MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2441694243 · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2794149

How Questions and Answers Shape Online Marketplaces: The Case of Amazon Answer

2016· article· en· W2441694243 on OpenAlex
Warut Khern-am-nuai, Hossein Ghasemkhani

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences/Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicExpert finding and Q&A systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrder (exchange)Product (mathematics)MarketingQuestions and answersBusinessComputer scienceWorld Wide WebMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper uses data from two online shopping platforms to investigate the economic implications of the Q&A system. This research problem becomes increasingly important as many websites start to adopt the Q&A system. Yet, its economic implications have not been discussed in the previous literature. We employ the difference-in-differences analysis to examine the effect of Q&A elements on product sales. We find that question elements negatively affect sales while answer elements have a positive impact. Also, an increase in the number of question is positively correlated with the number of reviews. Meanwhile, an increase in the number of answers reduces the average length of reviews. Our findings suggest that incorporating the Q&A system could be a potential approach to drive sales. However, it is crucially important for managers to develop appropriate policies to gather necessary answers to questions asked on the platform in order to capitalize on such system.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0110.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it