<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Co-Staying: A Social Network for Increasing the Trustworthiness of Hotel Recommendations</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Catalin-Mihai Barbu</string-name>
          <email>catalin.barbu@uni-due.de</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Jürgen Ziegler</string-name>
          <email>juergen.ziegler@uni-due.de</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>ACM Classification Keywords</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>H.5.2 [Information Interfaces and Presentation]: User, Interfaces-evaluation/methodology</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>graphical user, interfaces (GUI), user-centered.</addr-line>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>University of Duisburg-Essen</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Duisburg</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="DE">Germany</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2017</year>
      </pub-date>
      <fpage>35</fpage>
      <lpage>39</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Recommender systems attempt to match users' preferences with items. To achieve this, they typically store and process a large amount of user profiles, item attributes, as well as an ever-increasing volume of user-generated feedback about those items. By mining user-generated data, such as reviews, a complex network consisting of users, items, and item properties can be created. Exploiting this network could allow a recommender system to identify, with greater accuracy, items that users are likely to find attractive based on the attributes mentioned in their past reviews as well as in those left by similar users. At the same time, allowing users to visualize and explore the network could lead to novel ways of interacting with recommender systems and might play a role in increasing the trustworthiness of recommendations. We report on a conceptual model for a multimode network for hotel recommendations and discuss potential interactive mechanisms that might be employed for visualizing it.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>
        INTRODUCTION
Recommender systems (RS) typically build and maintain
network representations of the data they store about their
users and product catalogs. One of the earliest and most
wellknown examples is the “item-to-item” model introduced by
Amazon in its RS, which enabled the company to show,
using collaborative filtering techniques, what other products
were purchased by users who bought a certain product [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>Linking user preferences with items and subsequently
modeling the various relationships that arise between them
can increase the accuracy of recommendations. Most
commonly, RS employ 1-mode networks, meaning that all
nodes are of the same type (e.g., users). Less frequent is the
use of 2-mode networks [2], in which relationships are
shaped between two different types of nodes, e.g., users and
items. A relatively unexplored area of research concerns the
usage of multimode (or n-mode) networks, in which vertices
can be of three or even more types. To offer an example from
the tourism domain, consider a hotel recommender that
models the relationships that appear between users, hotels,
and hotel amenities. Furthermore, the internal representation
of such networks in usually not visible to users. This can
happen for various reasons, ranging from privacy concerns
to the inherent difficulty of creating a meaningful illustration
of the structure of complex networks.</p>
      <p>The purpose of this short paper is to advance the state of the
art in two ways. First, we propose a concept of a multimode
network for representing users, hotels, and hotel properties.</p>
      <p>We argue that a hotel recommender can exploit multimode
networks to generate more suitable suggestions. Second, we
examine potential interactive mechanisms that could be
developed to facilitate the presentation of the network to
users. We believe that having access to additional means of
visualizing hotel information would allow users to interact
in novel ways with the RS. Furthermore, such novel
interaction techniques could play a role in increasing the
trustworthiness of recommendations.</p>
      <p>In the following sections, we review related work on the
usage of multimode networks in RS. We also investigate
some of the typical visualization techniques that have been
developed so far. Next, we present our conceptual model for
a user-item-attribute network using references and examples
from the hotel booking domain. Finally, we discuss how
allowing users to interact with such a network might
introduce novel ways of interacting with RS. Additionally,
we open the discussion on whether exploiting this network
could play a role in increasing the trustworthiness of
recommendations.</p>
      <p>
        RELATED WORK
The emergence of web communities and the sustained
growth of the user-generated content available online
provides important opportunities for RS. Incorporating
social network information has the potential to alleviate
cold-start and sparsity problems, which are inherent in
typical collaborative filtering approaches [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
        ]. In the field of
RS for tourism (and, more generally, for commerce), a major
aspect of exploiting user-generated content is the extraction
of topics and sentiments from reviews, e.g., to create richer
user models [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ]. Combining social networks analysis
techniques, such as community detection and visualizing
techniques, with RS is, therefore, a worthwhile direction for
continued research [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ]. A survey of current state-of-the-art
      </p>
      <p>
        Figure 1 – Example of how a simple multimode network (right) containing three types of vertices—users (circle), topics (hexagon),
and hotels (rectangle)—could be generated from crawled user-generate content (left). In our conceptual model, users and hotels
are connected through topics, instead of directly.
