Journal of Marketing Research Scholarly Insights are produced in partnership with the AMA Doctoral Students SIG – a shared interest network for Marketing PhD students across the world.
Online marketplaces rely on simple signals to guide complex decisions. On eBay, one of the most noticeable signals is the Top-Rated Seller badge, or eTRS. For buyers, the badge appears directly in search results and provides a quick indication of seller quality. For sellers, it can lead to visibility, credibility, and sales. Xiang Hui, Ginger Zhe Jin, and Meng Liu studied what happened when eBay redesigned this badge and, in doing so, altered how quality was defined on the platform.
The redesign emerged from a practical concern. eBay believed that the original version of the badge relied too heavily on consumer feedback that could reflect issues beyond a seller’s control. A delayed package caused by a courier strike or a misunderstanding with a buyer could threaten certification status, even when the seller followed platform rules. In response, eBay shifted the badge criteria toward administrative performance measures, such as shipping timeliness based on tracking data and the handling of unresolved buyer claims. These measures were intended to reflect actions sellers could directly manage, giving sellers clearer control over how their efforts translated into certification.
How Sellers and Buyers Reacted to the Change
This change created a clear shift in the problem sellers were solving. Under the new system, maintaining certification depended less on how buyers reported their experience and more on meeting specific operational thresholds. The authors show that sellers responded accordingly. Performance improved on the dimensions tied to certification, particularly near the cutoff points that determined badge eligibility. Sellers learned the certification cutoff and adjusted their effort to remain just above the threshold, reflecting strategic behavior in response to the redesigned incentive system.
Buyers, meanwhile, were not explicitly made aware of the new criteria. Instead, they inferred what the badge meant on the basis of how well it aligned with their own experience. The study finds that the certificate carries more weight in markets where the administrative measures used by eBay are more closely related to consumer-reported satisfaction. In these categories, buyers saw the badge as more valuable, were more likely to purchase listings displaying it, and were more likely to return to the platform within six months. Where that alignment was weaker, the badge had less influence, even though the badge remained equally salient across categories.
Further Effects of Redesigned Trust Badges
The study also highlights how attention shapes the effectiveness of trust systems. Detailed seller ratings were already available on profile pages, yet very few buyers ever viewed them. The redesign worked well because the most relevant information was embedded directly in the badge buyers were already noticing, rather than hidden behind additional clicks. This design choice illustrates how platforms can increase the impact of information not by adding more signals but by repositioning existing ones into the main decision path.
This design choice illustrates how platforms can increase the impact of information not by adding more signals but by repositioning existing ones into the main decision path.
At a broader level, the redesign had consequences for market structure. Certification rates became more similar across categories, but sales also shifted toward larger sellers in some markets. When quality is assessed at the seller level, incumbents with higher volumes can gain an advantage, even if smaller sellers perform well on individual listings. This raises questions about how platforms can preserve trust while maintaining opportunities for smaller participants.
Key Takeaways
Redesigning a quality badge changes how sellers allocate effort and how buyers interpret trust signals. Administrative metrics give sellers more control, but they only strengthen buyer trust when they track what buyers experience. Simplicity and visibility also impact this relationship because information that sits outside the main decision path is rarely used. Finally, certification systems can influence who captures demand, meaning that badge design has implications for competition as well as trust.
We spoke with the authors to better understand what motivated the redesign, how buyers and sellers responded, and what managers should take away when thinking about trust systems:
Q: The paper studies eBay’s major redesign of its quality certificate. What marketplace observation first made you think that this redesign could meaningfully change seller behavior and buyer trust?
A: The redesign was motivated by eBay’s perception that the prior badge was unfair to sellers because it relied heavily on consumer reviews that could reflect factors outside sellers’ control, rather than verifiable seller actions. It also mattered because the eTRS badge was highly salient. At the time, it was the only reputation signal shown on the search results page, so changing its criteria could meaningfully change both seller incentives and buyer trust.
Q: When platforms redesign a trust badge, they often change what the badge “means” to consumers. How should a platform communicate the new badge criteria to buyers in a way that increases trust without overwhelming them with details?
A: While we do not directly observe how buyers got the information, seller-facing communications at the time of the rollout framed the new administrative criteria as a “simpler and more objective standard.” The platform focused on ensuring sellers understood the change to these fair metrics. Our results show that buyers changed their behavior in a way that is consistent with understanding this shift, valuing the badge more in markets where the new objective criteria were more relevant to their experience.
Q: The results suggest buyers value the certificate more when administrative data are more correlated with consumer reports. How should platforms decide whether to use a single certificate rule everywhere versus tailoring the certificate across categories or markets?
A: Tailoring can improve relevance when administrative metrics better track consumer experience in some categories than others, but it can reduce the clarity and salience of a single badge and increase complexity for sellers operating across markets. Even with a single rule, effects will be heterogeneous because markets differ in how hard it is to meet the same thresholds and how buyers evaluate performance. Managers must keep this tradeoff in mind when deciding between a single rule and tailoring.
Q: Your setting shows that administrative metrics can be more controllable for sellers but not always equally meaningful for buyers. When relevance is weaker, what complementary information should platforms display alongside the badge so customers still feel confident in their decision?
A: Our study highlights that complementary information, such as detailed seller ratings, was already available on seller profile pages but was rarely viewed by buyers—less than one percent. The redesign worked by integrating more relevant data into the salient badge itself. The implication is that simply displaying extra data may have a limited effect unless it is integrated into the main visible certification signal.
Q: You note that certification can lead to sales that are more concentrated sales on large sellers. What is one platform policy that could preserve the trust benefits of certification without unintentionally disadvantaging smaller sellers?
A: One policy is listing-level certification rather than seller-level certification. Certifying individual listings based on shipping performance and return handling allows smaller sellers to earn trust on specific products without requiring large cumulative sales histories. This preserves the trust value of certification while reducing the mechanical advantage that seller-level aggregation gives to large sellers. Platforms can also use levers other than certification, such as organic ranking or sponsored search, to direct traffic toward high-quality small sellers.
Q: In incentive systems, sellers may focus on the measured dimensions and ignore unmeasured ones. From a managerial standpoint, what guardrails can platforms put in place to prevent quality from declining in areas that are not directly included in the certification criteria?
A: Platforms should assume sellers will optimize to measured thresholds. The key managerial guardrail is balancing focus and dilution. Include the dimensions that matter most to buyers, but avoid so many metrics that incentives become diffuse. Operationally, platforms should continuously monitor for threshold targeting and deterioration in unmeasured dimensions and update criteria by adding or reweighting dimensions when needed.
Read the Full Study for Complete Details
Source: Xiang Hui, Ginger Zhe Jin, and Meng Liu (2025), “Designing Quality Certificates: Insights from eBay,” Journal of Marketing Research, 62 (1), 40–60. doi:10.1177/00222437241270222.
Go to the Journal of Marketing Research
Annur Islam Sifat is a doctoral student in marketing, Georgia State University, USA.
Md Nurul Alam is a doctoral student in marketing, Louisiana State University, USA.