Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Corrigendum

A corrigendum for this article has been published. To view the corrigendum, please click here.

The Scientific World Journal
Volume 2014, Article ID 872929, 8 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/872929
Research Article

A Preliminary Investigation of User Perception and Behavioral Intention for Different Review Types: Customers and Designers Perspective

1Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
2Faculty of Information Science and Technology, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology (CIIT), Park Road, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
3Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, King Abdulaziz University, North Jeddah Branch, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
4Machine Intelligence Research Labs, Scientific Network for Innovation and Research Excellence, Auburn, WA 98071, USA

Received 7 October 2013; Accepted 19 December 2013; Published 23 February 2014

Academic Editors: S. Sessa and Y. Zhao

Copyright © 2014 Atika Qazi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. N. Jindal and B. Liu, “Identifying comparative sentences in text documents,” in Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 244–251, August 2006. View at Scopus
  2. F. D. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 319–340, 1989. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. V. A. Rohani, “An effective recommender algorithm for cold-start problem in academic social networks,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering. In press.
  4. B. Liu, M. Hu, and J. Cheng, “Opinion observer: analyzing and comparing opinions on the Web,” in Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 342–351, 2005.
  5. M. Igbaria, N. Zinatelli, P. Cragg, and A. L. M. Cavaye, “Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: a structural equation model,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 279–305, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. W. Hong, J. Y. L. Thong, W.-M. Wong, and K.-Y. Tam, “Determinants of user acceptance of digital libraries: an empirical examination of individual differences and system characteristics,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 97–124, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. N. Jindal and B. Liu, “Mining comparative sentences and relations,” in Proceedings of the 21st National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and the 18th Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, pp. 1331–1336, July 2006. View at Scopus
  8. M. Ganapathibhotla and B. Liu, “Mining opinions in comparative sentences,” in Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (Coling '08), pp. 241–248, August 2008. View at Scopus
  9. M. Quigley, Encyclopedia of Information Ethics and Security, IGI Global, 2008.
  10. A.-M. Popescu and O. Etzioni, “Extracting product features and opinions from reviews,” in Proceedings of the conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 339–346, October 2005. View at Scopus
  11. F. L. Cruz, “A knowledge-rich approach to feature-based opinion extraction from product reviews,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Search and Mining User-Generated Contents, pp. 13–20, 2010.
  12. S. Hariharan, R. Srimathi, M. Sivasubramanian, and S. Pavithra, “Opinion mining and summarization of reviews in web forums,” in Proceedings of the 3rd Annual ACM Bangalore Conference (COMPUTE '10), January 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. F. Hou and G.-H. Li, “Mining Chinese comparative sentences by Semantic Role Labeling,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics (ICMLC '08), pp. 2563–2568, July 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. K. Xu, W. Wang, J. S. J. Ren, J. Xu, L. Liu, and S. S. Y. Liao, “Classifying consumer comparison opinions to uncover product strengths and weaknesses,” International Journal of Intelligent Information Technologies, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. K. Xu, S. S. Liao, J. Li, and Y. Song, “Mining comparative opinions from customer reviews for Competitive Intelligence,” Decision Support Systems, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 743–754, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. T. T. Thet, J.-C. Na, and C. S. G. Khoo, “Aspect-based sentiment analysis of movie reviews on discussion boards,” Journal of Information Science, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 823–848, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. H.-M. Huang and S.-S. Liaw, “Exploring users' attitudes and intentions toward the web as a survey tool,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 729–743, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. I. Ajzen and M. Fishbein, Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour, 1980.
  19. V. Venkatesh and F. D. Davis, “Theoretical extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: four longitudinal field studies,” Management Science, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186–204, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. P. J. Hu, P. Y. K. Chau, O. R. Liu Sheng, and K. Y. Tam, “Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 91–112, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. P. Y. Chau, “Influence of computer attitude and self-efficacy on IT usage behavior,” Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 26–33, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  22. F. D. Davis, “User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 475–487, 1993. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. J.-W. Moon and Y.-G. Kim, “Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context,” Information and Management, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 217–230, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. M. Koufaris, “Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online consumer behavior,” Information Systems Research, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 205–223, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. B. Hasan and M. U. Ahmed, “Effects of interface style on user perceptions and behavioral intention to use computer systems,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 3025–3037, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. H. H. Chang and I. C. Wang, “An investigation of user communication behavior in computer mediated environments,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 2336–2356, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. S. Varma and J. H. Marler, “The dual nature of prior computer experience: More is not necessarily better for technology acceptance,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 1475–1482, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  28. P. Zhang, “A theoretical acceptance model for computer-based communication media: nine field studies,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 1805–1815, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  29. A. U. Jan and V. Contreras, “Technology acceptance model for the use of information technology in universities,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 845–851, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. S. Davis and R. Bostrom, “An experimental investigation of the roles of the computer interface and individual characteristics in the learning of computer systems,” International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 143–172, 1992. View at Google Scholar
  31. S. Wiedenbeck and S. Davis, “The influence of interaction style and experience on user perceptions of software packages,” International Journal of Human Computer Studies, vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 563–588, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. Y. Liu, “Identifying helpful online reviews: a product designer’s perspective,” Computer-Aided Design, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 180–194, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  33. J. Sun, “Mining reviews for product comparison and recommendation,” Polibits, vol. 39, pp. 33–40, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  34. W. Hudson, “Card sorting,” in The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, M. Soegaard and R. F. Dam, Eds., The Interaction Design Foundation, Aarhus, Denmark, 2nd edition, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  35. S. Taylor and P. A. Todd, “Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models,” Information Systems Research, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 144–176, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. J. Yi and W. Niblack, “Sentiment mining in WebFountain,” in Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE '05), pp. 1073–1083, April 2005. View at Scopus
  37. J. Zhan, H. T. Loh, and Y. Liu, “Gather customer concerns from online product reviews: a text summarization approach,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 2107–2115, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. A. Kongthon, N. Angkawattanawit, C. Sangkeettrakarn, P. Palingoon, and C. Haruechaiyasak, “Using an opinion mining approach to exploit web content in order to improve customer relationship management,” in Proceedings of the Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET '10), Technology Management for Global Economic Growth, pp. 1355–1360, July 2010. View at Scopus
  39. N. Jindal and B. Liu, “Mining comparative sentences and relations,” in Proceedings of the 21st National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and the 18th Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, pp. 1331–1336, July 2006. View at Scopus
  40. A. Bryman and D. Cramer, Quantitative Data Analysis for Social Scientists, Routledge, 1994.
  41. R. M. Baron and D. A. Kenny, “The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research. Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 1173–1182, 1986. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. J. Dore, “Holophrases, speech acts and language universals,” Journal of Child Language, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 21–40, 1975. View at Google Scholar
  43. R. Kumar, “Making machine translations polite: the problematic speech acts,” in Information Systems for Indian Languages, pp. 185–190, Springer, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  44. M. Igbaria, “User acceptance of microcomputer technology: an empirical test,” Omega, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 73–90, 1993. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus