The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Detecting product review spammers using rating behaviors
Open accessAbstract
This paper aims to detect users generating spam reviews or review spammers. We identify several characteristic behaviors of review spammers and model these behaviors so as to detect the spammers. In particular, we seek to model the following behaviors. First, spammers may target specific products or product groups in order to maximize their impact. Second, they tend to deviate from the other reviewers in their ratings of products. We propose scoring methods to measure the degree of spam for each reviewer and apply them on an Amazon review dataset. We then select a subset of highly suspicious reviewers for further scrutiny by our user evaluators with the help of a web based spammer evaluation software specially developed for user evaluation experiments. Our results show that our proposed ranking and supervised methods are effective in discovering spammers and outperform other baseline method based on helpfulness votes alone. We finally show that the detected spammers have more significant impact on ratings compared with the unhelpful reviewers.
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
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
Jindal, N., & Liu, B. (2008) · Proceedings of the international conference on Web search and web data mining - WSDM '08 · doi:10.1145/1341531.1341560 · Cited by 1,542
Self-citationDetecting spammers and content promoters in online video social networks
Benevenuto, F., Rodrigues, T., Almeida, V., Almeida, J., & Gonçalves, M. (2009) · Proceedings of the 32nd international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval · doi:10.1145/1571941.1572047 · Cited by 220
Cited by
Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Zhang, L., & Liu, B. (2017) · Encyclopedia of Machine Learning and Data Mining · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-7687-1_907 · Cited by 3,260
Self-citationA survey on opinion mining and sentiment analysis: Tasks, approaches and applications
Ravi, K., & Ravi, V. (2015) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2015.06.015 · Cited by 1,306
Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination
Ott, M., Choi, Y., Cardie, C., & Hancock, J. T. (2011) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1107.4557 · Cited by 1,008
Filieri, R. (2015) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.006 · Cited by 1,083
Spotting fake reviewer groups in consumer reviews
Mukherjee, A., Liu, B., & Glance, N. (2012) · Proceedings of the 21st international conference on World Wide Web · doi:10.1145/2187836.2187863 · Cited by 773
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Lim, E.-P., Nguyen, V.-A., Jindal, N., Liu, B., & Lauw, H. W.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 19th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2010-10-26
- Pages
- 939-948
- OpenAlex
- W2159359879
- Cited by
- 715
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 23.61
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Detecting product review spammers using rating behaviors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1871437.1871557
- The paper
- Lim, E.-P., Nguyen, V.-A., Jindal, N., Liu, B., & Lauw, H. W. (2010). Detecting product review spammers using rating behaviors. Proceedings of the 19th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management. https://doi.org/10.1145/1871437.1871557
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.