skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

Rating Effects on Social News Posts and Comments

Published:24 July 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

At a time when information seekers first turn to digital sources for news and opinion, it is critical that we understand the role that social media plays in human behavior. This is especially true when information consumers also act as information producers and editors through their online activity. In order to better understand the effects that editorial ratings have on online human behavior, we report the results of a two large-scale in vivo experiments in social media. We find that small, random rating manipulations on social media posts and comments created significant changes in downstream ratings, resulting in significantly different final outcomes. We found positive herding effects for positive treatments on posts, increasing the final rating by 11.02% on average, but not for positive treatments on comments. Contrary to the results of related work, we found negative herding effects for negative treatments on posts and comments, decreasing the final ratings, on average, of posts by 5.15% and of comments by 37.4%. Compared to the control group, the probability of reaching a high rating ( ⩾ 2,000) for posts is increased by 24.6% when posts receive the positive treatment and for comments it is decreased by 46.6% when comments receive the negative treatment.

References

  1. Ashton Anderson, Daniel Huttenlocher, Jon Kleinberg, and Jure Leskovec. 2012. Discovering value from community activity on focused question answering sites: A case study of stack overflow. In SIGKDD. ACM, New York, 850--858. https://doi.org/10.1145/2339530.2339665 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Lisa R. Anderson and Charles A. Holt. 1997. Information cascades in the laboratory. American Economic Review 87, 5 (1997), 847--862. www.jstor.org/stable/2951328Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Sinan Aral, Lev Muchnik, and Arun Sundararajan. 2009. Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106, 51 (2009), 21544--21549. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0908800106 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Solomon E. Asch. 1955. Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American 193, 5 (1955), 31--35. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1155-31 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Ricardo Baeza-Yates, Arjen P. Vries, Hugo Zaragoza, B. Barla Cambazoglu, Vanessa Murdock, Ronny Lempel, and Fabrizio Silvestri (Eds.). 2012. Advances in Information Retrieval. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7224. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28997-2 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Eytan Bakshy, Brian Karrer, and Lada A. Adamic. 2009. Social influence and the diffusion of user-created content. In EC. ACM, New York, 325--334. https://doi.org/10.1145/1566374.1566421 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Miguel Ángel Ballester and Pedro Rey-Biel. 2009. Does uncertainty lead to sincerity? Simple and complex voting mechanisms. Social Choice and Welfare 33, 3 (Feb. 2009), 477--494. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00355-009-0374-8 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Abhijit V. Banerjee. 1992. A simple model of herd behavior. Quarterly Journal of Economics 107, 3 (1992), 797--817. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118364 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. John J. Bartholdi and James B. Orlin. 1991. Single transferable vote resists strategic voting. Social Choice and Welfare 8, 4 (1991), 341--354. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00183045 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. John J. Bartholdi, Craig A. Tovey, and Michael A. Trick. 1989. The computational difficulty of manipulating an election. Social Choice and Welfare 6, 3 (1989), 227--241. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00295861 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Sushil Bikhchandani, David Hirshleifer, and Ivo Welch. 1992. A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. Journal of Political Economy 100, 5 (Oct. 1992), 992--1026. https://doi.org/10.2307/2138632 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Daren C. Brabham. 2008. Crowdsourcing as a model for problem solving: An introduction and cases. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 14, 1 (2008), 75--90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856507084420 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Georg Buscher, Edward Cutrell, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2009. What do you see when you’re surfing?: Using eye tracking to predict salient regions of web pages. In SIGCHI. ACM, New York, 21--30. https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518705 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Boaçhan Çelen and Shachar Kariv. 2004. Distinguishing informational cascades from herd behavior in the laboratory. American Economic Review 94, 3 (June 2004), 484--498. http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/0002828041464461 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Pei-Yu Chen, Samita Dhanasobhon, and Michael Smith. 2008. All reviews are not created equal: The disaggregate impact of reviews and reviewers at amazon.com. Available at SSRN (2008). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.918083Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Judith A. Chevalier and Dina Mayzlin. 2006. The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. Journal of Marketing Research 43, 3 (Aug. 2006), 345--354. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.43.3.345 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Vincent Conitzer, Toby Walsh, and Lirong Xia. 2011. Dominating manipulations in voting with partial information. In AAAI. AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA, 638--643.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Chrysanthos Dellarocas, Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang, and Neveen F. Awad. 2007. Exploring the value of online product reviews in forecasting sales: The case of motion pictures. Journal of Interactive Marketing 21, 4 (Jan. 2007), 23--45. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20087 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Wenjing Duan, Bin Gu, and Andrew B. Whinston. 