Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 78, Issue 3, pp 3183–3201 | Cite as

A novel approach of making better recommendations by revealing hidden desires and information curation for users of internet of things

  • Keonsoo Lee
  • Yang Sun Lee
  • Yunyoung NamEmail author


One of the most significant disadvantages of the Internet of Things (IoT) is the overload of information. More information makes it harder to find valuable information. Recommendation systems identify the most suitable items for a given user. The recommended result is only valid if the system users know what they want, and clearly and explicitly convey their needs to the system. Because the role of a recommendation system is to calculate the similarity between the given request and each item, and to rank the similarity, the requests and identity of items should be clear to obtain correct results. However, in most situations in which recommendations are made, requests are implicit and ambiguous. A good recommendation system should make a reliable list of items, even with ambiguous requests. This paper proposes a model of generating recommendations for implicit requests. The model employs two methods that reveals the desire of the requestor and uses content curation with a customized layout to display the recommendations. The first method for revealing the requestor’s desire is to specify the implicit request by combining the user’s customized preference with the collective intelligence. The second method for employing content curation is to arrange the recommendation for users to accept spontaneously. To persuade users, the recommendations are transformed into a layout based on a personalized cognitive bias. Through these processes, reliable and beneficial recommendations can be provided to any user even if their requests are implicit or unclear.


Browsing Hidden desire Information curation Recommendation system 



This work was supported by the Soonchunhyang University Research Fund and also supported by the “ICT Convergence Smart Rehabilitation Industrial Education Program” through the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE) and Korea Institute for Advancement of Technology (KIAT).


  1. 1.
    Barron G, Leider S (2010) The role of experience in the gambler’s fallacy. J Behav Decis Mak 23:117–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Casey RH (2008) The model T a centennial history. The Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cialdini RB (2006) Influence: the psychology of persuasion. HarperBusiness, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fellbaum C, Miller G (1998) WordNet: an electronic lexical database (Language, Speech, and Communication), a Bradford book (
  5. 5.
    Freud S (2009) A general introduction to psychoanalysis. Martino Fine Books, EastfordGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fromm E (2005) To have or to be, revised edition. Bloomsbury Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Highhouse S (1996) Context-dependent selection: the effects of decoy and phantom job candidates. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 65(1):68–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Human-generated recommendation community site. Available at: Accessed 27 Feb 2018
  9. 9.
    Jungwirth B, Bruce BC (2002) Information overload: threat or opportunity? J Adolesc Adult Lit 45(5):89–99Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jurek AM, Greenland S, Maldonado G, Church TR (2005) Proper interpretation of non-differential misclassification effects: expectations vs observations. Int J Epidemiol 34:680–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kruglanski AW, Freund T (1983) The freezing and unfreezing of lay-inferences: effects on impressional primacy, ethnic stereotyping, and numerical anchoring. J Exp Soc Psychol 19(5):448–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kuran T, Sunstein CR (1999) Availability cascades and risk regulation. Stanford Law Rev 51(4):683–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee K, Kim M (2005) Conflict resolution method for multi-context situation. PRIMA 231–239Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lee K, Kim M (2008) A novel approach for conflict resolution in context-awareness using semantic unification of multi-cognition. PRIMA 267–274Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee K, Rho S, Kim M (2010) Dynamic community composing model in ubiquitous computing environment. MUE 1–4Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee K, Kim J, Rho S, Chang H (2013) Social relation-based dynamic team organization by context-aware matchmaking. Pers Ubiquit Comput 17(8):1753–1760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leibenstein H (1950) Bandwagon, snob, and Veblen effects in the theory of consumers’ demand. Q J Econ 64(2):183–207Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leibenstein H (1976) Beyond economic man: a new foundation for microeconomics. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Maslow AH (1943) A theory of human motivation. Psychol Rev 50(4):370–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moe WW (2003) Buying, searching, or browsing: differentiating between online shoppers using in-store navigational clickstream. J Consum Psychol 13(1):29–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Newman MEJ (2005) Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf’s law. Contemp Phys 46:323–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Novak TP, Hoffman DL, Duhachek A (2003) The influence of goal-directed and experiential activities on online flow experiences. J Consum Psychol 13(1):3–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Petrova K, Wang B (2011) Location-based services deployment and demand: a roadmap model. Electron Commer Res 11(1):5–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ross WD (1951) Plato’s theory of ideas. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Reed WJ (2001) The Pareto, Zipf and other power laws. Econ Lett 74:15–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rifkin J (2001) The age of access: the new culture of Hypercapitalism, where all of life is a paid-for experience. Tarcher, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sandel MJ (2010) Justice: what’s the right thing to do? Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Scarle S, Arnab S, Dunwell I, Petridls P, Protopsaltis A, de Freitas S (2012) E-commerce transactions in a virtual environment: virtual transactions. Electron Commer Res 12(3):379–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schwartz B (2004) The paradox of choice: why more is less. Ecco, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Senecal S, Kalczynski PJ, Nantel J (2005) Consumers’ decision-making process and their online shopping behavior: a clickstream analysis. J Bus Res 58(11):1599–1608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Suki NM (2013) Consumer shopping behavior on the internet: insights from Malaysia. Electronic Commerce Research, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sundar SS, Oeldorf-Hirsch A, Xu Q (2008) The bandwagon effect of collaborative filtering technology. Proceeding of CHI EA ‘08 CHI ‘08 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems 3453–3458Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Thaler RH, Sunstein CR (2008) Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    White HC (1981) Where do markets come from? Am J Sociol 87:517–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Convergence Institute of Medical Information Communication Technology and ManagementSoonchunhyang UniversityAsanSouth Korea
  2. 2.Division of Convergence Computer & MediaMokwon UniversityDaejeonSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringSoonchunhyang UniversityAsanSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations