Advertisement

Rational, Emotional, and Attentional Choice Models for Recommender Systems

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 931)

Abstract

This work analyzes the decision-making process underlying choice behavior. First, neural and gaze activity were recorded experimentally from different subjects performing a choice task in a Web Interface. Second, choice models were fitted using rational, emotional and attentional features. The model’s predictions were evaluated in terms of their accuracy and rankings were made for each user. The results show that (1) the attentional models are the best in terms of its average performance across all users, but (2) each subject shows a different best model.

Keywords

Recommender systems Decision-making Dual Process Theory Choice models 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We want to acknowledge the collaboration of Movistar, the leading Spanish Telco, which provided the list of real movies that were used as stimuli during the choice experiments.

References

  1. 1.
    Saavedra, P., Barreiro, P., Duran, R., Crujeiras, R., Loureiro, M., Vila, E.S.: Choice-based recommender systems. In: RecTour@ RecSys, pp. 38–46 (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vaisey, S.: Motivation and justification: a dual-process model of culture in action. Am. J. Sociol. 114(6), 1675–1715 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kahneman, D.: Think Fast, Think Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Scott, J.: Rational choice theory, p. 129. Understanding Contemporary Society, Theories of the Present (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157), 1124–1131 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pradeep, A.K., Patel, H.: The Buying Brain: Secrets for Selling to the Subconscious Mind. Wiley, Hoboken (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Damasio, A.R.: The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 351(1346), 1413–1420 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    McFadden, D.: Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior (1973)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Croissant, Y.: Estimation of multinomial logit models in R: the mlogit packages. R package version 02–2 (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CITIUSUniversity of Santiago de CompostelaSantiago de CompostelaSpain
  2. 2.NEUROLOGYCAVitoria-GasteizSpain

Personalised recommendations