2008a. Do online reviews matter? -- An empirical investigation of panel data. Decision Support Systems 45, 4 (Nov. 2008), 1007--1016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2008.04.001 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Wenjing Duan, Bin Gu, and Andrew B. Whinston. 2008b. The dynamics of online word-of-mouth and product sales: An empirical investigation of the movie industry. Journal of Retailing 84, 2 (May 2008), 233--242. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1101054 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Amir Fayazi, Kyumin Lee, James Caverlee, and Anna Squicciarini. 2015. Uncovering crowdsourced manipulation of online reviews. In SIGIR. ACM, New York, NY, 233--242. https://doi.org/10.1145/2766462.2767742 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Francis Galton. 1907. The ballot box. Nature 75 (1907), 509--510. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Saptarshi Ghosh, Bimal Viswanath, Farshad Kooti, Naveen Kumar Sharma, Gautam Korlam, Fabricio Benevenuto, Niloy Ganguly, and Krishna Phani Gummadi. 2012. Understanding and combating link farming in the twitter social network. In WWW. ACM Press, New York, NY, 61. https://doi.org/10.1145/2187836.2187846 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Allan Gibbard. 1973. Manipulation of voting schemes: A general result. Econometrica 41, 4 (1973), 587--601. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914083 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Eric Gilbert. 2013. Widespread underprovision on reddit. In CSCW. ACM Press, New York, NY, 803. https://doi.org/10.1145/2441776.2441866 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Maria Glenski, Corey Pennycuff, and Tim Weninger. 2017. Consumers and curators: Browsing and voting patterns on reddit. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.05267 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. William D. Hamilton. 1971. Geometry for the selfish herd. Journal of Theoretical Biology 31, 2 (1971), 295--311. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(71)90189-5 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Ward A. Hanson and Daniel S. Putler. 1996. Hits and misses: Herd behavior and online product popularity. Marketing Letters 7, 4 (Oct. 1996), 297--305. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00435537 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Eszter Hargittai and Gina Walejko. 2008. The participation divide: Content creation and sharing in the digital age. Information, Community and Society 11, 2 (2008), 239--256. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180801946150Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. David A. Hirshleifer. 1995. The blind leading the blind: Social influence, fads and informational cascades. In The New Economics of Human Behaviour, Kathryn Ierulli and Mariano Tommasi (Eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, Chapter 12, 188--215. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1278625Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Nan Hu, Paul A. Pavlou, and Jennifer Zhang. 2006. Can online reviews reveal a product’s true quality? In EC. ACM Press, New York, NY, 324--330. https://doi.org/10.1145/1134707.1134743 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Olga Kharif. 2012. “Likejacking”: Spammers hit social media. Business Week (May 2012). http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-24/likejacking-spammers-hit-social-mediaGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Himabindu Lakkaraju, Julian J. McAuley, and Jure Leskovec. 2013. What’s in a name? Understanding the interplay between titles, content, and communities in social media.. In ICWSM. AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA, 311--320.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Kyumin Lee, James Caverlee, Zhiyuan Cheng, and Daniel Z. Sui. 2014. Campaign extraction from social media. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology 5, 1, Article 9 (Jan. 2014), 28 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2542182.2542191Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Kristina Lerman and Tad Hogg. 2014. Leveraging position bias to improve peer recommendation. PLoS One 9, 6 (2014), e98914. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098914Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Jure Leskovec, Lars Backstrom, and Jon Kleinberg. 2009. Meme-tracking and the dynamics of the news cycle. In SIGKDD. ACM Press, New York, NY, 497--506. https://doi.org/10.1145/1557019.1557077 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Jure Leskovec, Mary McGlohon, Christos Faloutsos, Natalie S. Glance, and Matthew Hurst. 2007. Patterns of cascading behavior in large blog graphs. In SDM. SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 551--556. https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611972771.60 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Jure Leskovec, Ajit Singh, and Jon Kleinberg. 2006. Patterns of influence in a recommendation network. In PAKDD. Springer, Berlin, 380--389. https://doi.org/10.1007/11731139_44 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. X. Li and L. M. Hitt. 2008. Self-selection and information role of online product reviews. Information Systems Research 19, 4 (Dec. 2008), 456--474. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1070.0154 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Jan Lorenz, Heiko Rauhut, Frank Schweitzer, and Dirk Helbing. 2011. How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108, 22 (2011), 9020--9025. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1008636108 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Yue Lu, Malu Castellanos, Umeshwar Dayal, and ChengXiang Zhai. 2011. Automatic construction of a context-aware sentiment lexicon. In WWW. ACM Press, New York, NY, 347. https://doi.org/10.1145/1963405.1963456 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Yue Lu, Panayiotis Tsaparas, Alexandros Ntoulas, and Livia Polanyi. 2010. Exploiting social context for review quality prediction. In WWW. ACM Press, New York, NY, 691. https://doi.org/10.1145/1772690.1772761 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Yue Lu and Chengxiang Zhai. 2008. Opinion integration through semi-supervised topic modeling. In WWW. ACM Press, New York, NY, 121. https://doi.org/10.1145/1367497.1367514 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Yue Lu, ChengXiang Zhai, and Neel Sundaresan. 2009. Rated aspect summarization of short comments. In WWW. ACM Press, New York, NY, 131. https://doi.org/10.1145/1526709.1526728 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Michael Luca. 2011. Reviews, reputation, and revenue: The case of yelp.com. Harvard Business Review 12, 016 (Oct. 2011). http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6833.