methods in both fields as well as existing challenges are
highlighted, for example, in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        Exploiting 2-mode networks for improving the quality of
recommendations has already been achieved in various
domains. One such approach was used to derive similarity
information between artists and songs by exploiting data
collected from a music file-sharing network [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
        ]. The
information was then used to build a 2-mode graph of users
and songs, which was subsequently used to recommend new
artists. Citation networks are also a frequent focus of
research [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ]. The usage of multimode networks for
recommendations is less frequent [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ]. Linking users to
items via tags to improve recommendations is of definite
interest in the RS community [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ]. Still, tripartite graphs
containing users, items, and tags have been studied more in
the context of information retrieval [3]. Alternate
approaches, for example using multiple 1-mode networks (as
opposed to multimode networks) for generating article
recommendations, have also been proposed [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        The problem of visualizing complex networks employed in
RS is also receiving increasing attention. Previous work has
been done, for instance, on facilitating the exploration of
recommended items by combining different entities (users,
tags, and agents) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ]. Although there is ongoing research on
visualization techniques for tripartite networks [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ], it appears
that such methods are usually not applied in a systematic
way in the context of RS. We argue that multimode networks
should not be used solely for enhancing the generation of
recommendations. Providing means to visualize the network
as well as mechanisms for interacting with it could increase
the transparency and control of the RS [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ]. The lack of
transparency exhibited by many modern RS is frequently
cited as having a detrimental effect on the perceived
trustworthiness of such systems [6]. Trust is especially
1 http://www.booking.com/
relevant in the context of hotel recommending, where the
risk associated with poor choices is often higher. Visualizing
the underlying factors used to generate recommendations
could, for example, allow developers to embed trust cues
(i.e. interface elements that allow the user to determine the
reliability of the presented information) into the presentation
layer [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>CO-STAYING NETWORK
Based on our review of the literature, there appears to be a
research gap with respect to the usage of multimode
networks for RS. At the same time, the goal of providing
interactive mechanisms for allowing users to explore the
underlying graph has been studied less frequently.</p>
      <p>Example Domain and Dataset
Hotel booking is a domain in which the trustworthiness of
recommendations is especially important. More generally,
while selecting the domain we considered three aspects: 1)
The choice should carry a substantial amount of risk for the
user; 2) the items should have a reasonable set of attributes
that need to be considered; and 3) there should be a large
body of user-generated content available, in the form of
reviews, photos, tags, and ratings, that can be leveraged in
the presentation. Because of the first criterion, we decided
against using the more common domain of movie
recommendations. Hotel booking, on the other hand, fulfils
all three conditions.</p>
      <p>We crawled metadata and overall 838,780 user reviews for
11,544 hotels located in five major European cities from
Booking.com1. This real-world dataset ensures access to a
representative and interesting subset of hotels, covering as
many types of amenities as possible. Furthermore, it features
a diverse set of reviews contributed by various types of
travelers—and who are travelling for different purposes—
thereby maximizing the variety of user opinions and
arguments. A characteristic of Booking.com is that all
reviews on its site are verified, meaning they are written by
people who have stayed in those hotels. This feature reduces
the number of fake reviews.</p>
      <p>Conceptual Model
Our conceptual model, to which we will refer in the
following sections as a “co-staying network”, has three types
of vertices: users, topics (i.e. hotel attributes), and hotels. In
contrast to a typical 2-mode network, users are not linked
directly to the hotels in which they stayed. Instead, an edge
is first created between the user and a topic. A second edge
then links the topic to the hotel for which the review was
submitted (Figure 1). This process is repeated iteratively for
each topic in a review as well as for all user-contributed
reviews. If a review contains references to more than one
topic (as is often the case in hotel reviews), there will be
several paths between its author and the hotel, each passing
through a topic. Furthermore, if a user mentioned the same
topic in more than one review, a separate pair of edges will
