Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 516

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Personalized Content Recommendation and User Satisfaction: Theoretical Synthesis and Empirical Findings

Liang, Ting-Peng, Lai, Hung-Jen, Ku, Yi-Cheng·2006·Journal of Management Information Systems

Abstract

Personalized services are increasingly popular in the Internet world. This study identifies theories related to the use of personalized content services and their effect on user satisfaction. Three major theories have been identified—information overload, uses and gratifications, and user involvement. The information overload theory implies that user satisfaction increases when the recommended content fits user interests (i.e., the recommendation accuracy increases). The uses and gratifications theory indicates that motivations for information access affect user satisfaction. The user involvement theory implies that users prefer content recommended by a process in which they have explicit involvement. In this research, a research model was proposed to integrate these theories and two experiments were conducted to examine the theoretical relationships. Our findings indicate that information overload and uses and gratifications are two major theories for explaining user satisfaction with personalized services. Personalized services can reduce information overload and, hence, increase user satisfaction, but their effects may be moderated by the motivation for information access. The effect is stronger for users whose motivation is in searching for a specific target. This implies that content recommendation would be more useful for knowledge management systems, where users are often looking for specific knowledge, rather than for general purpose Web sites, whose customers often come for scanning. Explicit user involvement in the personalization process may affect a user's perception of customization, but has no significant effect on overall satisfaction.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2753/mis0742-1222230303

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 516

Metadata

Authors
Liang, T.-P., Lai, H.-J., & Ku, Y.-C.
Venue
Journal of Management Information Systems
Published
2006-12
Volume
23
Issue
3
Pages
45-70
ISSN
  • 0742-1222 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-928X
OpenAlex
W1985617553
Cited by
516
References
4
FWCI
41.88
Type
journal article
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: Personalized Content Recommendation and User Satisfaction: Theoretical Synthesis and Empirical Findings. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2753/mis0742-1222230303
The paper
Liang, T.-P., Lai, H.-J., & Ku, Y.-C. (2006). Personalized Content Recommendation and User Satisfaction: Theoretical Synthesis and Empirical Findings. Journal of Management Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.2753/mis0742-1222230303

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.