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Dipjyoti Majumdar and Arunava Sen. 2004. Ordinally Bayesian incentive compatible voting rules. Econometrica 72, 2 (March 2004), 523--540. https://doi.org/10.2307/3598911 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Charles F. Manski. 1993. Identification of endogenous social effects: The reflection problem. Review of Economic Studies 60, 3 (1993), 531--542. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2298123 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Benjamin Markines, Ciro Cattuto, and Filippo Menczer. 2009. Social spam detection. In AIRWeb. ACM Press, New York, NY, 41. https://doi.org/10.1145/1531914.1531924 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Lev Muchnik, Sinan Aral, and Sean J. Taylor. 2013. Social influence bias: A randomized experiment. Science 341, 6146 (Aug. 2013), 647--651. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1240466 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Seth A. Myers and Jure Leskovec. 2012. Clash of the contagions: Cooperation and competition in information diffusion. In ICDM. IEEE, 539--548. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDM.2012.159 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Harold Nguyen. 2013. State of Social Media Spam. Technical Report. Nexgate Research.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Stanley Le Baron Payne. 2014. The Art of Asking Questions: Studies in Public Opinion, 3. Vol. 3. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Owen Priestley. 2015. User experience methodology: From the physical to the emotional. Learned Publishing 28, 4 (2015), 317--320. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Matthew J. Salganik, Peter Sheridan Dodds, and Duncan J. Watts. 2006. Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. Science 311, 5762 (Feb. 2006), 854--856. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1121066 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Matthew J. Salganik and Duncan J. Watts. 2008. Leading the herd astray: An experimental study of self-fulfilling prophecies in an artificial cultural market. Social Psychology Quarterly 71, 4 (Jan. 2008), 338. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250807100404Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Mark Allen Satterthwaite. 1975. Strategy-proofness and arrow’s conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions. Journal of Economic Theory 10, 2 (1975), 187--217. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0531(75)90050-2 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. Alan T. Sorensen. 2007. Bestseller lists and product variety. Journal of Industrial Economics 55, 4 (2007), 715--738. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6451.2007.00327.x Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Greg Stoddard. 2015. Popularity and quality in social news aggregators: A study of reddit and hacker news. In WWW. IW3C2, Geneva, 815--818. https://doi.org/10.1145/2740908.2742470Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. James Surowiecki. 2005. The Wisdom of Crowds. Anchor, New York, NY. 336 pages.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Dan Tynan. 2012. Social spam is taking over the internet. IT World (April 2012). http://www.itworld.com/article/2832566/it-management/social-spam-is-taking-over-the-internet.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Trevor van Mierlo. 2014. The 1% rule in four digital health social networks: An observational study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 16, 2 (Feb. 2014), e33. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2966Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  62. Tim Weninger, Thomas James Johnston, and Maria Glenski. 2015. Random voting effects in social-digital spaces: A case study of reddit post submissions. In Hypertext and Social Media. ACM, New York, NY, 293--297. https://doi.org/10.1145/2700171.2791054 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Tim Weninger, Xihao Avi Zhu, and Jiawei Han. 2013. An exploration of discussion threads in social news sites: A case study of the reddit community. In ASONAM. ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/2492517.2492646 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  64. Anita Williams Woolley, Christopher F. Chabris, Alex Pentland, Nada Hashmi, and Thomas W. Malone. 2010. Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science 330, 6004 (Oct. 2010), 686--688. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1193147 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. Fang Wu and Bernardo A. Huberman. 2008. How public opinion forms. In Internet and Network Economics, Christos Papadimitriou and Shuzhong Zhang (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 5385. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92185-1_39 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. Xianchao Zhang, Shaoping Zhu, and Wenxin Liang. 2012. Detecting spam and promoting campaigns in the twitter social network. In ICDM. IEEE, 1194--1199. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDM.2012.28 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. Feng Zhu and Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang. 2010. Impact of online consumer reviews on sales: The moderating role of product and consumer characteristics. Journal of Marketing 74, 2 (March 2010), 133--148. http://journals.ama.org/doi/abs/10.1509/jmkg.74.2.133Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Rating Effects on Social News Posts and Comments

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

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

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology
        ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology  Volume 8, Issue 6
        Survey Paper, Regular Papers and Special Issue: Social Media Processing
        November 2017
        265 pages
        ISSN:2157-6904
        EISSN:2157-6912
        DOI:10.1145/3127339
        • Editor:
        • Yu Zheng
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2017 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 the author(s) 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].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 24 July 2017
        • Accepted: 1 June 2016
        • Revised: 1 April 2016
        • Received: 1 December 2015
        Published in tist Volume 8, Issue 6

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader