你不能替我做决定!旅游业可解释群体聚集策略的评价

Shabnam Najafian, Daniel Herzog, S. Qiu, O. Inel, N. Tintarev
{"title":"你不能替我做决定!旅游业可解释群体聚集策略的评价","authors":"Shabnam Najafian, Daniel Herzog, S. Qiu, O. Inel, N. Tintarev","doi":"10.1145/3372923.3404800","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most recommender systems propose items to individual users. However, in domains such as tourism, people often consume items in groups rather than individually. Different individual preferences in such a group can be difficult to resolve, and often compromises need to be made. Social choice strategies can be used to aggregate the preferences of individuals. We evaluated two explainable modified preference aggregation strategies in a between-subject study (n=200), and compared them with two baseline strategies for groups that are also explainable, in two scenarios: high divergence (group members with different travel preferences) and low divergence (group members with similar travel preferences). Generally, all investigated aggregation strategies performed well in terms of perceived individual and group satisfaction and perceived fairness. The results also indicate that participants were sensitive to a dictator-based strategy, which affected both their individual and group satisfaction negatively (compared to the other strategies).","PeriodicalId":389616,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 31st ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"You Do Not Decide for Me! Evaluating Explainable Group Aggregation Strategies for Tourism\",\"authors\":\"Shabnam Najafian, Daniel Herzog, S. Qiu, O. Inel, N. Tintarev\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3372923.3404800\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Most recommender systems propose items to individual users. However, in domains such as tourism, people often consume items in groups rather than individually. Different individual preferences in such a group can be difficult to resolve, and often compromises need to be made. Social choice strategies can be used to aggregate the preferences of individuals. We evaluated two explainable modified preference aggregation strategies in a between-subject study (n=200), and compared them with two baseline strategies for groups that are also explainable, in two scenarios: high divergence (group members with different travel preferences) and low divergence (group members with similar travel preferences). Generally, all investigated aggregation strategies performed well in terms of perceived individual and group satisfaction and perceived fairness. The results also indicate that participants were sensitive to a dictator-based strategy, which affected both their individual and group satisfaction negatively (compared to the other strategies).\",\"PeriodicalId\":389616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 31st ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 31st ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3372923.3404800\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 31st ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3372923.3404800","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

大多数推荐系统向个人用户推荐项目。然而,在旅游等领域,人们通常是集体消费,而不是个人消费。在这样一个群体中,不同的个人偏好可能很难解决,通常需要做出妥协。社会选择策略可以用来汇总个人的偏好。我们在一项受试者间研究中评估了两种可解释的修正偏好聚合策略(n=200),并将它们与两种基线策略进行了比较,这两种策略在两种情况下也是可解释的:高分化(群体成员具有不同的旅行偏好)和低分化(群体成员具有相似的旅行偏好)。总体而言,所有被调查的聚合策略在感知个人和群体满意度和感知公平方面表现良好。结果还表明,参与者对基于独裁的策略很敏感,这对他们的个人和群体满意度都有负面影响(与其他策略相比)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
You Do Not Decide for Me! Evaluating Explainable Group Aggregation Strategies for Tourism
Most recommender systems propose items to individual users. However, in domains such as tourism, people often consume items in groups rather than individually. Different individual preferences in such a group can be difficult to resolve, and often compromises need to be made. Social choice strategies can be used to aggregate the preferences of individuals. We evaluated two explainable modified preference aggregation strategies in a between-subject study (n=200), and compared them with two baseline strategies for groups that are also explainable, in two scenarios: high divergence (group members with different travel preferences) and low divergence (group members with similar travel preferences). Generally, all investigated aggregation strategies performed well in terms of perceived individual and group satisfaction and perceived fairness. The results also indicate that participants were sensitive to a dictator-based strategy, which affected both their individual and group satisfaction negatively (compared to the other strategies).
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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