research-article

Are user-contributed reviews community property?: exploring the beliefs and practices of reviewers

Authors:

Frank M. Shipman,

Catherine C. MarshallAuthors Info & Claims

WebSci '13: Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM Web Science Conference

Pages 386 - 395

https://doi.org/10.1145/2464464.2464473

Published: 02 May 2013 Publication History

Abstract

User-contributed reviews form the cornerstone of many Web communities and online services. People rely on reviews as a source of information about products, services, creative efforts, and the reputation of other buyers and sellers. Although specific rights about the ownership and control of these reviews are spelled out in licensing agreements and by copyright law, most reviewers' actions are guided instead by evolving social norms. In this paper, we report on 203 responses to a questionnaire offered to reliable US-based Mechanical Turk workers who have written different types of online reviews. The questionnaire uses a series of realistic scenarios and specific questions about recent practice to probe participants about how online reviews may be reused, archived, re-purposed, deleted, and otherwise manipulated. We use these collective attitudes and behaviors to arrive at a picture of current social norms and examine user-contributed reviews as a counterpart to other types of online content, including photos and tweets.

References

[1]

Archak, N., Ghose, A., and Ipeirotis, P. Show me the money!: deriving the pricing power of product features by mining consumer reviews. Proc. KDD '07. 56--65.

Digital Library

[2]

Aufderheide, P, Jaszi, P., Bieze, K. and Boyles, J. L. Copyright, Free Speech, and the Public's Right to Know: How Journalists Think About Fair Use (July 30, 2012). http://ssrn.com/abstract=2119933

[3]

Boyle, J. The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind, Yale University Press, New Haven, 2008.

[4]

Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, C. Kossinets, G., Kleinberg, J. and Lee. L. How opinions are received by online communities: a case study on amazon.com helpfulness votes. Proc. WWW 2009.

Digital Library

[5]

David, S. and Pinch, T. J. Six degrees of reputation: The use and abuse of online review and recommendation systems. First Monday, July 2006.

[6]

de Albornoz, J. C., Plaza, L., Gervás, P., and Díaz, A. A joint model of feature mining and sentiment analysis for product review rating. Proc. ECIR'11, Springer-Verlag, 55--66.

Digital Library

[7]

Downs, J., Holbrook, M., Sheng, S., and Cranor, L. Are your participants gaming the system?: Screening Mechanical Turk workers. Proc. CHI'10. 2399--2402.

Digital Library

[8]

Faridani, S., Bitton, E., Ryokai, K., and Goldberg, K. Opinion space: a scalable tool for browsing online comments. Proc. CHI '10. 1175--1184.

Digital Library

[9]

Gilbert, E. and Karahalios, K. Understanding Deja Reviewers. Proc. of CSCW '10, 225--228.

Digital Library

[10]

Greengard, S. Digitally Possessed. Communications of the ACM, 55 (5), 2012, 14--16.

Digital Library

[11]

Hill, B., Monroy-Hernandez, A., and Olson, K. Responses to Remixing on a Social Media Website. Proc. ICWSM 2010, AAAI, 74--81.

[12]

Ipeirotis, P. Analyzing the Amazon Mechanical Turk Marketplace. ACM XRDS 17, 2, Winter 2010.

Digital Library

[13]

Jakobsson, M. Experimenting on Mechanical Turk: 5 How Tos. ITWorld, September 3, 2009.

[14]

Jindal, N. and Liu, B. Opinion spam and analysis. Proc. WSDM '08. ACM, 219--230

Digital Library

[15]

Kittur, A., Chi, E., Suh, B. Crowdsourcing user studies with Mechanical Turk. Proc. CHI'08. ACM, 453--456.

Digital Library

[16]

Lessig, L. Code, Version 2.0, Basic Books, 2006.

Digital Library

[17]

Lessig, L. Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy, Penguin, New York, 2008.

[18]

Lim, E.-P., Nguyen, V.-A., Jindal, N., Liu, B., and Lauw, H. W. Detecting product review spammers using rating behaviors. Proc. CIKM '10. ACM, 939--948.

Digital Library

[19]

Marshall, C. C., and Shipman, F. M. Social media ownership: Using Twitter as a window onto current attitudes and beliefs. Proc. CHI'11, ACM, 1081--1090.

Digital Library

[20]

Marshall, C. C., and Shipman, F. M. The ownership and reuse of visual media. Proc. JCDL'11. ACM, 157--166.

Digital Library

[21]

Marshall, C. C., and Shipman, F. M. On the institutional archiving of social media. Proc. JCDL'12. ACM, 1--10.

Digital Library

[22]

Nelson, T. H. The heart of connection: Hypermedia unified by transclusion. Communications of the ACM, 38 (8), 1995, 31--33.

Digital Library

[23]

Odom, W. Sellen, A., Harper, R., and Thereska, E. Lost in Translation: Understanding the Possession of Digital Things in the Cloud. Proc. CHI'12. 781--790.

Digital Library

[24]

Popescu, A.-M. and Etzioni, O. Extracting product features and opinions from reviews. Proc. HLT '05. Association for Computational Linguistics, 339--346.

