The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How Do Users Like This Feature? A Fine Grained Sentiment Analysis of App Reviews
Abstract
App stores allow users to submit feedback for downloaded apps in form of star ratings and text reviews. Recent studies analyzed this feedback and found that it includes information useful for app developers, such as user requirements, ideas for improvements, user sentiments about specific features, and descriptions of experiences with these features. However, for many apps, the amount of reviews is too large to be processed manually and their quality varies largely. The star ratings are given to the whole app and developers do not have a mean to analyze the feedback for the single features. In this paper we propose an automated approach that helps developers filter, aggregate, and analyze user reviews. We use natural language processing techniques to identify fine-grained app features in the reviews. We then extract the user sentiments about the identified features and give them a general score across all reviews. Finally, we use topic modeling techniques to group fine-grained features into more meaningful high-level features. We evaluated our approach with 7 apps from the Apple App Store and Google Play Store and compared its results with a manually, peer-conducted analysis of the reviews. On average, our approach has a precision of 0.59 and a recall of 0.51. The extracted features were coherent and relevant to requirements evolution tasks. Our approach can help app developers to systematically analyze user opinions about single features and filter irrelevant reviews.
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
WordNet: a lexical database for English
Miller, G. A. (1995) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/219717.219748 · Cited by 14,015 · cited 3×
“We group collocations whose pairs of words are synonyms and use Wordnet as a synonym dictionary.”
MethodInfluentialThe Content Analysis Guidebook
Neuendorf, K. A. (2017) · doi:10.4135/9781071802878 · Cited by 9,286 · cited 2×
“The methodological cornerstone for the creation of the truth set was the use of content analysis techniques as described by Neuendorf [20] and by Maalej and Robillard [16].”
MethodSentiment strength detection in short informal text
Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., Paltoglou, G., Cai, D., & Kappas, A. (2010) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21416 · Cited by 1,449
Sentiment strength detection for the social web
Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., & Paltoglou, G. (2012) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21662 · Cited by 1,062
Cited by
A survey on sentiment analysis challenges
Hussein, D. M. E.-D. M. (2018) · Journal of King Saud University - Engineering Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.jksues.2016.04.002 · Cited by 659
A Survey of App Store Analysis for Software Engineering
Martin, W., Sarro, F., Jia, Y., Zhang, Y., & Harman, M. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2016.2630689 · Cited by 459
Shoumy, N. J., Ang, L.-M., Seng, K. P., Rahaman, D. M. M., & Zia, T. (2020) · Journal of Network and Computer Applications · doi:10.1016/j.jnca.2019.102447 · Cited by 171
Ensemble Methods for App Review Classification: An Approach for Software Evolution (N)
Guzman, E., El-Haliby, M., & Bruegge, B. (2015) · 2015 30th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) · doi:10.1109/ase.2015.88 · Cited by 143
Self-citationStudying the dialogue between users and developers of free apps in the Google Play Store
Hassan, S., Tantithamthavorn, C., Bezemer, C.-P., & Hassan, A. E. (2018) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10664-017-9538-9 · Cited by 100
Metadata
- Authors
- Guzman, E., & Maalej, W.
- Venue
- 2014 IEEE 22nd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2014-08
- Pages
- 153-162
- OpenAlex
- W2074975950
- Cited by
- 590
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 23.72
- Type
- conference paper
- 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: How Do Users Like This Feature? A Fine Grained Sentiment Analysis of App Reviews. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/re.2014.6912257
- The paper
- Guzman, E., & Maalej, W. (2014). How Do Users Like This Feature? A Fine Grained Sentiment Analysis of App Reviews. 2014 IEEE 22nd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE). https://doi.org/10.1109/re.2014.6912257
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.