Paper detail

Exploring Linkablility of Community Reviewing

Large numbers of people all over the world read and contribute to various review sites. Many contributors are understandably concerned about privacy; specifically, about linkability of reviews (and accounts) across review sites. In this paper, we study linkability of community reviewing and try to answer the question: to what extent are "anonymous" reviews linkable, i.e., likely authored by the same contributor? Based on a very large set of reviews from a popular site (Yelp), we show that a high percentage of ostensibly anonymous reviews can be linked with very high confidence. This is despite the fact that we use very simple models and equally simple features set. Our study suggests that contributors reliably expose their identities in reviews. This has important implications for cross-referencing accounts between different review sites. Also, techniques used in our study could be adopted by review sites to give contributors feedback about privacy of their reviews.

preprint2012arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.