Digital Library

[25]

Rissland, E. and Ashley, K. Hypotheticals as Heuristic Device. Proc. Strategic Computing Natural Language, 1986, 165--178.

Digital Library

[26]

Sag, M. Predicting Fair Use. Ohio State Law Journal, 73 (1), 2012, 47--91.

[27]

Scaffidi, C., Bierhoff, K., Chang, E., Felker, M., Ng, H., and Jin, C. Red Opal: product-feature scoring from reviews. Proc. EC '07. ACM, 182--191.

Digital Library

[28]

Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. Basics of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, 1998.

[29]

Yeung, C.-M. A. and Iwata, T. Strength of social influence in trust networks in product review sites. Proc. of WSDM '11. ACM, 495--504.

Digital Library

[30]

Zhang, Z. and Varadarajan, B. Utility scoring of product reviews. Proc. of CIKM '06. ACM, 51--57.

Digital Library

Cited By

Pimenta FLopes LGonçalves FCampos P(2020)Designing Positive Behavior Change Experiences: a Systematic Review and Sentiment Analysis based on Online User Reviews of Fitness and Nutrition Mobile ApplicationsProceedings of the 19th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia10.1145/3428361.3428403(152-161)Online publication date: 22-Nov-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3428361.3428403
Fleck RCowan BDarmanin EWang Y(2019)Understanding and Encouraging Online Reviewing With a Selection-Based Review SystemInteracting with Computers10.1093/iwc/iwz02931:5(446-464)Online publication date: 12-Dec-2019
https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwz029
Marshall CShipman FCosley DForte ACiolfi LMcDonald D(2015)Exploring the Ownership and Persistent Value of Facebook ContentProceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing10.1145/2675133.2675203(712-723)Online publication date: 28-Feb-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2675133.2675203
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Are user-contributed reviews community property?: exploring the beliefs and practices of reviewers
1. Information systems
  1. World Wide Web
    1. Web applications
      1. Internet communications tools

Recommendations

Social media ownership: using twitter as a window onto current attitudes and beliefs
CHI '11: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Social media, by its very nature, introduces questions about ownership. Ownership comes into play most crucially when we investigate how social media is saved or archived; how it is reused; and whether it can be removed or deleted. We investigate these ...
The ownership and reuse of visual media
JCDL '11: Proceedings of the 11th annual international ACM/IEEE joint conference on Digital libraries

This paper presents the results of a study of the ownership and reuse of visual media. A survey was administered to 250 social media-savvy respondents to investigate their attitudes about saving, sharing, publishing, and removing online photos; the ...
On the institutional archiving of social media
JCDL '12: Proceedings of the 12th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital Libraries

Social media records the thoughts and activities of countless cultures and subcultures around the globe. Yet institutional efforts to archive social media content remain controversial. We report on 988 responses across six surveys of social media users ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

WebSci '13: Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM Web Science Conference

May 2013

481 pages

ISBN:9781450318891

DOI:10.1145/2464464

Conference Chairs:
Hugh Davis
University of Southampton
,
Harry Halpin
World Wide Web Consortium
,
Alex Pentland,
Program Chairs:
Mark Bernstein,
Lada Adamic,
Harith Alani,
Alexandre Monnin,
Richard Rogers

Copyright © 2013 ACM.

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

SIGWEB: ACM Special Interest Group on Hypertext, Hypermedia, and Web

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 02 May 2013

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

WebSci '13

Sponsor:

SIGWEB

WebSci '13: Web Science 2013

May 2 - 4, 2013

Paris, France

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 245 of 933 submissions, 26%

Upcoming Conference

Websci '25

Sponsor:
sigweb

17th ACM Web Science Conference

May 20 - 24, 2025

New Brunswick , NJ , USA

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

4
Total Citations
View Citations
151
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)2
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 07 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Pimenta FLopes LGonçalves FCampos P(2020)Designing Positive Behavior Change Experiences: a Systematic Review and Sentiment Analysis based on Online User Reviews of Fitness and Nutrition Mobile ApplicationsProceedings of the 19th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia10.1145/3428361.3428403(152-161)Online publication date: 22-Nov-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3428361.3428403
Fleck RCowan BDarmanin EWang Y(2019)Understanding and Encouraging Online Reviewing With a Selection-Based Review SystemInteracting with Computers10.1093/iwc/iwz02931:5(446-464)Online publication date: 12-Dec-2019
https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwz029
Marshall CShipman FCosley DForte ACiolfi LMcDonald D(2015)Exploring the Ownership and Persistent Value of Facebook ContentProceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing10.1145/2675133.2675203(712-723)Online publication date: 28-Feb-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2675133.2675203
Marshall CShipman FDavis HHalpin HPentland ABernstein MAdamic LAlani HMonnin ARogers R(2013)Experiences surveying the crowdProceedings of the 5th Annual ACM Web Science Conference10.1145/2464464.2464485(234-243)Online publication date: 2-May-2013
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2464464.2464485

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten