• Asia Marketing Journal
• /
• 제15권4호
• /
• pp.61-101
• /
• 2014

This study investigates when and how disagreements in online customer ratings prompt more favorable product evaluations. Among the three metrics of volume, valence, and variance that feature in the research on online customer ratings, volume and valence have exhibited consistently positive patterns in their effects on product sales or evaluations (e.g., Dellarocas, Zhang, and Awad 2007; Liu 2006). Ratings variance, or the degree of disagreement among reviewers, however, has shown rather mixed results, with some studies reporting positive effects on product sales (e.g., Clement, Proppe, and Rott 2007) while others finding negative effects on product evaluations (e.g., Zhu and Zhang 2010). This study aims to resolve these contradictory findings by introducing preference heterogeneity as a possible moderator and causal attribution as a mediator to account for the moderating effect. The main proposition of this study is that when preference heterogeneity is perceived as high, a disagreement in ratings is attributed more to reviewers' different preferences than to unreliable product quality, which in turn prompts better quality evaluations of a product. Because disagreements mostly result from differences in reviewers' tastes or the low reliability of a product's quality (Mizerski 1982; Sen and Lerman 2007), a greater level of attribution to reviewer tastes can mitigate the negative effect of disagreement on product evaluations. Specifically, if consumers infer that reviewers' heterogeneous preferences result in subjectively different experiences and thereby highly diverse ratings, they would not disregard the overall quality of a product. However, if consumers infer that reviewers' preferences are quite homogeneous and thus the low reliability of the product quality contributes to such disagreements, they would discount the overall product quality. Therefore, consumers would respond more favorably to disagreements in ratings when preference heterogeneity is perceived as high rather than low. This study furthermore extends this prediction to the various levels of average ratings. The heuristicsystematic processing model so far indicates that the engagement in effortful systematic processing occurs only when sufficient motivation is present (Hann et al. 2007; Maheswaran and Chaiken 1991; Martin and Davies 1998). One of the key factors affecting this motivation is the aspiration level of the decision maker. Only under conditions that meet or exceed his aspiration level does he tend to engage in systematic processing (Patzelt and Shepherd 2008; Stephanous and Sage 1987). Therefore, systematic causal attribution processing regarding ratings variance is likely more activated when the average rating is high enough to meet the aspiration level than when it is too low to meet it. Considering that the interaction between ratings variance and preference heterogeneity occurs through the mediation of causal attribution, this greater activation of causal attribution in high versus low average ratings would lead to more pronounced interaction between ratings variance and preference heterogeneity in high versus low average ratings. Overall, this study proposes that the interaction between ratings variance and preference heterogeneity is more pronounced when the average rating is high as compared to when it is low. Two laboratory studies lend support to these predictions. Study 1 reveals that participants exposed to a high-preference heterogeneity book title (i.e., a novel) attributed disagreement in ratings more to reviewers' tastes, and thereby more favorably evaluated books with such ratings, compared to those exposed to a low-preference heterogeneity title (i.e., an English listening practice book). Study 2 then extended these findings to the various levels of average ratings and found that this greater preference for disagreement options under high preference heterogeneity is more pronounced when the average rating is high compared to when it is low. This study makes an important theoretical contribution to the online customer ratings literature by showing that preference heterogeneity serves as a key moderator of the effect of ratings variance on product evaluations and that causal attribution acts as a mediator of this moderation effect. A more comprehensive picture of the interplay among ratings variance, preference heterogeneity, and average ratings is also provided by revealing that the interaction between ratings variance and preference heterogeneity varies as a function of the average rating. In addition, this work provides some significant managerial implications for marketers in terms of how they manage word of mouth. Because a lack of consensus creates some uncertainty and anxiety over the given information, consumers experience a psychological burden regarding their choice of a product when ratings show disagreement. The results of this study offer a way to address this problem. By explicitly clarifying that there are many more differences in tastes among reviewers than expected, marketers can allow consumers to speculate that differing tastes of reviewers rather than an uncertain or poor product quality contribute to such conflicts in ratings. Thus, when fierce disagreements are observed in the WOM arena, marketers are advised to communicate to consumers that diverse, rather than uniform, tastes govern reviews and evaluations of products.

