nach oben

Cognitive Computation

Erschienen in:

01.08.2017

A Study on Text-Score Disagreement in Online Reviews

verfasst von: Michela Fazzolari, Vittoria Cozza, Marinella Petrocchi, Angelo Spognardi

Erschienen in: Cognitive Computation | Ausgabe 5/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

In this paper, we focus on online reviews and employ artificial intelligence tools, taken from the cognitive computing field, to help understand the relationships between the textual part of the review and the assigned numerical score. We move from the intuitions that (1) a set of textual reviews expressing different sentiments may feature the same score (and vice-versa), and (2) detecting and analyzing the mismatches between the review content and the actual score may benefit both service providers and consumers, by highlighting specific factors of satisfaction (and dissatisfaction) in texts. To prove the intuitions, we adopt sentiment analysis techniques and we concentrate on hotel reviews, to find polarity mismatches therein. In particular, we first train a text classifier with a set of annotated hotel reviews, taken from the Booking website. Then, we analyze a large dataset, with around 160k hotel reviews collected from TripAdvisor, with the aim of detecting a polarity mismatch, indicating if the textual content of the review is in line, or not, with the associated score. Using well-established artificial intelligence techniques and analyzing in depth the reviews featuring a mismatch between the text polarity and the score, we find that—on a scale of five stars—those reviews ranked with middle scores include a mixture of positive and negative aspects. The approach proposed here, beside acting as a polarity detector, provides an effective selection of reviews—on an initial very large dataset—that may allow both consumers and providers to focus directly on the review subset featuring a text/score disagreement,which conveniently convey to the user a summary of positive and negative features of the review target.

Vorheriger Artikel An Efficient Corpus-Based Stemmer

Nächster Artikel Semantic Category-Based Classification Using Nonlinear Features and Wavelet Coefficients of Brain Signals

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

see, e.g., http://https://www.brightlocal.com/learn/local-consumer-review-survey/ (All URLs accessed on June 7, 2017).

http://www.booking.com

http://www.TripAdvisor.com

https://pypi.python.org/pypi/langdetect

Here, an example of score distribution for more than one million of reviews about electronic products on Amazon: https://goo.gl/Es6L40

http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka/.

Mudambi SM, Schuff D, Zhang Z. Why aren’t the stars aligned? An analysis of online review content and star ratings, In: 47th Hawaii international conference on system sciences; 2014. p. 3139–3147.

Liu B. Sentiment analysis and opinion mining, Morgan & Claypool Publishers; 2012.

Wilson T, et al. OpinionFinder: a system for subjectivity analysis, In: HLT/EMNLP on interactive demonstrations, Association for Computational Linguistics; 2005. p. 34–35.

Wilson T, Wiebe J, Hoffmann P. Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis, In: Human language technology and empirical methods in natural language processing, Association for Computational Linguistics; 2005. p. 347–354.

Wilson T, Wiebe J, Hoffmann P. Recognizing contextual polarity: an exploration of features for phrase-level sentiment analysis. Comput Linguist. 2009;35(3):399–433.CrossRef

Weiss S, Indurkhya N, Zhang T, Damerau F. Text mining: predictive methods for analyzing unstructured information, SpringerVerlag; 2004.

Hotho A, Nürnberger A, Paaß G. A brief survey of text mining. Computational linguistics and language technology. 2005;20(1):19–62.

Flanagin A, Metzger M, Pure R, Markov A, Hartsell E. Mitigating risk in e-commerce transactions: perceptions of information credibility and the role of user-generated ratings in product quality and purchase intention. Electron Commer Res. 2014;14(1):1–23.CrossRef

Ghose A, et al. Estimating the helpfulness and economic impact of product reviews: mining text and reviewer characteristics. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 2011;23(10):1498–512.CrossRef

10.

Sparks BA, Browning V. The impact of online reviews on hotel booking intentions and perception of trust. Tour Manag. 2011;32(6):1310–23.CrossRef

11.

Vermeulen IE, Seegers D. Tried and tested: the impact of online hotel reviews on consumer consideration. Tour Manag. 2009;30(1):123–7.CrossRef

12.

