Accounting for taste: using profile similarity to improve recommender systems

Recommender systems have been developed to address the abundance of choice we face in taste domains (films, music, restaurants) when shopping or going out. However, consumers currently struggle to evaluate the appropriateness of recommendations offered. With collaborative filtering, recommendations are based on people's ratings of items. In this paper, we propose that the usefulness of recommender systems can be improved by including more information about recommenders. We conducted a laboratory online experiment with 100 participants simulating a movie recommender system to determine how familiarity of the recommender, profile similarity between decision-maker and recommender, and rating overlap with a particular recommender influence the choices of decision-makers in such a context. While familiarity in this experiment did not affect the participants' choices, profile similarity and rating overlap had a significant influence. These results help us understand the decision-making processes in an online context and form the basis for user-centered social recommender system design.

[1]  John Riedl,et al.  An algorithmic framework for performing collaborative filtering , 1999, SIGIR '99.

[2]  Paul Resnick,et al.  Recommender systems , 1997, CACM.

[3]  Ian Alexander,et al.  An introduction to qualitative research , 2000, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[4]  John F. Canny,et al.  Collaborative filtering with privacy via factor analysis , 2002, SIGIR '02.

[5]  Yaniv,et al.  Advice Taking in Decision Making: Egocentric Discounting and Reputation Formation. , 2000, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[6]  Ilan Yaniv,et al.  Receiving Other People's Advice: Influence and Benefit , 2004 .

[7]  Dan Cosley,et al.  Studying the effect of similarity in online task-focused interactions , 2003, GROUP.

[8]  David Heckerman,et al.  Empirical Analysis of Predictive Algorithms for Collaborative Filtering , 1998, UAI.

[9]  S. Fiske,et al.  The Handbook of Social Psychology , 1935 .

[10]  Barry Smyth,et al.  Trust in recommender systems , 2005, IUI.

[11]  John Riedl,et al.  Explaining collaborative filtering recommendations , 2000, CSCW '00.

[12]  Jonathan L. Herlocker,et al.  A collaborative filtering algorithm and evaluation metric that accurately model the user experience , 2004, SIGIR '04.

[13]  John Riedl,et al.  Analysis of recommendation algorithms for e-commerce , 2000, EC '00.

[14]  Mary Frances Luce,et al.  Behavioral Decision ResearchAn Overview , 1998 .

[15]  N. Harvey,et al.  Taking Advice: Accepting Help, Improving Judgment, and Sharing Responsibility☆☆☆ , 1997 .

[16]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Fast and frugal heuristics: The tools of bounded rationality , 2004 .

[17]  E. Miller Handbook of Social Psychology , 1946, Mental Health.

[18]  Kirsten Swearingen,et al.  Beyond Algorithms: An HCI Perspective on Recommender Systems , 2001 .

[19]  John Riedl,et al.  Item-based collaborative filtering recommendation algorithms , 2001, WWW '01.

[20]  H. Reis,et al.  Attraction and close relationships. , 1998 .

[21]  Ilan Yaniv,et al.  The Benefit of Additional Opinions , 2004 .

[22]  M. Angela Sasse,et al.  "I thought it was terrible and everyone else loved it" - A New Perspective for Effective Recommender System Design , 2005, BCS HCI.

[23]  Edward A. Fox,et al.  Recommender Systems Research: A Connection-Centric Survey , 2004, Journal of Intelligent Information Systems.

[24]  Kirsten Swearingen,et al.  Interaction Design for Recommender Systems , 2002 .

[25]  Paolo Avesani,et al.  Trust-Aware Collaborative Filtering for Recommender Systems , 2004, CoopIS/DOA/ODBASE.