在线推荐代理的性能测试:meta分析

IF 8 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Retailing Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jretai.2023.08.001
Markus Blut , Arezou Ghiassaleh , Cheng Wang
{"title":"在线推荐代理的性能测试:meta分析","authors":"Markus Blut ,&nbsp;Arezou Ghiassaleh ,&nbsp;Cheng Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.jretai.2023.08.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Many retailers (e.g., Amazon, Walmart) use various types of online recommendation agents (RAs) on their websites to suggest goods and services to consumers. These RAs screen millions of options to ease consumers’ information search and evaluation. To determine which RA types best support consumers’ efforts, the present research reports a meta-analysis of perceived recommendation quality research, a key performance metric that gauges RAs from consumers’ perspectives. To test the framework derived from this meta-analysis, the authors rely on data gathered from 32,172 consumers, reported in 122 samples. The results affirm that some RAs perform better than others in leveraging the effects of perceived recommendation quality on consumers’ decision-making satisfaction, RA satisfaction, and intention to use the RA in the future. The best performing RAs feature specific algorithms (i.e., collaborative filtering, interactive RAs, and self-serving recommendations), recommendation presentations (i.e., solicited recommendation), and data sources (i.e., location-based and social network–based RAs). Moreover, the results suggest that some RAs perform better than others in leveraging the effects of decision-making and RA satisfaction on future use intentions. These insights advance RA theory and provide guidance for managers, with regard to choosing the optimal RA.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48402,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Retailing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing the performance of online recommendation agents: A meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Markus Blut ,&nbsp;Arezou Ghiassaleh ,&nbsp;Cheng Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jretai.2023.08.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Many retailers (e.g., Amazon, Walmart) use various types of online recommendation agents (RAs) on their websites to suggest goods and services to consumers. These RAs screen millions of options to ease consumers’ information search and evaluation. To determine which RA types best support consumers’ efforts, the present research reports a meta-analysis of perceived recommendation quality research, a key performance metric that gauges RAs from consumers’ perspectives. To test the framework derived from this meta-analysis, the authors rely on data gathered from 32,172 consumers, reported in 122 samples. The results affirm that some RAs perform better than others in leveraging the effects of perceived recommendation quality on consumers’ decision-making satisfaction, RA satisfaction, and intention to use the RA in the future. The best performing RAs feature specific algorithms (i.e., collaborative filtering, interactive RAs, and self-serving recommendations), recommendation presentations (i.e., solicited recommendation), and data sources (i.e., location-based and social network–based RAs). Moreover, the results suggest that some RAs perform better than others in leveraging the effects of decision-making and RA satisfaction on future use intentions. These insights advance RA theory and provide guidance for managers, with regard to choosing the optimal RA.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48402,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Retailing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Retailing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022435923000349\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Retailing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022435923000349","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

许多零售商(如亚马逊、沃尔玛)在其网站上使用各种类型的在线推荐代理(RAs)向消费者推荐商品和服务。这些RAs筛选数以百万计的选项,以方便消费者的信息搜索和评估。为了确定哪种RA类型最能支持消费者的努力,本研究报告了对感知推荐质量研究的荟萃分析,这是一个从消费者角度衡量RA的关键绩效指标。为了验证从这一荟萃分析中得出的框架,作者依赖于从122个样本中收集的32172名消费者的数据。结果证实,在利用感知推荐质量对消费者决策满意度、RA满意度和未来使用RA的意愿的影响方面,一些RA表现得比其他RA更好。表现最好的RAs具有特定的算法(即协同过滤、交互式RAs和自服务推荐)、推荐演示(即征求推荐)和数据源(即基于位置和基于社交网络的RAs)。此外,研究结果表明,在利用决策和RA满意度对未来使用意图的影响方面,一些RA的表现优于其他RA。这些见解推动了RA理论的发展,并为管理者选择最优RA提供了指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Testing the performance of online recommendation agents: A meta-analysis

Many retailers (e.g., Amazon, Walmart) use various types of online recommendation agents (RAs) on their websites to suggest goods and services to consumers. These RAs screen millions of options to ease consumers’ information search and evaluation. To determine which RA types best support consumers’ efforts, the present research reports a meta-analysis of perceived recommendation quality research, a key performance metric that gauges RAs from consumers’ perspectives. To test the framework derived from this meta-analysis, the authors rely on data gathered from 32,172 consumers, reported in 122 samples. The results affirm that some RAs perform better than others in leveraging the effects of perceived recommendation quality on consumers’ decision-making satisfaction, RA satisfaction, and intention to use the RA in the future. The best performing RAs feature specific algorithms (i.e., collaborative filtering, interactive RAs, and self-serving recommendations), recommendation presentations (i.e., solicited recommendation), and data sources (i.e., location-based and social network–based RAs). Moreover, the results suggest that some RAs perform better than others in leveraging the effects of decision-making and RA satisfaction on future use intentions. These insights advance RA theory and provide guidance for managers, with regard to choosing the optimal RA.

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
15.90
自引率
6.00%
发文量
54
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: The focus of The Journal of Retailing is to advance knowledge and its practical application in the field of retailing. This includes various aspects such as retail management, evolution, and current theories. The journal covers both products and services in retail, supply chains and distribution channels that serve retailers, relationships between retailers and supply chain members, and direct marketing as well as emerging electronic markets for households. Articles published in the journal may take an economic or behavioral approach, but all are based on rigorous analysis and a deep understanding of relevant theories and existing literature. Empirical research follows the scientific method, employing modern sampling procedures and statistical analysis.
期刊最新文献
Bargaining with algorithms: How consumers respond to offers proposed by algorithms versus humans Quiet sellers: When introversion drives salesperson performance Understanding shoppers’ attention to price information at the point of consideration using in-store ambulatory eye-tracking FM ii: Copyright/ ID Statement Navigating the complexities of retail mergers in a changing landscape: A call for deeper insights
×
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