Search results

Past research often relies on linear relationship assumptions from the perspective of managers when studying the relationship between attribute performance and satisfaction. However, this study extracts tourists’ online reviews to explore asymmetric relationships and identifies island tourism satisfiers, hybrids and dissatisfiers.

The research uses 3,523 reviews from Tripadvisor to examine Langkawi Island’s tourist satisfaction. Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) machine-learning approach, penalty–reward contrast analysis and asymmetric impact-performance analysis (AIPA) were employed to extract and analyse the data.

Langkawi’s dissatisfiers included “hotel and restaurant”, “beach leisure”, “water sport”, “snorkelling”, “commanding view”, “waterfall”, “sky bridge walk”, “animal show”, “animal feeding”, “history culture”, “village activity” and “duty-free mall”. Amongst these, five were low performers. Hybrids encompassed “ticket purchasing”, “amenity” “traditional food market” and “gift and souvenir”, all of which were low performers. Only one attribute was categorised as a satisfier: “nature view” which performed exceptionally well.

This study provides recommendations to enhance tourist satisfaction and address tourist dissatisfaction. The elements requiring immediate attention for enhancement are the five low-performance dissatisfiers, as they represent tourists’ fundamental expectations. Conversely, the satisfier or excitement factor (i.e. nature views – mangroves and wildlife) could be prominently featured in promotional materials.

This research constitutes an early endeavour to categorise attributes of island tourism into groups of satisfaction, hybrid or dissatisfaction based on user-generated data. It is underpinned by two-factor and three-factor theories.

Objectively evaluating the fairness of the algorithm, exploring in specific scenarios combined with scenario characteristics and constructing the algorithm fairness evaluation index system in specific scenarios.

This paper selects marketing scenarios, and in accordance with the idea of “theory construction-scene feature extraction-enterprise practice,” summarizes the definition and standard of fairness, combs the application link process of marketing algorithms and establishes the fairness evaluation index system of marketing equity allocation algorithms. Taking simulated marketing data as an example, the fairness performance of marketing algorithms in some feature areas is measured, and the effectiveness of the evaluation system proposed in this paper is verified.

The study reached the following conclusions: (1) Different fairness evaluation criteria have different emphases, and may produce different results. Therefore, different fairness definitions and standards should be selected in different fields according to the characteristics of the scene. (2) The fairness of the marketing equity distribution algorithm can be measured from three aspects: marketing coverage, marketing intensity and marketing frequency. Specifically, for the fairness of coverage, two standards of equal opportunity and different misjudgment rates are selected, and the standard of group fairness is selected for intensity and frequency. (3) For different characteristic fields, different degrees of fairness restrictions should be imposed, and the interpretation of their calculation results and the means of subsequent intervention should also be different according to the marketing objectives and industry characteristics.

First of all, the fairness sensitivity of different feature fields is different, but this paper does not classify the importance of feature fields. In the future, we can build a classification table of sensitive attributes according to the importance of sensitive attributes to give different evaluation and protection priorities. Second, in this paper, only one set of marketing data simulation data is selected to measure the overall algorithm fairness, after which multiple sets of marketing campaigns can be measured and compared to reflect the long-term performance of marketing algorithm fairness. Third, this paper does not continue to explore interventions and measures to improve algorithmic fairness. Different feature fields should be subject to different degrees of fairness constraints, and therefore their subsequent interventions should be different, which needs to be continued to be explored in future research.

This paper combines the specific features of marketing scenarios and selects appropriate fairness evaluation criteria to build an index system for fairness evaluation of marketing algorithms, which provides a reference for assessing and managing the fairness of marketing algorithms.

Algorithm governance and algorithmic fairness are very important issues in the era of artificial intelligence, and the construction of the algorithmic fairness evaluation index system in marketing scenarios in this paper lays a safe foundation for the application of AI algorithms and technologies in marketing scenarios, provides tools and means of algorithm governance and empowers the promotion of safe, efficient and orderly development of algorithms.

In this paper, firstly, the standards of fairness are comprehensively sorted out, and the difference between different standards and evaluation focuses is clarified, and secondly, focusing on the marketing scenario, combined with its characteristics, key fairness evaluation links are put forward, and different standards are innovatively selected to evaluate the fairness in the process of applying marketing algorithms and to build the corresponding index system, which forms the systematic fairness evaluation tool of marketing algorithms.