Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3178876.3186160acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesthewebconfConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Free access

When Sheep Shop: Measuring Herding Effects in Product Ratings with Natural Experiments

Published: 23 April 2018 Publication History

Abstract

As online shopping becomes ever more prevalent, customers rely increasingly on product rating websites for making purchase decisions. The reliability of online ratings, however, is potentially compromised by the so-called herding effect: when rating a product, customers may be biased to follow other customers' previous ratings of the same product. This is problematic because it skews long-term customer perception through haphazard early ratings. The study of herding poses methodological challenges. In particular, observational studies are impeded by the lack of counterfactuals: simply correlating early with subsequent ratings is insufficient because we cannot know what the subsequent ratings would have looked like had the first ratings been different. The methodology introduced here exploits a setting that comes close to an experiment, although it is purely observational---a natural experiment. Our key methodological device consists in studying the same product on two separate rating sites, focusing on products that received a high first rating on one site, and a low first rating on the other. This largely controls for confounds such as a product»s inherent quality, advertising, and producer identity, and lets us isolate the effect of the first rating on subsequent ratings. In a case study, we focus on beers as products and jointly study two beer rating sites, but our method applies to any pair of sites across which products can be matched. We find clear evidence of herding in beer ratings. For instance, if a beer receives a very high first rating, its second rating is on average half a standard deviation higher, compared to a situation where the identical beer receives a very low first rating. Moreover, herding effects tend to last a long time and are noticeable even after 20 or more ratings. Our results have important implications for the design of better rating systems.

References

[1]
Abhijit V Banerjee. 1992. A Simple Model of Herd Behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics Vol. 107, 3 (1992), 797--817.
[2]
Judith A Chevalier and Dina Mayzlin. 2006. The Effect of Word of Mouth on Sales: Online Book Reviews. Journal of Marketing Research Vol. 43, 3 (2006), 345--354.
[3]
Wenjing Duan, Bin Gu, and Andrew B Whinston. 2008. Do Online Reviews Matter? An Empirical Investigation of Panel Data. Decision Support Systems Vol. 45, 4 (2008), 1007--1016.
[4]
Leonard Evans. 1986 a. Double Pair Comparison: A New Method to Determine How Occupant Characteristics Affect Fatality Risk in Traffic Crashes. Accident Analysis & Prevention Vol. 18, 3 (1986), 217--227.
[5]
Leonard Evans. 1986 b. The Effectiveness of Safety Belts in Preventing Fatalities. Accident Analysis & Prevention Vol. 18, 3 (1986), 229--241.
[6]
Maria Glenski and Tim Weninger. 2017. Rating Effects on Social News Posts and Comments. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, Vol. 8, 6 (2017), 78.
[7]
William D Hamilton. 1971. Geometry for the Selfish Herd. Journal of Theoretical Biology Vol. 31, 2 (1971), 295--311.
[8]
Nan Hu, Paul A Pavlou, and Jennifer Zhang. 2006. Can Online Reviews Reveal a Product's True Quality? Empirical Findings and Analytical Modeling of Online Word-of-Mouth Communication Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce. 324--330.
[9]
Nitin Jindal and Bing Liu. 2007. Analyzing and Detecting Review Spam. In Proceedings of the 7th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining. 547--552.
[10]
Young-Jin Lee, Kartik Hosanagar, and Yong Tan. 2015. Do I Follow my Friends or the Crowd? Information Cascades in Online Movie Ratings. Management Science, Vol. 61, 9 (2015), 2241--2258.
[11]
Jure Leskovec and Andrej Krevl. 2016. SNAP Datasets: Stanford Large Network Dataset Collection (2014). http://snap.stanford.edu/data (2016).
[12]
Julian J McAuley, Jure Leskovec, and Daniel Jurafsky. 2012. Learning Attitudes and Attributes from Multi-Aspect Reviews. Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (2012), 1020--1025.
[13]
Lev Muchnik, Sinan Aral, and Sean J Taylor. 2013. Social Influence Bias: A Randomized Experiment. Science, Vol. 341, 6146 (2013), 647--651.
[14]
Andreas Roider and Andrea Voskort. 2016. Reputational Herding in Financial Markets: A Laboratory Experiment. Journal of Behavioral Finance Vol. 17, 3 (2016), 244--266.
[15]
Paul R Rosenbaum. 2010. Design of Observational Studies. Springer.
[16]
David S Scharfstein and Jeremy C Stein. 1990. Herd Behavior and Investment. The American Economic Review Vol. 80, 3 (1990), 465--479.
[17]
Ting Wang and Dashun Wang. 2014. Why Amazon's Ratings Might Mislead You: The Story of Herding Effects. Big Data, Vol. 2, 4 (2014), 196--204.
[18]
Kislev Yoav and Nira Shchori-Bachrach. 1973. The Process of an Innovation Cycle. American Journal of Agricultural Economics Vol. 55, 1 (1973), 28--37.