Cambria E. Affective computing and sentiment analysis. IEEE Intell Syst. 2016;31(2):102–7.CrossRef

13.

Cambria E, Poria S, Bajpai R, Schuller B. SenticNet 4: a semantic resource for sentiment analysis based on conceptual primitives, In: 26th Computational Linguistics, COLING, The COLING 2016 Organizing Committee, Osaka, Japan; 2016. p. 2666–2677.

14.

Cambria E, Hussain A. Sentic computing: a common-sense-based framework for concept-level sentiment analysis, 1st Edn. Incorporated: Springer Publishing Company; 2015.CrossRef

15.

Esuli A, Sebastiani F. SENTIWORDNET: A publicly available lexical resource for opinion mining, In: 5th Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation; 2006. p. 417–422.

16.

Bravo-Marquez F, Frank E, Pfahringer B. Building a Twitter opinion lexicon from automatically-annotated tweets. Knowl-Based Syst. 2016;108:65–78. new Avenues in Knowledge Bases for Natural Language Processing.CrossRef

17.

Baccianella S, Esuli A, Sebastiani F. Multi-facet rating of product reviews, In: Advances in information retrieval, Springer; 2009. p. 461–472.

18.

Fang X, Zhan J. Sentiment analysis using product review data. J Big Data. 2015;2:5.CrossRef

19.

Pandarachalil R, Sendhilkumar S, Mahalakshmi GS. Twitter sentiment analysis for large-scale data: an unsupervised approach. Cogn Comput. 2015;7(2):254–62.CrossRef

20.

Muhammad A, Wiratunga N, Lothian R. Contextual sentiment analysis for social media genres. Knowl-Based Syst. 2016;108:92–101. new Avenues in Knowledge Bases for Natural Language Processing.CrossRef

21.

Medhat W, Hassan A, Korashy H. Sentiment analysis algorithms and applications: a survey. Ain Shams Eng J. 2014;5(4):1093–113.CrossRef

22.

Rosenthal S, Nakov P, Kiritchenko S, Mohammad S, Ritter A, Stoyanov V. SemEval-2015 task 10: sentiment analysis in Twitter, In: 9th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation, Association for Computational Linguistics; 2015. p. 451–463.

23.

Nakov P, Ritter A, Rosenthal S, Sebastiani F, Stoyanov V. Semeval-2016 task 4: sentiment analysis in twitter, In: 10th Intl. Workshop on Semantic Evaluation, SemEval@NAACL-HLT 2016; 2016. p. 1–18.

24.

Poria S, Cambria E, Gelbukh A. Aspect extraction for opinion mining with a deep convolutional neural network. Knowl-Based Syst. 2016;108:42–49. new Avenues in Knowledge Bases for Natural Language Processing.CrossRef

25.

Lo SL, Cambria E, Chiong R, Cornforth D. A multilingual semi-supervised approach in deriving singlish sentic patterns for polarity detection. Knowl-Based Syst. 2016;105:236–47.CrossRef

26.

Bu Z, Li H, Cao J, Wu Z, Zhang L. Game theory based emotional evolution analysis for chinese online reviews. Knowl-Based Syst. 2016;103:60–72.CrossRef

27.

Zhou Q, Xia R, Zhang C. Online shopping behavior study based on multi-granularity opinion mining: China versus America. Cogn Comput. 2016;8(4):587–602.CrossRef

28.

Kasper W, Vela M. Sentiment analysis for hotel reviews, In: Computational linguistics-applications; 2011. p. 45–52.

29.

Brody S, Elhadad N. An unsupervised aspect-sentiment model for online reviews, In: Human Language Technologies: The 2010 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, HLT ’10, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, USA; 2010. p. 804–812.

30.

Xia Y, Cambria E, Hussain A, Zhao H. Word polarity disambiguation using Bayesian model and opinion-level features. Cogn Comput. 2015;7(3):369–80.CrossRef

31.

Vural AG, Cambazoglu BB, Senkul P, Tokgoz ZO. A framework for sentiment analysis in turkish: application to polarity detection of movie reviews in turkish. In: Gelenbe E, Lent R, editors. Computer and Information Sciences III: 27th International Symposium on Computer and Information Sciences, Springer, London, London; 2013. p. 437–445.

