Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/2043932.2043962acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesrecsysConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A user-centric evaluation framework for recommender systems

Published: 23 October 2011 Publication History

Abstract

This research was motivated by our interest in understanding the criteria for measuring the success of a recommender system from users' point view. Even though existing work has suggested a wide range of criteria, the consistency and validity of the combined criteria have not been tested. In this paper, we describe a unifying evaluation framework, called ResQue (Recommender systems' Quality of user experience), which aimed at measuring the qualities of the recommended items, the system's usability, usefulness, interface and interaction qualities, users' satisfaction with the systems, and the influence of these qualities on users' behavioral intentions, including their intention to purchase the products recommended to them and return to the system. We also show the results of applying psychometric methods to validate the combined criteria using data collected from a large user survey. The outcomes of the validation are able to 1) support the consistency, validity and reliability of the selected criteria; and 2) explain the quality of user experience and the key determinants motivating users to adopt the recommender technology. The final model consists of thirty two questions and fifteen constructs, defining the essential qualities of an effective and satisfying recommender system, as well as providing practitioners and scholars with a cost-effective way to evaluate the success of a recommender system and identify important areas in which to invest development resources.

References

[1]
Adomavicius, G. and Tuzhilin, A. 2005. Toward the Next Generation of Recommender Systems: A Survey of the State-of-the-Art and Possible Extensions. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 17(6), 734--749.
[2]
Beenen, G., Ling, K., Wang, X., Chang, K., Frankowski, D., Resnick, P., et al. 2004. Using social psychology to motivate contributions to online communities. In Proceedings of CSCW '04. New York: ACM Press.
[3]
Chen, L. and Pu, P. 2006. Trust Building with Explanation Interfaces. In Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligent User Interface, 93--100.
[4]
Chen, L. and Pu, P. 2009. Interaction Design Guidelines on Critiquing-based Recommender Systems. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction Journal (UMUAI), Springer Netherlands, Volume 19, Issue3, 167--206.
[5]
Churchill, G.A. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs, Journal of Marketing Research 16 (1), 1979, pp. 64--73.
[6]
Davis, F.D. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart. 13 319--339.
[7]
Grabner-Kräuter, S. and Kaluscha, E.A. 2003. Empirical research in on-line trust: a review and critical assessment Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. (IJMMS) 58(6), 783--812.
[8]
Herlocker, J.L., Konstan, J.A., and Riedl, J. 2000. Explaining collaborative filtering recommendations. CSCW'00, 241--250.
[9]
Herlocker, J.L., Konstan, J.A., Terveen, L.G., and Riedl, J. 2004. Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 22(1), 5--53.
[10]
Jones, N., and Pu, P. 2007. User Technology Adoption Issues in Recommender Systems. In Proceedings of Networking and Electronic Commerce Research Conference, 379--394.
[11]
Kirakowski, J. 1993. SUMI: the Software Usability Measurement Inventory. British Journal of Educational Technology, 24 (3) 210--214.
[12]
Knijnenburg, B. P., Willemsen, M. C., Gantner, Z. and Soncu, H. 2011. Explaining the user experience of recommender systems. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction Journal (UMUAI), Special Issue on User Interfaces for Recommender Systems. (upcoming)
[13]
McNee, S.M., Lam, S.K., Konstan, J.A., Riedal, J. 2003. Interfaces for eliciting new user preferences in recommender systems. User Modeling 2003, 178--187.
[14]
McNee, S.M., Riedl, J., and Konstan, J.A. 2006. Being accurate is not enough: How accuracy metrics have hurt recommender systems. CHI Extended Abstracts, 1097--1101.
[15]
Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric Theory.
[16]
Ozok, A.A, Fan, Q., Norcio, A.F. 2010. Design guidelines for effective recommender system interfaces based on a usability criteria conceptual model: results from a college student population. Behaviour & Information Technology, Volume 29, Issue 1, 57 -- 83.
[17]
Peterson, R.A. 1994. A meta-analysis of Cronbach's coefficient alpha. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 21 September, pp. 381--91.
[18]
Pu, P., Chen, L., and Kumar, P. 2008. Evaluating Product Search and Recommender Systems for E-Commerce Environments. Electronic Commerce Research Journal, 8(1--2), 1--27.
[19]
Pu, P., Zhou, M., and Castagnos, S. 2009. Critiquing Recommenders for Public Taste Products. In proceedings of RecSys'09. New York, ACM Press, 249--252.
[20]
Pu, P. and Chen, L. 2010. A User-Centric Evaluation Framework of Recommender Systems. In the 3rd ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, Workshop on User-Centric Evaluation of Recommender Systems and Their Interfaces, Barcelona, Spain, Sept. 26-30.
[21]
Simonson, I. 2005. Determinants of customers' responses to customized offers: Conceptual framework and research propositions. Journal of Marketing, 69, 32--45.
[22]
Swearingen, K. and Sinha, R. 2002. Interaction design for recommender systems. In Interactive Systems (DIS2002).
[23]
Tintarev, N. and Masthoff, J. 2007. Survey of explanations in recommender systems. ICDE Workshops 2007, 801--810.
[24]
Venkatesh,V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B. and Davis, F.D. 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 2003, 27, 3, 425--478.
[25]
Ziegler, C.N., McNee, S.M., Konstan, J.A., and Lausen, G. 2005. Improving Recommendation Lists through Topic Diversification. In Proc. of WWW 2005, ACM Press (2005), 22--32.
[26]
Xiao, B. and Benbasat, I. 2007. Ecommerce Product Recommendation Agents: Use, Characteristics, and Impact. Mis Quarterly 31(1), 137--209.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Assessing the impacts of peer-to-peer recommender system on online shopping: PLS-SEM approachInnovative Marketing10.21511/im.20(4).2024.0120:4(1-12)Online publication date: 2-Oct-2024
  • (2024)The transformative power of recommender systems in enhancing citizens’ satisfaction: Evidence from the Moroccan public sectorInnovative Marketing10.21511/im.20(3).2024.1820:3(224-236)Online publication date: 5-Sep-2024
  • (2024)Unexplored Frontiers: A Review of Empirical Studies of Exploratory SearchACM SIGIR Forum10.1145/3687273.368727858:1(1-19)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
RecSys '11: Proceedings of the fifth ACM conference on Recommender systems
October 2011
414 pages
ISBN:9781450306836
DOI:10.1145/2043932
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

