Do we need better online book review organisation

T. Jug, M. Zumer
{"title":"Do we need better online book review organisation","authors":"T. Jug, M. Zumer","doi":"10.15291/LIBELLARIUM.V9I2.268","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. Online customer reviews present one of the most important factors in book purchasing or borrowing decisions. Given that only well-organized reviews are useful, Amazon has already started linking multiple formats and editions of the same book. Nevertheless, this method is not suitable for books that have appeared in many formats and editions as some attributes do not apply to all versions. \n \nResearch questions. In our study we were interested in the aspects of a book users perceive as important and the extent to which these attributes match FRBR entities. We were also interested in the relation between specific attributes in the reviews and the numeric rating of the book. \n \nMethods. We used content analysis on two random samples of Amazon customer reviews. The sample included a total of 600 reviews of three well-known fiction book titles that have many formats and editions that accommodate the different preferences of readers. \n \nResults. The results show that readers take into consideration book information at various abstraction levels that match those in the FRBR model. Most reviewers comment on the book content while review readers consider reviews that comment on different aspects of a book as more helpful. \n \nConclusions. Given that subjective opinion is an important factor in the users’ book selection decision, it would be reasonable to rethink the presentation and organisation of online book reviews.","PeriodicalId":30549,"journal":{"name":"Libellarium Journal for the Research of Writing Books and Cultural Heritage Institutions","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Libellarium Journal for the Research of Writing Books and Cultural Heritage Institutions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15291/LIBELLARIUM.V9I2.268","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction. Online customer reviews present one of the most important factors in book purchasing or borrowing decisions. Given that only well-organized reviews are useful, Amazon has already started linking multiple formats and editions of the same book. Nevertheless, this method is not suitable for books that have appeared in many formats and editions as some attributes do not apply to all versions. Research questions. In our study we were interested in the aspects of a book users perceive as important and the extent to which these attributes match FRBR entities. We were also interested in the relation between specific attributes in the reviews and the numeric rating of the book. Methods. We used content analysis on two random samples of Amazon customer reviews. The sample included a total of 600 reviews of three well-known fiction book titles that have many formats and editions that accommodate the different preferences of readers. Results. The results show that readers take into consideration book information at various abstraction levels that match those in the FRBR model. Most reviewers comment on the book content while review readers consider reviews that comment on different aspects of a book as more helpful. Conclusions. Given that subjective opinion is an important factor in the users’ book selection decision, it would be reasonable to rethink the presentation and organisation of online book reviews.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
我们需要更好的在线书评组织吗
介绍。在线顾客评论是购买或借阅图书的最重要因素之一。考虑到只有组织良好的评论才有用,亚马逊已经开始链接同一本书的多种格式和版本。然而,这种方法并不适用于以多种格式和版本出现的书籍,因为有些属性并不适用于所有版本。研究的问题。在我们的研究中,我们感兴趣的是用户认为重要的书籍方面,以及这些属性与FRBR实体匹配的程度。我们还对评论中的特定属性与书的数字评级之间的关系感兴趣。方法。我们对亚马逊客户评论的两个随机样本进行了内容分析。样本包括对三本知名小说的总共600篇评论,这些小说有许多格式和版本,以适应读者的不同偏好。结果。结果表明,读者在不同的抽象层次上考虑图书信息,这些抽象层次与FRBR模型相匹配。大多数评论家评论书籍的内容,而评论读者认为评论书籍的不同方面更有帮助。结论。鉴于主观意见是用户选书决策的重要因素,重新考虑在线书评的呈现和组织是合理的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Digitisation of films and selection of films for digitisation from the perspective of users Metodologija strukture izrade životopisa te kriterija odabira osoba za upis u mrežni biografski leksikon How public libraries deliver value online Tržište elektroničkih knjiga u Republici Hrvatskoj - pregled snaga, slabosti, prilika i prijetnji s naznakama budućeg razvoja Public Libraries as Agonistic Spaces: At the Crossroads of Librarianship and Contemporary Artistic Practices
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1