32.

Martín-Valdivia M-T, Martínez-Cámara E, Perea-Ortega J-M, Ureña-López LA. Sentiment polarity detection in Spanish reviews combining supervised and unsupervised approaches. Expert Syst Appl. 2013;40(10):3934–42.CrossRef

33.

Agarwal B, Poria S, Mittal N, Gelbukh A, Hussain A. Concept-level sentiment analysis with dependency-based semantic parsing: a novel approach. Cogn Comput. 2015;7(4):487–99.CrossRef

34.

Cortes C, Vapnik V. Support-vector networks. Mach Learn. 1995;20(3):273–97.

35.

Celli F, Di Lascio F, Magnani M, Pacelli B, Rossi L. Social network data and practices: the case of Friendfeed, In: Advances in social computing, Vol. 6007 of LNCS, Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2010. p. 346–353.

36.

Mitchell TM. Machine learning, 1st Edn. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.; 1997.

37.

Platt JC. Fast training of support vector machines using sequential minimal optimization. In: Schölkopf B, Burges CJC, Smola AJ, editors. Advances in Kernel methods—support vector learning, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA; 1999. Ch. Fast Training of Support Vector Machines Using Sequential Minimal Optimization, p. 185–208.

38.

Quinlan JR. C4.5: Programs for machine learning. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.; 1993.

39.

Frank E, Witten IH. Generating accurate rule sets without global optimization, In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML ’98, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA; 1998. p. 144–151.

40.

John GH, Langley P. Estimating continuous distributions in bayesian classifiers, In: Uncertainty in artificial intelligence, UAI’95, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.; 1995. p. 338–345.

41.

Rahman S, Afrin T, Adjeroh D. Determinants of user ratings in online business rating services, In: Social computing, behavioral-cultural modeling, and prediction, Vol. 9021 of LNCS, Springer International Publishing; 2015. p. 412–420.

42.

Schwartz HA, et al. Personality, gender, and age in the language of social media: the open-vocabulary approach. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(9):1–16.CrossRef

43.

Hovy D, Johannsen A, Søgaard A. User review sites as a resource for large-scale sociolinguistic studies, In: 24th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW ’15, 2015, p. 452–461.

44.

Minnich AJ, Chavoshi N, Mueen A, Luan S, Faloutsos M. TrueView: harnessing the power of multiple review sites, In: 24th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW ’15; 2015. p. 787–797.

45.

Hipp J, Güntzer U, Nakhaeizadeh G. Algorithms for association rule mining: a general survey and comparison. SIGKDD Explor Newsl. 2000;2(1):58–64.CrossRef

46.

Gustafsson A, Herrmann A, Huber F, (eds). Conjoint measurement: methods and applications. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag Berlin; 2007.

47.

Green P, Vithala R. Conjoint measurement for quantifying judgmental data. Mark Res. 1971;8:355–363.CrossRef

48.

Netzer O, Toubia O, Bradlow ET, Dahan E, Evgeniou T, Feinberg FM, Feit EM, Hui SK, Johnson J, Liechty JC, Orlin JB, Rao VR. Beyond conjoint analysis: advances in preference measurement. Mark Lett. 2008;19(3):337.CrossRef

Titel: A Study on Text-Score Disagreement in Online Reviews
verfasst von: Michela Fazzolari
Vittoria Cozza
Marinella Petrocchi
Angelo Spognardi
Publikationsdatum: 01.08.2017
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Cognitive Computation / Ausgabe 5/2017
Print ISSN: 1866-9956
Elektronische ISSN: 1866-9964
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-017-9496-y

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2017

Semantic Category-Based Classification Using Nonlinear Features and Wavelet Coefficients of Brain Signals

Removal of Electrooculogram Artifacts from Electroencephalogram Using Canonical Correlation Analysis with Ensemble Empirical Mode Decomposition

Establishment of Cognitive Relations Based on Cognitive Informatics

A Comparative Study of In-Air Trajectories at Short and Long Distances in Online Handwriting

Storages Are Not Forever

Multi-criteria Outranking Methods with Hesitant Probabilistic Fuzzy Sets

Premium Partner