In-Cooperation

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 23 October 2011

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. e-commerce recommender
  2. post-study questionnaire
  3. quality of user experience
  4. recommender systems

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

RecSys '11
Sponsor:
RecSys '11: Fifth ACM Conference on Recommender Systems
October 23 - 27, 2011
Illinois, Chicago, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 254 of 1,295 submissions, 20%

Upcoming Conference

RecSys '24
18th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems
October 14 - 18, 2024
Bari , Italy

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)863
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)79
Reflects downloads up to 03 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Assessing the impacts of peer-to-peer recommender system on online shopping: PLS-SEM approachInnovative Marketing10.21511/im.20(4).2024.0120:4(1-12)Online publication date: 2-Oct-2024
  • (2024)The transformative power of recommender systems in enhancing citizens’ satisfaction: Evidence from the Moroccan public sectorInnovative Marketing10.21511/im.20(3).2024.1820:3(224-236)Online publication date: 5-Sep-2024
  • (2024)Unexplored Frontiers: A Review of Empirical Studies of Exploratory SearchACM SIGIR Forum10.1145/3687273.368727858:1(1-19)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
  • (2024)User-Centric Tensions: Exploring Perceived Benefits and (Dis)comfort in Media PersonalisationProceedings of the 13th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/3679318.3685365(1-13)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
  • (2024)KPAR: Knowledge-aware Path-based Attentive Recommender with InterpretabilityACM Transactions on Recommender Systems10.1145/3673243Online publication date: 17-Jun-2024
  • (2024)Visualization for Recommendation Explainability: A Survey and New PerspectivesACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems10.1145/367227614:3(1-40)Online publication date: 11-Jun-2024
  • (2024)What Did I Say Again? Relating User Needs to Search Outcomes in Conversational CommerceProceedings of Mensch und Computer 202410.1145/3670653.3670680(129-139)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2024
  • (2024)SAMANTHA: A chatbot to assist users in training tasks to prevent workplace hazardsProceedings of the XXIV International Conference on Human Computer Interaction10.1145/3657242.3658587(1-8)Online publication date: 19-Jun-2024
  • (2024)A Trust-Enhanced Patent Recommendation Approach to University-Industry Technology TransferACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems10.1145/3645057.364506155:1(35-55)Online publication date: 6-Feb-2024
  • (2024)Sample, Nudge and Rank: Exploiting Interpretable GAN Controls for Exploratory SearchProceedings of the 29th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces10.1145/3640543.3645156(582-596)Online publication date: 18-Mar-2024
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media