旅客对智能机场设施的看法:X(推特)情感分析

IF 3.9 2区 工程技术 Q2 TRANSPORTATION Journal of Air Transport Management Pub Date : 2024-05-31 DOI:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2024.102600
Amphai Booranakittipinyo , Rita Yi Man Li , Nutteera Phakdeephirot
{"title":"旅客对智能机场设施的看法:X(推特)情感分析","authors":"Amphai Booranakittipinyo ,&nbsp;Rita Yi Man Li ,&nbsp;Nutteera Phakdeephirot","doi":"10.1016/j.jairtraman.2024.102600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study investigates travelers' perceptions of smart airport facilities through sentiment analysis. It collected 39,616 comments from thirteen smart airports, and 25,572 tweets were analyzed. Most mentioned words about the smart airport included \"technology\" and \"security\". Comments also highlighted concerns about airport customer service, including \"bag,\" \"transit,\" and \"disabled.\" The results also reveal that travelers are more concerned about the outcome of these facilities, such as the efficiency and time management of flights via smart facilities. The most mentioned words in the tweets related to smart airport operations are \"flight,\" \"waiting,\" and \"time\". Despite most smart facilities being equipped in the airports aiming to raise travelers' satisfaction, the results showed that 12 smart airports' tweets were generally neutral. Smart airport facilities might not add as much value to the airport impression as we expect. Brisbane International Airport was the only one with a positive perception of smart airport facilities. Most travelers mentioned that the airport had faster and better wifi and the airport is continuously improving. In contrast, Charles de Gaulle Airport and London Heathrow Airport had the highest percentage of negative sentiment, with 25.90% and 27.52% of tweets being negative, respectively. Travelers' complained that self-check-in kiosks were a mess, unhelpful staff and poor wifi. The results reveal travelers' concerns regarding smart airport facilities, and they let us know the importance of smart facility management. Smart airport facilities were initially designed to shorten travelers' time and enhance satisfaction, yet unhelpful staff and poor managed kiosks raise dissatisfaction. This study helps airport managers and operators to address the weakest part of smart airports as reflected in social media comments. It also fills the academic voids in examining travelers' satisfaction with smart facilities using social media and sentiment analysis via artificial intelligence.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":14925,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Air Transport Management","volume":"118 ","pages":"Article 102600"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Travelers' perception of smart airport facilities: An X (Twitter) sentiment analysis\",\"authors\":\"Amphai Booranakittipinyo ,&nbsp;Rita Yi Man Li ,&nbsp;Nutteera Phakdeephirot\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jairtraman.2024.102600\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This study investigates travelers' perceptions of smart airport facilities through sentiment analysis. It collected 39,616 comments from thirteen smart airports, and 25,572 tweets were analyzed. Most mentioned words about the smart airport included \\\"technology\\\" and \\\"security\\\". Comments also highlighted concerns about airport customer service, including \\\"bag,\\\" \\\"transit,\\\" and \\\"disabled.\\\" The results also reveal that travelers are more concerned about the outcome of these facilities, such as the efficiency and time management of flights via smart facilities. The most mentioned words in the tweets related to smart airport operations are \\\"flight,\\\" \\\"waiting,\\\" and \\\"time\\\". Despite most smart facilities being equipped in the airports aiming to raise travelers' satisfaction, the results showed that 12 smart airports' tweets were generally neutral. Smart airport facilities might not add as much value to the airport impression as we expect. Brisbane International Airport was the only one with a positive perception of smart airport facilities. Most travelers mentioned that the airport had faster and better wifi and the airport is continuously improving. In contrast, Charles de Gaulle Airport and London Heathrow Airport had the highest percentage of negative sentiment, with 25.90% and 27.52% of tweets being negative, respectively. Travelers' complained that self-check-in kiosks were a mess, unhelpful staff and poor wifi. The results reveal travelers' concerns regarding smart airport facilities, and they let us know the importance of smart facility management. Smart airport facilities were initially designed to shorten travelers' time and enhance satisfaction, yet unhelpful staff and poor managed kiosks raise dissatisfaction. This study helps airport managers and operators to address the weakest part of smart airports as reflected in social media comments. It also fills the academic voids in examining travelers' satisfaction with smart facilities using social media and sentiment analysis via artificial intelligence.