The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Collaborative reputation mechanisms in electronic marketplaces
Abstract
The members of electronic communities are often unrelated to each other, they may have never met and have no information on each other's reputation. This kind of information is vital in electronic commerce interactions, where the potential counterpart's reputation can be a significant factor in the negotiation strategy. This paper proposes two complementary reputation mechanisms that rely on collaborative ratings and personalized evaluation of the various ratings assigned to each user. While these reputation mechanisms are developed in the context of electronic commerce, we believe that they may have applicability in other types of electronic communities such as chatrooms, newsgroups, mailing lists, etc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 17
- 10.1145/236156.236175 · DOI
- 0, Recreational Software Advisory Council
- minar, 1998, Friend of a Friend Finder Software Agents Group
- 10.1145/223904.223931 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/192844.192905 · DOI · Paper page
- elo, 1978, The Rating of Chessplayers Past and Present
- glickman, 1993, Paired Comparison Models with Time-Varying Parameters, 10.21236/ADA272016 · DOI
- garfinkel, 1994, PGP Pretty Good Privacy
- marsh, 1994, Formalising trust as a computational concept
- 0, OnSale
- 0, Better Business Bureau Report
- reagle, 1996, Trust in a Cryptographic Economy and Digital Security Deposits Protocols and Policies
- 10.1145/267658.267732 · doi:10.1145/267658.267732
- 0, Fair Isaak Co
- 0, eBay
- chavez, 1996, Kasbah: An Agent Marketplace for Buying and Selling Goods, Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Practical Application of Intelligent Agents and Multi-Agent Technology (PAAM'96)
- khare, 1997, Weaving a Web of Trust, World Wide Web Journal, 2, 77
Cited by
The Digitization of Word of Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms
Dellarocas, C. (2003) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.49.10.1407.17308 · Cited by 3,433
A survey of trust and reputation systems for online service provision
Jøsang, A., Ismail, R., & Boyd, C. (2007) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2005.05.019 · Cited by 3,330
Review on Computational Trust and Reputation Models
Sabater, J., & Sierra, C. (2005) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-004-0041-5 · Cited by 911
A computational model of trust and reputation
Mui, L., Mohtashemi, M., & Halberstadt, A. (2003) · Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.1109/hicss.2002.994181 · Cited by 890
Maes, P., Guttman, R. H., & Moukas, A. G. (1999) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/295685.295716 · Cited by 799
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Zacharia, G., Moukas, A., & Maes, P.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers
- Publisher
- IEEE Comput. Soc
- Published
- 2003-01-20
- Pages
- 7
- ISSN
- 1530-1605 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1521374031
- Cited by
- 331
- References
- 0
- Type
- conference abstract
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Collaborative reputation mechanisms in electronic marketplaces. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/hicss.1999.773057
- The paper
- Zacharia, G., Moukas, A., & Maes, P. (2003). Collaborative reputation mechanisms in electronic marketplaces. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers. https://doi.org/10.1109/hicss.1999.773057
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