be created for each instance.</p>
      <p>
        The crawled user reviews in the dataset are mined to extract
topics. First, we identify attribute-value pairs such as
“comfortable bed” in the reviews. Then, these pairs are
merged with others that have the same meaning, e.g., “comfy
bed”. Next, using sentiment analysis, pairs are classified as
positive or negative hotel properties. Finally, pairs that
describe properties related to, for example, a hotel room, are
classified and clustered together. Broadly, topics are divided
into three main categories: room attributes (e.g., bed,
shower, minibar), hotel attributes (e.g., location, swimming
pool, parking), and hotel services (e.g., breakfast, Wi-Fi
quality, friendliness of staff). The complete procedure is
described in detail in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. Topic disambiguation techniques
are employed to prevent duplication and correct spelling
errors. For example, the terms “wi-fi”, “wifi”, “wireless
network”, “wireless internet”, or “wifus” (an incorrect
spelling that is encountered relatively often in user reviews)
should all be filed under a single attribute, e.g., “Wi-Fi”.
      </p>
      <p>
        The user’s sentiment regarding each topic is classified with
respect to its polarity (i.e. positive, neutral, or negative) and
strength. These two attributes are normalized and encoded
in the edges as a single value in the interval [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">-1,1</xref>
        ]. Values
closer to the left side of the interval are indicative of strong
negative sentiments about a topic (e.g., “terrible breakfast”).
      </p>
      <p>Similarly, higher positive values are associated with topics
that a user has praised in a review (e.g., “wonderful
location”).</p>
      <p>If a hotel is part of a chain, our model also allows the creation
of additional “soft links” from a topic to the rest of the hotels
in that chain. This is based on the premise that these hotels
share many characteristics—though not all. Thus, it is likely
(and typically advertised as such by hotel brands) that
travelers would have comparable experiences and access to
similar amenities in every location that is part of a franchise.</p>
      <p>This approach lets the RS exploit user opinions about
selected topics when suggesting recommendations that
might otherwise not have enough reviews. Among the topics
that could be shared in this way are those concerning room
layout and furnishings, breakfast, and hotel facilities. Topics
such as those related to the hotel’s location or the service
quality, on the other hand, would not be shared between
hotels (Figure 2).</p>
      <p>Clusters can be identified for each type of vertex in the
costaying network. Topics can be characterized by their
overarching category (i.e. hotel, room, or service).</p>
      <p>
        Furthermore, by analyzing travel and review patterns,
additional relationships between hotel topics could be
identified. Hotels can be clustered based on whether they are
part of a chain as well as by looking at the most common
topics that characterize them. Finally, user similarity
measures can be extended to include, in addition to
demographic data (e.g., age range, country of origin) and
rating behavior, also experience (e.g., based on the number
of contributed reviews, frequency of travel, and the types of
hotels visited). Preliminary work on these aspects has
already been reported in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>The proposed model aims to improve upon traditional
approaches to hotel recommending by creating stronger
links between users, hotels, and hotel attributes. This would
allow users to explore, in addition to the details of the
recommended items, the public profiles and preferences of
those guests whose reviews were exploited for generating
the recommendations. Various forms of interactive
mechanisms could be developed to facilitate this kind of
exploration.</p>
      <p>Interactive Mechanisms
The initial focal point of the network would be the hotel that
is being recommended. Users might ask themselves, “What
do people talk about when reviewing this hotel?” The most
common topics (ideally tailored to fit the user’s interests)
could be shown radiating from the hotel. These should be
clustered by category. Edges would connect these topics to
the most representative users. Ensuring that the co-staying
network remains accessible to users of the RS is a non-trivial
task. One mechanism could involve providing sufficient
criteria to filter topics and users to avoid information
overload. Furthermore, the proportion of the co-staying
network that is visible to the user should also be controlled,
for example by implementing a “zoom in / zoom out” design
pattern.</p>
      <p>Users should also be able to refocus the network based on
their interests or goals. The system should allow seamless
transition between vertices, for example between hotels,
from a hotel to a topic, or from a topic to the users who
referenced it in their reviews. Interacting with a topic should
bring up the review snippets in which it is mentioned. The
user could then expand reviews that look promising to read
them fully; alternatively, less interesting snippets could be
hidden completely.</p>
      <p>
        Trust in online reviews has been shown to depend on the
