I'm 100% i nthe minority these days but I don't watch any video reviews, at all, unless the video review exists because features can only be demonstrated via video. Part of it is because my ADHD makes it hard to focus at a time when tolerance to my prescribed medication makes it almost worthless, and I've always been a fast reader (raised bilingual, early reader, and I'm almost always reading something). Part of it is that video reviews are difficult backtrack and locate specific parts that I may have questions about, particularly if it's poorly done or vague. It's possible that I might email or message the maker for details but the T is that 95% of the time I just ignore it and not use the product if they can't be straight with me about something. This happens more often than you think. I'm sure this is a heterodox way of finding new products and getting reviews of new products, but at least one of us is out there. There's also a little chicanery going on. Videos are far less likely to show bad parts or deficiencies in their product. Text reviews are more likely to, and frequently it's inadvertent. In those cases, I suppose they are unintentionally honest in a roundabout way.

yea, a lot better

I would say both. The point is not about the format but how authentic the review is. IMO social capital is a signal that comes from genuine, credible reviews.

Yes, but only if they dive right in and get to the point immediately. No one sits and reads an entire long review -- they scan for keywords and the most important parts. Video reviews should be quick and to the point.

It depends on several factors. What are you covering, target audience, and more? In general, I would go for text review to get a surface idea and later on video content if I find anything interesting. So, If I am already developing a video I would at least provide a summary in the text version.

Elena, I do prefer video because let's say I have the chance to easily explain what I am seeing in the moment and the way I am feeling about something. It works perfectly to explain to our UX/UI designer a new feature for example.

Yes. Problem is that it's difficult to get a great video review. There's a myriad of things that can go wrong with the video review. - Quality - Sound - Who is doing the reviewing - What the reviewer says - How the reviewer say things (are they charismatic?) - Length - Recording scene/atmosphere - Charisma These are just some of the major variables that effect a good video. You can't really ensure all these things be perfect. In fact, forcing a script to control what the reviewer says can make the whole thing sound disingenuous. This is why picking the right reviewer is important because a cheerleader for your product will say the right things and speak the way other people like them speak.

Definitely, you see a real person, his emotions, expressions, intonation. You trust such reviews much more if they are sincere of course. I remember how happy we were to get a video review on the G2. :)

To an extent- YES. In a video, we get to see the personality and genuinity of the review. That adds a lot of confidence to the next prospective client. But yes - some extra effort has to be put in to make the review video clean and watchable.

I think either work equally well. Depends wholly upon the skills of the reviewer - I have found some amazon reviews from customers to be more effective, than short video reviews by professionals, it's all about how you put forth your points.

Videos reviews are really powerful, but it also depends on the quality of the review. You can get a lot of text reviews from your customers for free and then just choose to use the best ones. On the video side you probably have to pay for each video (discount, gift card, charity, etc..) and even then you don't know what the quality will be.

I always read and appreciate text reviews. But it is found that 88% of consumers trust video reviews because they are hard to fake.

I would definitely say both. It's not about the format but who is behind the review. I found that for SaaS market, reviews from customers and credible media, tech persons are well received within community regardless of format.

yes I think they are better than reading content that can be forged by anyone while at least video review shows us what the real product is.

For me, it depends. Video reviews hosted on websites often load incredibly slow and don't have captions. I rarely listen to videos. For clothing purchases, I prefer video, but those reviews are rare. If clothing websites made it easier to leave video reviews, I think more people would leave them.

@elena_cirera This is from an older NEC study and broadly referred to. Below are a couple places you can find it. Hope that helps. https://www.fastcompany.com/3035... https://www.motocms.com/blog/en/....

@elena_cirera I checked out @vidmonials and it looks pretty cool. I wonder if you could use some mix of technologies to record a video testimonial and then present short form of autogenerated text through NLP that could be read as a teaser to watch the video. I see value in both text and video. In fact, there is deep evidence that they both perform differently and can even out perform one another depending on the context of the message. Video is powerful, but don't overlook text entirely.

I think it depends. For a smartphone, car, laptop, headphones, and other larger purchases, I'd say a video for sure. If it's just something daft like a keyboard, mouse, smart home device, etc, a written review is easier as it's much quicker to skim through. Depends on whether you need to see what the product's like to use all the time in detail, or just a quick "does it work?"

Of course, we are currently in a stage where audio visuals are consumed more, which is why the video review is better.

Depends on where I am consuming the content (mobile/web...on the go, at home). Overall though, video is just easier to digest.