IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/elcore/v21y2021i2d10.1007_s10660-019-09372-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The user preference identification for product improvement based on online comment patch

Author

Listed:
  • Shugang Li

    (Shanghai University)

  • Yuqi Zhang

    (Shanghai University)

  • Yueming Li

    (Shanghai University
    China United Network Communications Group Co., Ltd)

  • Zhaoxu Yu

    (East China University of Science and Technology)

Abstract

Online comments have become a valuable source for designers for the purpose of product improvement. However, the implicitly expressed users’ preferences on multiple product attributes in incomplete online comments make it difficult to extract useful information to improve the product from the online comments. In order to identify the users’ preference from the perspective of product improvement, the comment extension mining model is proposed to patch up the online reviews based on the semantic similarity and emotional resemblance. First of all, for the sake of mining the full context semantic information of the keywords in comments, they are transferred into vectors by the word2vec method. Next, smart semantic distance measurement models are developed to match the online comments with the standard comment templates that express users’ sentiment on product attributes based on the semantic similarity. Moreover, the fine-grained matching neural networks are designed to further match the reviews of each product attribute to its standard sentiment templates according to the user’s overall emotions towards the product. Finally, the KANO model is introduced to depict users’ preferences and develop product improvement strategies. The experiment on laptop product confirms that our method is effective.

Suggested Citation

  • Shugang Li & Yuqi Zhang & Yueming Li & Zhaoxu Yu, 2021. "The user preference identification for product improvement based on online comment patch," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 423-444, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:elcore:v:21:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s10660-019-09372-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10660-019-09372-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10660-019-09372-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10660-019-09372-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nikolay Archak & Anindya Ghose & Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis, 2011. "Deriving the Pricing Power of Product Features by Mining Consumer Reviews," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(8), pages 1485-1509, August.
    2. Decker, Reinhold & Trusov, Michael, 2010. "Estimating aggregate consumer preferences from online product reviews," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 293-307.
    3. Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Shyam Gopinath & Sriram Venkataraman, 2010. "The Effects of Online User Reviews on Movie Box Office Performance: Accounting for Sequential Rollout and Aggregation Across Local Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 944-957, 09-10.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shugang Li & Fang Liu & Yuqi Zhang & Boyi Zhu & He Zhu & Zhaoxu Yu, 2022. "Text Mining of User-Generated Content (UGC) for Business Applications in E-Commerce: A Systematic Review," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(19), pages 1-26, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniel Kaimann & Joe Cox, 2014. "The Interaction of Signals: A Fuzzy set Analysis of the Video Game Industry," Working Papers Dissertations 13, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    2. Xiao Liu & Param Vir Singh & Kannan Srinivasan, 2016. "A Structured Analysis of Unstructured Big Data by Leveraging Cloud Computing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 363-388, May.
    3. Oded Netzer & Ronen Feldman & Jacob Goldenberg & Moshe Fresko, 2012. "Mine Your Own Business: Market-Structure Surveillance Through Text Mining," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 521-543, May.
    4. Christoph Schneider & Markus Weinmann & Peter N.C. Mohr & Jan vom Brocke, 2021. "When the Stars Shine Too Bright: The Influence of Multidimensional Ratings on Online Consumer Ratings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 3871-3898, June.
    5. Daniel Kaimann & Joe Cox, 2014. "The Interaction of Signals: A Fuzzy set Analysis of the Video Game Industry," Working Papers CIE 84, Paderborn University, CIE Center for International Economics.
    6. Tingting Song & Jinghua Huang & Yong Tan & Yifan Yu, 2019. "Using User- and Marketer-Generated Content for Box Office Revenue Prediction: Differences Between Microblogging and Third-Party Platforms," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 191-203, March.
    7. Carlson, Keith & Kopalle, Praveen K. & Riddell, Allen & Rockmore, Daniel & Vana, Prasad, 2023. "Complementing human effort in online reviews: A deep learning approach to automatic content generation and review synthesis," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 54-74.
    8. Pauwels, Koen & Aksehirli, Zeynep & Lackman, Andrew, 2016. "Like the ad or the brand? Marketing stimulates different electronic word-of-mouth content to drive online and offline performance," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 639-655.
    9. Agnieszka Zablocki & Bodo Schlegelmilch & Michael J. Houston, 2019. "How valence, volume and variance of online reviews influence brand attitudes," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 9(1), pages 61-77, June.
    10. Dominik Gutt, 2018. "In the Eye of the Beholder? Empirically Decomposing Different Economic Implications of the Online Rating Variance," Working Papers Dissertations 40, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    11. Christof Naumzik & Stefan Feuerriegel & Markus Weinmann, 2022. "I Will Survive: Predicting Business Failures from Customer Ratings," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(1), pages 188-207, January.
    12. Daniel Kaimann, 2020. "Behind the Review Curtain: Decomposition of Online Consumer Ratings in Peer-to-Peer Markets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-17, July.
    13. Dinesh Puranam & Vishal Narayan & Vrinda Kadiyali, 2017. "The Effect of Calorie Posting Regulation on Consumer Opinion: A Flexible Latent Dirichlet Allocation Model with Informative Priors," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(5), pages 726-746, September.
    14. Supriyo Mandal & Abyayananda Maiti, 2022. "Network promoter score (NePS): An indicator of product sales in E-commerce retailing sector," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1327-1349, September.
    15. Floyd, Kristopher & Freling, Ryan & Alhoqail, Saad & Cho, Hyun Young & Freling, Traci, 2014. "How Online Product Reviews Affect Retail Sales: A Meta-analysis," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 217-232.
    16. Juan Feng & Xin Li & Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang, 2019. "Online Product Reviews-Triggered Dynamic Pricing: Theory and Evidence," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 1107-1123, December.
    17. Mingfeng Lin & Yong Liu & Siva Viswanathan, 2018. "Effectiveness of Reputation in Contracting for Customized Production: Evidence from Online Labor Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 345-359, January.
    18. Jürgen Neumann & Dominik Gutt & Dennis Kundisch, 2018. "The Traveling Reviewer Problem – Exploring the Relationship between Offline Locations and Online Rating Behavior," Working Papers Dissertations 44, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    19. King, Robert Allen & Racherla, Pradeep & Bush, Victoria D., 2014. "What We Know and Don't Know About Online Word-of-Mouth: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 167-183.
    20. Young Kwark & Jianqing Chen & Srinivasan Raghunathan, 2018. "User-Generated Content and Competing Firms’ Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(10), pages 4608-4628, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:elcore:v:21:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s10660-019-09372-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.