IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jknowl/v15y2024i4d10.1007_s13132-024-01812-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enhancing a Business Recommendation System: Leveraging Blockchain Technology with a Differentiated Scoring Incentive Mechanism

Author

Listed:
  • Zhijian Lan

    (City University of Macau)

  • Shuyue Li

    (City University of Macau)

  • Jinsheng Li

    (Guilin University of Technology)

  • Liang Chen

    (Guilin University of Technology)

Abstract

Recommender systems play a pivotal role in offering personalized suggestions for products, items, and services within the commercial sector. This capability has significantly boosted profits for various platforms. Yet, a notable challenge within these systems remains the sparsity of user ratings. This paper introduces a novel approach to tackle the challenge of sparsity in user ratings within recommender systems, proposing a business recommendation system leveraging blockchain technology. The core innovation lies in a rating incentive system designed to address the scarcity of user ratings in commercial recommender systems. The revamped rating incentive system diverges from conventional undifferentiated scoring approaches. Instead, it introduces a differentiated scoring incentive mechanism based on user contributions. This strategy aims to motivate users to provide high-quality ratings, thereby enhancing the reliability and richness of the rating pool. To mitigate trust risks associated with these differentiated incentives, the integration of blockchain technology into the web-based business platform ensures transparency and fosters trust among users. Simulation experiments conducted on the Epinion dataset validate the effectiveness of this mechanism. The mean value of the differentiated scoring incentive mechanism stabilizes at 8.5, showcasing a marked difference from the non-differentiated incentive mechanism. These experimental results underscore the suitability of this scoring mechanism for business platforms with significant data flow. Moreover, it effectively bolsters user ratings within recommendation systems, subsequently augmenting the enterprise’s revenue on the platform.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhijian Lan & Shuyue Li & Jinsheng Li & Liang Chen, 2024. "Enhancing a Business Recommendation System: Leveraging Blockchain Technology with a Differentiated Scoring Incentive Mechanism," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(4), pages 19051-19070, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jknowl:v:15:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s13132-024-01812-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s13132-024-01812-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13132-024-01812-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13132-024-01812-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Resnick & Christopher Avery & Richard Zeckhauser, 1999. "The Market for Evaluations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 564-584, June.
    2. Youjie Liu & Mohammad Shabaz, 2022. "Design and research of computer network micro-course management system based on JSP technology," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 13(1), pages 203-211, March.
    3. Xiaoying Xu & Kaushik Dutta & Anindya Datta & Chunmian Ge, 2018. "Identifying functional aspects from user reviews for functionality†based mobile app recommendation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(2), pages 242-255, February.
    4. Marten Risius & Kai Spohrer, 2017. "A Blockchain Research Framework," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 59(6), pages 385-409, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Edgardo Arturo Ayala Gaytán, 2009. "Social network externalities and price dispersion in online markets," Ensayos Revista de Economia, Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon, Facultad de Economia, vol. 0(2), pages 1-28, November.
    2. Plinio Limata, 2020. "Blockchain and Institutions (I): trust and (de)centralization," CERBE Working Papers wpC35, CERBE Center for Relationship Banking and Economics.
    3. Gary E. Bolton & Elena Katok & Axel Ockenfels, 2004. "How Effective Are Electronic Reputation Mechanisms? An Experimental Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1587-1602, November.
    4. Büttgen, Marion & al.,, 2021. "Blockchain in Service Management and Service Research - Developing a Research Agenda and Managerial Implications," SMR - Journal of Service Management Research, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 5(2), pages 71-102.
    5. Rockenbach, Bettina & Sadrieh, Abdolkarim, 2012. "Sharing information," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 689-698.
    6. Britta Hoyer & Dirk van Straaten, 2021. "Anonymity and Self-Expression in Online Rating Systems - An Experimental Analysis," Working Papers Dissertations 70, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    7. Teck Ming Tan & Saila Saraniemi, 2023. "Trust in blockchain-enabled exchanges: Future directions in blockchain marketing," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 914-939, July.
    8. Engström, Per & Forsell, Eskil, 2018. "Demand effects of consumers’ stated and revealed preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 43-61.
    9. Chrysanthos Dellarocas, 2003. "The Digitization of Word of Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback Mechanisms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(10), pages 1407-1424, October.
    10. Erhan Baran & Tulay Korkusuz Polat, 2022. "Classification of Industry 4.0 for Total Quality Management: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-20, March.
    11. Martin Abel & Rulof Burger & Patrizio Piraino, 2017. "The value of reference letters," Working Papers 06/2017, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics.
    12. Ingrid Bauer & Liudmila Zavolokina & Gerhard Schwabe, 2020. "Is there a market for trusted car data?," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(2), pages 211-225, June.
    13. Juan Feng, 2004. "Optimal Allocation Mechanisms When Bidders Ranking for the objects is common," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 545, Econometric Society.
    14. Panos Constantinides & Ola Henfridsson & Geoffrey G. Parker, 2018. "Introduction—Platforms and Infrastructures in the Digital Age," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 381-400, June.
    15. Tandon, Anushree & Kaur, Puneet & Mäntymäki, Matti & Dhir, Amandeep, 2021. "Blockchain applications in management: A bibliometric analysis and literature review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    16. Jonathan Levin, 2011. "The Economics of Internet Markets," Discussion Papers 10-018, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    17. Paul Resnick & Richard Zeckhauser & John Swanson & Kate Lockwood, 2006. "The value of reputation on eBay: A controlled experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 79-101, June.
    18. Cristiano Codagnone & Federico Biagi & Fabienne Abadie, 2016. "The Passions and the Interests: Unpacking the ‘Sharing Economy’," JRC Research Reports JRC101279, Joint Research Centre.
    19. Tobias J. Klein & Christian Lambertz & Konrad O. Stahl, 2016. "Market Transparency, Adverse Selection, and Moral Hazard," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 124(6), pages 1677-1713.
    20. Gesche, Tobias, 2018. "Reference Price Shifts and Customer Antagonism: Evidence from Reviews for Online Auctions," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181650, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jknowl:v:15:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s13132-024-01812-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.