• 지능정보연구
• /
• 제26권4호
• /
• pp.1-25
• /
• 2020

대규모 텍스트에서 관심 대상이 가지고 있는 속성들에 대한 감성을 세부적으로 분석하는 속성기반 감성분석(Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis)은 상당한 비즈니스 가치를 제공한다. 특히, 텍스트에 속성어가 존재하는 명시적 속성뿐만 아니라 속성어가 없는 암시적 속성까지 분석 대상으로 하는 속성카테고리 감성분류(ACSC, Aspect Category Sentiment Classification)는 속성기반 감성분석에서 중요한 의미를 지니고 있다. 본 연구는 속성카테고리 감성분류에 BERT 사전훈련 언어 모델을 적용할 때 기존 연구에서 다루지 않은 다음과 같은 주요 이슈들에 대한 답을 찾고, 이를 통해 우수한 ACSC 모델 구조를 도출하고자 한다. 첫째, [CLS] 토큰의 출력 벡터만 분류벡터로 사용하기보다는 속성카테고리에 대한 토큰들의 출력 벡터를 분류벡터에 반영하면 더 나은 성능을 달성할 수 있지 않을까? 둘째, 입력 데이터의 문장-쌍(sentence-pair) 구성에서 QA(Question Answering)와 NLI(Natural Language Inference) 타입 간 성능 차이가 존재할까? 셋째, 입력 데이터의 QA 또는 NLI 타입 문장-쌍 구성에서 속성카테고리를 포함한 문장의 순서에 따른 성능 차이가 존재할까? 이러한 연구 목적을 달성하기 위해 입력 및 출력 옵션들의 조합에 따라 12가지 ACSC 모델들을 구현하고 4종 영어 벤치마크 데이터셋에 대한 실험을 통해 기존 모델 이상의 성능을 제공하는 ACSC 모델들을 도출하였다. 그리고 [CLS] 토큰에 대한 출력 벡터를 분류벡터로 사용하기 보다는 속성카테고리 토큰의 출력 벡터를 사용하거나 두 가지를 함께 사용하는 것이 더욱 효과적이고, NLI 보다는 QA 타입의 입력이 대체적으로 더 나은 성능을 제공하며, QA 타입 안에서 속성이 포함된 문장의 순서는 성능과 무관한 점 등의 유용한 시사점들을 발견하였다. 본 연구에서 사용한 ACSC 모델 디자인을 위한 방법론은 다른 연구에도 비슷하게 응용될 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

• 미술이론과 현장
• /
• 제2호
• /
• pp.27-48
• /
• 2004

Robert Rauschenberg's artistic career has often been regarded as having reached its culmination when the artist won the first prize at the 1964 Venice Biennale. With this victory, Rauschenberg triumphantly entered the pantheon of all-American artists and firmly secured his position in the history of American art. On the other hand, despite the artist's ongoing new experiments in his art, the seemingly precocious ripeness in his career has led the critical discourses on Rauschenberg's art to the artist's early works, most of which were done in the mid-1950s and the 1960s. The crux of Rauschenberg criticism lies not only in focusing on the artist's 50's and 60's works, but also in its large dismissal of the significance of the imagery that the artist employed in his works. As art historians Roger Cranshaw and Adrian Lewis point out, the critical discourse of Rauschenberg either focuses on the formalist concerns on the picture plane, or relies on the "culturalist" interpretation of Rauschenberg's imagery which emphasizes the artist's "Americanness." Recently, a group of art historians centered around October has applied Charles Sanders Peirce's semiotics as art historical methodology and illuminated the indexical aspects of Rauschenberg's work. The semantic inquiry into Rauschenberg's imagery has also been launched by some art historians who seek the clues in the artist's personal context. The first half of this essay will examine the previous criticism on Rauschenberg's art and the other half will discuss the artist's 1955 work Rebus, which I think intersects various critical concerns of Rauschenberg's work, and yet defies the closure of discourses in one direction. The categories of signs in the semiotics of Charles Sanders Peirce and the discourse of Jean-Francois Lyotard will be used in discussing the meanings of Rebus, not to search for the semantic readings of the work, hut to make an analogy in terms of the paradoxical structures of both the work and the theory. The definitions of rebus is as follows: Rebus 1. a representation or words or syllables by pictures of object or by symbols whose names resemble the intended words or syllables in sound; also: a riddle made up wholly or in part of such pictures or symbols. 2. a badge that suggests the name of the person to whom it belongs. Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged. Since its creation in 1955, Robert Rauschenberg's Rebus has been one of the most intriguing works in the artist's oeuvre. This monumental 'combine' painting($6feet{\times}10feet$ 10.5 inches) consists of three panels covered with fabric, paper, newspaper, and printed reproductions. On top of these, oil paints, pencil and crayon drawings connect each section into a whole. The layout of the images is overall horizontal. Starting from a torn election poster, which is partially read as "THAT REPRE," on the far left side of the painting. Rebus leads us to proceed from the left to the right, the typical direction of reading in a Western context. Along with its seemingly proper title. Rebus, the painting has triggered many art historians to seek some semantic readings of it. These art historians painstakingly reconstruct the iconography based on the artist's interviews, (auto)biography, and artistic context of his works. The interpretation of Rebus varies from a 'image-by-image' collation with a word to a more general commentary on Rauschenberg's work overall, such as a work that "bridges between art and life." Despite the title's allusion to the legitimate purpose of the painting as a decoding of the imagery into sound, Rebus, I argue, actually hinders a reading of it. By reading through Peirce to Rauschenberg, I will delve into the subtle anxiety between words and images in their works. And on this basis, I suggest Rauschenberg's strategy in playing Rebus is to hide the meaning of the imagery rather than to disclose it.

• 지능정보연구
• /
• 제25권1호
• /
• pp.109-125
• /
• 2019

지능형 전자상거래 검색 엔진에 대한 관심이 커지면서, 검색 상품의 특징을 지능적으로 추출하고 활용하기 위한 연구들이 수행되고 있다. 특히 전자상거래 지능형 검색 엔진에서 상품을 검색 할 때, 제품의 색상은 상품을 묘사하는 중요한 특징 중에 하나이다. 따라서 사용자의 질의에 정확한 응답을 위해서는 사용자가 검색하려는 색상과 그 색상의 동의어 및 유의어에 대한 처리가 필요하다. 기존의 연구들은 색상 특징에 대한 동의어 처리를 주로 사전 방식으로 다뤄왔다. 하지만 이러한 사전방식으로는 사전에 등록되지 않은 색상 용어가 질의에 포함된 경우 처리하지 못하는 한계점을 가지고 있다. 본 연구에서는 기존에 사용하던 방식의 한계점을 극복하기 위하여, 실시간으로 인터넷 검색 엔진을 통해 해당 색상의 RGB 값을 추출한 후 추출된 색상정보를 기반으로 유사한 색상명들을 출력하는 모델을 제안한다. 본 모델은 우선적으로 기본적인 색상 검색을 위해 671개의 색상명과 각 RGB값이 저장된 색상 사전을 구축하였다. 본 연구에서 제시한 모델은 특정 색상을 검색하는 것으로 시작하며, 검색된 색상이 색상 사전 내 존재하는 지 유무를 확인한다. 사전 내에 검색한 색상이 존재한다면, 해당 색상의 RGB 값이 기준 값으로 사용된다. 만일 색상사전 내에 존재하지 않는다면, Google 이미지 검색 결과를 크롤링하여 각 이미지의 특정 영역 내 RGB값들을 군집화하여 구한 평균 RGB값을 검색한 색상의 기준 값으로 한다. 기준 RGB값을 앞서 구축한 색상 사전 내의 모든 색상의 RGB 값들과 비교하여 각 R, G, B 값에 있어서 ${\pm}50$ 내의 색상 목록을 정렬하고, RGB값 간의 유클리디안 거리 유사도를 활용하여 최종적으로 유사한 색 상명들을 출력한다. 제안 방안의 유용성을 평가하기 위해 실험을 진행하였다. 피설문자들이 생각하는 300 개의 색상 이름과 해당 색상 값을 얻어, 본 연구에서 제안한 방안을 포함한 총 네가지 방법을 통해 얻은 RGB 값들과 피설문자가 지정한 RGB값에 대한 비교를 진행했다. 인간의 눈을 반영하는 측정 기준인 CIELAB의 유클리드안거리는 평균 13.85로 색상사전만을 활용한 방안의 30.88, 한글 동의어사전 사이트인 워드넷을 추가로 활용한 방안의 30.38에 비해 비교적 낮은 색상 간의 거리 값을 보였다. 연구에서 제시하는 방안에서 군집화 과정을 제외한 방안의 색 차는 13.88로 군집화 과정이 색 차를 줄여준다는 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 본 연구에서는 기존 동의어 처리 방식인 사전 방식이 지닌 한계에서 벗어나기 위해, 사전 방식에 새로운 색상명에 대한 실시간 동의어 처리 방식을 결합한 RGB값 기반의 새로운 색상 동의어 처리 방안을 제안한다. 본 연구의 결과를 활용하여 전자상거래 검색 시스템의 지능화에 크게 기여할 수 있을 것이다.