Consistency of expert product reviews: an application to wine guides

Q1 Economics, Econometrics and Finance
G. Penagos-Londoño, Felipe Ruiz-Moreno, Ricardo Sellers-Rubio, Salvador Del Barrio-García, A. B. Casado-Díaz
{"title":"Consistency of expert product reviews: an application to wine guides","authors":"G. Penagos-Londoño, Felipe Ruiz-Moreno, Ricardo Sellers-Rubio, Salvador Del Barrio-García, A. B. Casado-Díaz","doi":"10.36253/wep-12400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose. The purpose of this study is to examine the internal consistency of wine guides by comparing the judgements of expert wine tasters and reviewers. A classification of wines is provided to establish whether expert reviews of similar wines are coherent. Design/methodology/approach. Sentiment analysis based on natural language processing techniques was used to compare quantitative and qualitative reviews between experts. In addition, a finite mixture model was used to classify wines into categories to analyse internal consistency between ratings. Findings. The results for a sample of more than 200,000 Wine Enthusiast ratings reveal significant differences between expert reviews. This finding indicates that there are no standard criteria for reviewing wines included in the guide. Originality. Wine guides are amongst the most widely used marketing resources in the wine industry. They provide a signal to consumers about the quality of wines, guiding their purchase decisions. They also influence the reputation of brands and the performance of companies producing these wines. The main contribution of this study is to propose a new way to compare the reviews of wine guide experts.","PeriodicalId":38081,"journal":{"name":"Wine Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wine Economics and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-12400","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of this study is to examine the internal consistency of wine guides by comparing the judgements of expert wine tasters and reviewers. A classification of wines is provided to establish whether expert reviews of similar wines are coherent. Design/methodology/approach. Sentiment analysis based on natural language processing techniques was used to compare quantitative and qualitative reviews between experts. In addition, a finite mixture model was used to classify wines into categories to analyse internal consistency between ratings. Findings. The results for a sample of more than 200,000 Wine Enthusiast ratings reveal significant differences between expert reviews. This finding indicates that there are no standard criteria for reviewing wines included in the guide. Originality. Wine guides are amongst the most widely used marketing resources in the wine industry. They provide a signal to consumers about the quality of wines, guiding their purchase decisions. They also influence the reputation of brands and the performance of companies producing these wines. The main contribution of this study is to propose a new way to compare the reviews of wine guide experts.
专家产品评论的一致性:葡萄酒指南的应用
目的。本研究的目的是通过比较专家品酒师和评论家的判断来检验葡萄酒指南的内部一致性。提供了葡萄酒的分类,以确定是否专家评论相似的葡萄酒是连贯的。设计/方法/方法。基于自然语言处理技术的情感分析用于比较专家之间的定量和定性评论。此外,采用有限混合模型对葡萄酒进行分类,以分析评级之间的内部一致性。发现。对20多万份《葡萄酒爱好者》(Wine Enthusiast)评级样本的调查结果显示,专家评论之间存在显著差异。这一发现表明,没有标准的标准,审查葡萄酒包括在指南。创意。葡萄酒指南是葡萄酒行业最广泛使用的营销资源之一。它们向消费者提供了关于葡萄酒质量的信号,指导他们的购买决策。它们还会影响品牌的声誉和生产这些葡萄酒的公司的业绩。本研究的主要贡献是提出了一种比较葡萄酒指南专家评论的新方法。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Wine Economics and Policy
Wine Economics and Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics, Econometrics and Finance (all)
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
28 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信