasion. |
|---|