credibility of the source [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>
        ]. Thus, users should be afforded
the possibility to explore the public profiles of reviewers that
have contributed opinions about topics of interest. Public
profiles might contain information about contributed
reviews, visited hotels, frequently-mentioned topics, as well
as any demographic data that users may want to share (e.g.,
purpose of travel, typical number of nights spent in hotels,
average price paid). Trustworthiness cues embedded in the
personal profiles could help users decide whether to
consider—or not—the comments left by other users in the
network regarding a certain recommendation. We expect
that this might lead to a better calibration between the user’s
trust in the RS and the system's actual trustworthiness [5].
      </p>
      <p>
        DISCUSSION AND FUTURE WORK
Including hotel topics as an additional type of vertex in the
network is expected to allow the RS to identify, with greater
accuracy, which items users are likely to find attractive
based on the attributes mentioned in their reviews as well as
in reviews left by similar users [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">3,11</xref>
        ]. At the same time, the
system could extract and present, for each recommended
item, the experiences of other people who are interested in
the same combination of topics as the current user. The
costaying network might further facilitate the discovery of
users with similar preferences and who have already stayed
in the same hotel or in hotels with similar characteristics to
the one that a person is considering. We believe that this
could thus introduce novel ways of interacting with RS. For
example, someone who has a strong preference for soft beds
would be able to explore the opinions of other travelers who
share this preference. Taking this a step further, the user
might then ask herself, “What other preferences do such
people have?” Personalizing the presentation to facilitate the
exploration of similar people’s expectations could allow
users to discover new preferences that they would not have
considered otherwise. A prototype implementation of the
presented co-staying concept and interactive mechanisms is
currently under development.
      </p>
      <p>We believe that our co-staying network concept has the
potential to increase the transparency of the RS by providing
visual clues as to why certain recommendations are
presented. Moreover, the proposed interactive mechanisms
are meant to increase user control over the presentation of
the recommended items. Thus, the trustworthiness of the
recommendation should increase [6]. Developing evaluation
criteria for measuring the effects of these novel interactions
on the trustworthiness of the recommendations is planned for
future work.</p>
      <p>Our approach should also alleviate, to some extent, the data
sparsity problem by sharing topics—and, therefore, user
opinions—about hotels that are part of a chain. However,
this will continue to remain an issue in the case of isolated
hotel vertices, for which not enough user-generated
information is available from the network. This aspect will
be investigated in future work.</p>
      <p>ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work is supported by the German Research Foundation
(DFG) under grant No. GRK 2167, Research Training Group
"User-Centred Social Media".</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Barbu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.-M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ziegler</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>User Model Dimensions for Personalizing the Presentation of Recommendations</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. IntRS '17</source>
          .
          <string-name>
            <surname>ACM</surname>
          </string-name>
          (to appear).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Borgatti</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S. P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Everett</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M. G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Network analysis of 2- mode data</article-title>
          .
          <source>Social networks 19</source>
          ,
          <fpage>243</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>269</lpage>
          (
          <year>1997</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          <article-title>Optimizing single term queries using a personalized Markov random walk over the social graph</article-title>
          .
          <source>In ECIR Workshop on Exploiting Semantic Annotations in Information Retrieval (ESAIR '08)</source>
          , Springer (
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Feuerbach</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Loepp</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Barbu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.-M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ziegler</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Enhancing an Interactive Recommendation System with Review-based Information Filtering</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. IntRS '17</source>
          .