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)DGT: Unbiased sequential recommendation via Disentangled Graph TransformerKnowledge-Based Systems10.1016/j.knosys.2024.112946310(112946)Online publication date: Feb-2025
  • (2024)PopGR: Popularity reweighting for debiasing in group recommendationWorld Wide Web10.1007/s11280-024-01272-527:4Online publication date: 17-May-2024
  • (2023)Counterfactual Video Recommendation for Duration DebiasingProceedings of the 29th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining10.1145/3580305.3599797(4894-4903)Online publication date: 6-Aug-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
WWW '18: Proceedings of the 2018 World Wide Web Conference
April 2018
2000 pages
ISBN:9781450356398
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

  • IW3C2: International World Wide Web Conference Committee

In-Cooperation

Publisher

International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee

Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland

Publication History

Published: 23 April 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. herding
  2. natural experiments
  3. observational studies
  4. product ratings
  5. product reviews
  6. social influence

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

WWW '18
Sponsor:
  • IW3C2
WWW '18: The Web Conference 2018
April 23 - 27, 2018
Lyon, France

Acceptance Rates

WWW '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 170 of 1,155 submissions, 15%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,899 of 8,196 submissions, 23%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)151
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)27
Reflects downloads up to 20 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)DGT: Unbiased sequential recommendation via Disentangled Graph TransformerKnowledge-Based Systems10.1016/j.knosys.2024.112946310(112946)Online publication date: Feb-2025
  • (2024)PopGR: Popularity reweighting for debiasing in group recommendationWorld Wide Web10.1007/s11280-024-01272-527:4Online publication date: 17-May-2024
  • (2023)Counterfactual Video Recommendation for Duration DebiasingProceedings of the 29th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining10.1145/3580305.3599797(4894-4903)Online publication date: 6-Aug-2023
  • (2023)CAM2: Conformity-Aware Multi-Task Ranking Model for Large-Scale Recommender SystemsCompanion Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 202310.1145/3543873.3584657(513-517)Online publication date: 30-Apr-2023
  • (2023)Utilizing statistical physics and machine learning to discover collective behavior on temporal social networksInformation Processing & Management10.1016/j.ipm.2022.10319060:2(103190)Online publication date: Mar-2023
  • (2023)Recommender System Frontier TopicsRecommender Systems10.1007/978-981-99-8964-5_5(205-229)Online publication date: 24-Nov-2023
  • (2021)Spiral of Silence and Its Application in Recommender SystemsIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering10.1109/TKDE.2020.3013973(1-1)Online publication date: 2021
  • (2019)What's in a ReviewProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/33592423:CSCW(1-22)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2019
  • (2019)Quantifying Voter Biases in Online PlatformsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/33592223:CSCW(1-27)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2019
  • (2019)Quality Effects on User Preferences and Behaviorsin Mobile News StreamingThe World Wide Web Conference10.1145/3308558.3313751(1187-1197)Online publication date: 13-May-2019

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Login options

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media