{"title":"五是最亮的星。但有多亮？测试在线评论中星级评定的等距性","authors":"Balázs Kovács","doi":"10.1177/10944281231223412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Organizational research increasingly relies on online review data to gauge perceived valuation and reputation of organizations and products. Online review platforms typically collect ordinal ratings (e.g., 1 to 5 stars); however, researchers often treat them as a cardinal data, calculating aggregate statistics such as the average, the median, or the variance of ratings. In calculating these statistics, ratings are implicitly assumed to be equidistant. We test whether star ratings are equidistant using reviews from two large-scale online review platforms: Amazon.com and Yelp.com. We develop a deep learning framework to analyze the text of the reviews in order to assess their overall valuation. We find that 4 and 5-star ratings, as well as 1 and 2-star ratings, are closer to each other than 3-star ratings are to 2 and 4-star ratings. An additional online experiment corroborates this pattern. Using simulations, we show that the distortion by non-equidistant ratings is especially harmful in cases when organizations receive only a few reviews and when researchers are interested in estimating variance effects. We discuss potential solutions to solve the issue with rating non-equidistance.","PeriodicalId":19689,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Research Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Five Is the Brightest Star. But by how Much? Testing the Equidistance of Star Ratings in Online Reviews\",\"authors\":\"Balázs Kovács\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10944281231223412\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Organizational research increasingly relies on online review data to gauge perceived valuation and reputation of organizations and products. Online review platforms typically collect ordinal ratings (e.g., 1 to 5 stars); however, researchers often treat them as a cardinal data, calculating aggregate statistics such as the average, the median, or the variance of ratings. In calculating these statistics, ratings are implicitly assumed to be equidistant. We test whether star ratings are equidistant using reviews from two large-scale online review platforms: Amazon.com and Yelp.com. We develop a deep learning framework to analyze the text of the reviews in order to assess their overall valuation. We find that 4 and 5-star ratings, as well as 1 and 2-star ratings, are closer to each other than 3-star ratings are to 2 and 4-star ratings. An additional online experiment corroborates this pattern. Using simulations, we show that the distortion by non-equidistant ratings is especially harmful in cases when organizations receive only a few reviews and when researchers are interested in estimating variance effects. We discuss potential solutions to solve the issue with rating non-equidistance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19689,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Research Methods\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Research Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281231223412\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281231223412","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
Five Is the Brightest Star. But by how Much? Testing the Equidistance of Star Ratings in Online Reviews
Organizational research increasingly relies on online review data to gauge perceived valuation and reputation of organizations and products. Online review platforms typically collect ordinal ratings (e.g., 1 to 5 stars); however, researchers often treat them as a cardinal data, calculating aggregate statistics such as the average, the median, or the variance of ratings. In calculating these statistics, ratings are implicitly assumed to be equidistant. We test whether star ratings are equidistant using reviews from two large-scale online review platforms: Amazon.com and Yelp.com. We develop a deep learning framework to analyze the text of the reviews in order to assess their overall valuation. We find that 4 and 5-star ratings, as well as 1 and 2-star ratings, are closer to each other than 3-star ratings are to 2 and 4-star ratings. An additional online experiment corroborates this pattern. Using simulations, we show that the distortion by non-equidistant ratings is especially harmful in cases when organizations receive only a few reviews and when researchers are interested in estimating variance effects. We discuss potential solutions to solve the issue with rating non-equidistance.
期刊介绍：
Organizational Research Methods (ORM) was founded with the aim of introducing pertinent methodological advancements to researchers in organizational sciences. The objective of ORM is to promote the application of current and emerging methodologies to advance both theory and research practices. Articles are expected to be comprehensible to readers with a background consistent with the methodological and statistical training provided in contemporary organizational sciences doctoral programs. The text should be presented in a manner that facilitates accessibility. For instance, highly technical content should be placed in appendices, and authors are encouraged to include example data and computer code when relevant. Additionally, authors should explicitly outline how their contribution has the potential to advance organizational theory and research practice.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