          <string-name>
            <surname>ACM</surname>
          </string-name>
          (to appear).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Harman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>O'Donovan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Abdelzaher</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gonzalez</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Dynamics of human trust in recommender systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. RecSys</source>
          '
          <volume>14</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>305</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>308</lpage>
          , ACM (
          <year>2014</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Konstan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Riedl</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Recommender systems: From algorithms to user experience</article-title>
          .
          <source>User Mod. and User-Adapted Interaction 22</source>
          ,
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>2</lpage>
          ,
          <fpage>101</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>123</lpage>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lambiotte</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp; and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ausloos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Collaborative tagging as a tripartite network</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. ICCS</source>
          '
          <volume>06</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>1114</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1117</lpage>
          , Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg (
          <year>2006</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Linden</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Smith</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp; York, J. Amazon.
          <article-title>com recommendations: Item-to-item collaborative filtering</article-title>
          .
          <source>IEEE Internet computing</source>
          ,
          <volume>7</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>76</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>80</lpage>
          . IEEE (
          <year>2003</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Luong</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N. T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nguyen</surname>
          </string-name>
          , T. T.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hwang</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lee</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C. H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jung</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Similarity-based Complex Publication Network Analytics for Recommending Potential Collaborations</article-title>
          .
          <source>J.UCS</source>
          ,
          <volume>21</volume>
          (
          <issue>6</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>871</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>889</lpage>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Maivizhi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sendhilkumar</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mahalakshmi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G. S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A Survey of Tools for Community Detection and Mining in Social Networks</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. ICIA</source>
          '
          <volume>16</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>71</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>79</lpage>
          , ACM (
          <year>2016</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>McAuley</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Leskovec</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Hidden factors and hidden topics: Understanding rating dimensions with review text</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. RecSys</source>
          '
          <volume>13</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>165</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>172</lpage>
          , ACM (
          <year>2013</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rossetti</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stella</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zanker</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Analyzing user reviews in tourism with topic models</article-title>
          .
          <source>Information Technology &amp; Tourism</source>
          ,
          <volume>16</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>5</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>21</lpage>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sacha</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Senaratne</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kwon</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B. C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ellis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Keim</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The role of uncertainty, awareness, and trust in visual analytics</article-title>
          .
          <source>IEEE Trans. Vis. Comp. Graph., 22-1</source>
          ,
          <fpage>240</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>249</lpage>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Shavitt</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Weinsberg</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>U.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Song clustering using peer-to-peer co-occurrences</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. ISM '09. 11th IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia</source>
          ,
          <volume>471</volume>
          -
          <fpage>476</fpage>
          , IEEE (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vig</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Riedl</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Tagommenders: connecting users to items through tags</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. WWW</source>
          '
          <volume>09</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>671</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>680</lpage>
          , ACM (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Verbert</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Parra</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Brusilovsky</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Duval</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Visualizing recommendations to support exploration, transparency and controllability</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. IUI</source>
          '
          <volume>13</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>351</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>362</lpage>
          , ACM (
          <year>2013</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wasserman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Faust</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Social Network</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Analysis: Methods and Applications</article-title>
          . Cambridge Univ. Press (
          <year>1994</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Xu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Z.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Zhang,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
            , &amp;
            <surname>Cao</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>J.</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Social networking meets recommender systems: survey</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Social Network Mining</source>
          ,
          <volume>2</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>64</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>100</lpage>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          19.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yoo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K. H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lee</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gretzel</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>U.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fesenmaier</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D. R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Trust in travel-related consumer generated media</article-title>
          .
          <source>Information and communication technologies in tourism</source>
          <year>2009</year>
          ,
          <fpage>49</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>59</lpage>
          , Springer (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          20.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zhou</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zhu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Song</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tseng</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B. L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zha</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Giles</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C. L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Learning multiple graphs for document recommendations</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proc. WWW</source>
          '
          <volume>08</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>141</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>150</lpage>
          . ACM (
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>