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14925,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Air Transport Management\",\"volume\":\"118 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102600\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Air Transport Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969699724000656\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"TRANSPORTATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Air Transport Management","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969699724000656","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究通过情感分析调查了旅客对智能机场设施的看法。研究收集了来自 13 个智能机场的 39,616 条评论,并对 25,572 条推文进行了分析。关于智能机场,提及最多的词语包括 "技术 "和 "安全"。评论还强调了对机场客户服务的关注,包括 "行李"、"转机 "和 "残疾人"。结果还显示,旅客更关注这些设施的成果,如通过智能设施进行航班效率和时间管理。在与智能机场运行相关的推文中,提及最多的词是 "航班"、"等待 "和 "时间"。尽管大多数机场都配备了智能设施,旨在提高旅客的满意度,但结果显示,12 个智能机场的推文总体上是中性的。智能机场设施可能并不像我们期望的那样为机场印象增值。布里斯班国际机场是唯一一个对智能机场设施持正面看法的机场。大多数旅客提到机场有更快、更好的 wifi,机场也在不断改进。相比之下,戴高乐机场和伦敦希思罗机场的负面情绪比例最高,分别为 25.90% 和 27.52%。旅客们抱怨自助值机亭一团糟、工作人员不提供帮助以及 Wifi 信号差。这些结果揭示了旅客对智能机场设施的担忧,也让我们了解到智能设施管理的重要性。智能机场设施的设计初衷是缩短旅客的时间,提高旅客的满意度,但工作人员的无助和自助机的管理不善却引起了旅客的不满。这项研究有助于机场管理者和运营商解决社交媒体评论中反映出的智能机场最薄弱的部分。它还填补了利用社交媒体和人工智能情感分析研究旅客对智能设施满意度的学术空白。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Travelers' perception of smart airport facilities: An X (Twitter) sentiment analysis

This study investigates travelers' perceptions of smart airport facilities through sentiment analysis. It collected 39,616 comments from thirteen smart airports, and 25,572 tweets were analyzed. Most mentioned words about the smart airport included "technology" and "security". Comments also highlighted concerns about airport customer service, including "bag," "transit," and "disabled." The results also reveal that travelers are more concerned about the outcome of these facilities, such as the efficiency and time management of flights via smart facilities. The most mentioned words in the tweets related to smart airport operations are "flight," "waiting," and "time". Despite most smart facilities being equipped in the airports aiming to raise travelers' satisfaction, the results showed that 12 smart airports' tweets were generally neutral. Smart airport facilities might not add as much value to the airport impression as we expect. Brisbane International Airport was the only one with a positive perception of smart airport facilities. Most travelers mentioned that the airport had faster and better wifi and the airport is continuously improving. In contrast, Charles de Gaulle Airport and London Heathrow Airport had the highest percentage of negative sentiment, with 25.90% and 27.52% of tweets being negative, respectively. Travelers' complained that self-check-in kiosks were a mess, unhelpful staff and poor wifi. The results reveal travelers' concerns regarding smart airport facilities, and they let us know the importance of smart facility management. Smart airport facilities were initially designed to shorten travelers' time and enhance satisfaction, yet unhelpful staff and poor managed kiosks raise dissatisfaction. This study helps airport managers and operators to address the weakest part of smart airports as reflected in social media comments. It also fills the academic voids in examining travelers' satisfaction with smart facilities using social media and sentiment analysis via artificial intelligence.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.40
自引率
11.70%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: The Journal of Air Transport Management (JATM) sets out to address, through high quality research articles and authoritative commentary, the major economic, management and policy issues facing the air transport industry today. It offers practitioners and academics an international and dynamic forum for analysis and discussion of these issues, linking research and practice and stimulating interaction between the two. The refereed papers in the journal cover all the major sectors of the industry (airlines, airports, air traffic management) as well as related areas such as tourism management and logistics. Papers are blind reviewed, normally by two referees, chosen for their specialist knowledge. The journal provides independent, original and rigorous analysis in the areas of: • Policy, regulation and law • Strategy • Operations • Marketing • Economics and finance • Sustainability
期刊最新文献
Stochastic infection risk models for aircraft seat assignment considering passenger vaccination status and seat location Addressing the impact of airport pricing, investment and operations on greenhouse gas emissions Editorial Board A privacy-preserving federated learning approach for airline upgrade optimization Exploring prediction accuracy for optimal taxi times in airport operations using various machine learning models
×
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