skip to main content
research-article

Relating Reputation and Money in Online Markets

Published:01 September 2010Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Reputation in online economic systems is typically quantified using counters that specify positive and negative feedback from past transactions and/or some form of transaction network analysis that aims to quantify the likelihood that a network user will commit a fraudulent transaction. These approaches can be deceiving to honest users from numerous perspectives. We take a radically different approach with the goal of guaranteeing to a buyer that a fraudulent seller cannot disappear from the system with profit following a set of fabricated transactions that total a certain monetary limit. Even in the case of stolen identity, such an adversary cannot produce illegal profit unless a buyer decides to pay over the suggested limit.

References

  1. }}Aberer, K. and Despotovic, Z. 2001. Managing trust in a peer-2-peer information system. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM’01). ACM, New York, 310--317. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. }}Abernethy, S. 2003. Building large-scale online dispute resolution & trustmark systems. In Proceedings of the UNECE Forum on ODR.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. }}Advogato.org. 2000. Advogato’s trust metric. http://www.advogato.org/trust-metric.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. }}Allalouf, M. and Shavitt, Y. 2008. Centralized and distributed algorithms for routing and weighted max-min fair bandwidth allocation. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 16, 5, 1015--1024. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. }}Amazon.com, Inc. 2009. The Amazon marketplace. http://www.amazon.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. }}Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., and McCabe, K. 1995. Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games Econ. Behav. 10, 1, 122--142.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. }}Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Stone, C. J., and Olshen, R. A. 1984. Classification and Regression Trees. Chapman & Hall/CRC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. }}Buchegger, S. and Le Boudec, J.-Y. 2003. A robust reputation system for mobile ad-hoc networks. Tech. rep., IC/2003/50, EPFL-IC-LCA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. }}Cheng, A. and Friedman, E. 2005. Sybilproof reputation mechanisms. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems (P2PECON’05). ACM, New York, 128--132. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. }}Cornelli, F., Damiani, E., di Vimercati, S. D. C., Paraboschi, S., and Samarati, P. 2002. Choosing reputable servents in a p2p network. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’02). ACM, New York, 376--386. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. }}Dellarocas, C. 2000. Immunizing online reputation reporting systems against unfair ratings and discriminatory behavior. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC’00). ACM, New York, 150--157. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. }}Dellarocas, C. 2003. The digitization of word of mouth: Promise and challenges of online feedback mechanisms. Manage. Sci. 49, 10, 1407--1424. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. }}Dinic, E. 1970. Algorithm for solution of a problem of maximum flow in networks with power estimation. Soviet Math. Doklady 11, 1277--1280.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. }}eBay Inc. 2002. Chat with Rob Chesnut, vice president of ebay’s trust and safety dept. http://pages.ebay.com/event/robc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. }}eBay Inc. 2008. Interactive annual report. http://investor.ebay.com/annuals.cfm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. }}eBay Inc. 2009. Protecting the seller’s reputation. http://pages.ebay.com/services/forum/sellerprotection.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. }}Edmonds, J. and Karp, R. M. 1972. Theoretical improvements in algorithmic efficiency for network flow problems. J. ACM 19, 2, 248--264. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. }}Ghose, A., Ipeirotis, P. G., and Sundararajan, A. 2005. Reputation premiums in electronic peer-to-peer markets: Analyzing textual feedback and network structure. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems (P2PECON’05). ACM, New York, 150--154. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. }}Goldberg, A. V. and Rao, S. 1998. Beyond the flow decomposition barrier. J. ACM 45, 5, 783--797. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. }}Goldberg, A. V. and Tarjan, R. E. 1988. A new approach to the maximum-flow problem. J. ACM 35, 4, 921--940. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. }}Henzinger, M. R., Heydon, A., Mitzenmacher, M., and Najork, M. 2000. On near-uniform URL sampling. In Proceedings of the 9th International World Wide Web Conference on Computer Networks: The International Journal of Computer and Telecommunications Networking. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 295--308. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. }}Ignjatovic, A., Foo, N., and Lee, C. T. 2008. An analytic approach to reputation ranking of participants in online transactions. In Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT’08). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, California, 587--590. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. }}Internet Crime Complaint Center. 2007. Internet crime report for 2006. http://www.ic3.gov/media/annualreport/2006_ic3report.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. }}Internet Crime Complaint Center. 2009. Internet crime report for 2008. http://www.ic3.gov/media/annualreport/2008_IC3Report.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. }}Jamali, M. and Ester, M. 2009. Trustwalker: A random walk model for combining trust-based and item-based recommendation. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD’09). ACM, New York, 397--406. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. }}Kamvar, S. D., Schlosser, M. T., and Garcia-Molina, H. 2003. The eigentrust algorithm for reputation management in p2p networks. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’03). ACM, New York, 640--651. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. }}Katsh, E. and Wing, L. 2006. Ten years of online dispute resolution (ODR): Looking at the past and constructing the future. Univ. Toledo Law Rev. 38, 1, 19--47.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. }}Katsh, E., Rifkin, J., and Gaitenby, A. 2000. E-commerce, e-disputes, and e-dispute resolution: In the shadow of “ebay law.” Ohio State J. Dispute Resol. 15, 3, 705--734.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. }}Klos, T. B. and Alkemade, F. 2005. Trusted intermediating agents in electronic trade networks. In Proceedings of the 4th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS’05). ACM, New York, 1249--1250. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. }}Klos, T. B. and Poutré, H. L. 2005. Decentralized reputation-based trust for assessing agent reliability under aggregate feedback. In Proceedings of the Belgium-Netherlands Conference on Artificial Intelligence (BNAIC). 357--358.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. }}Lawrence Page, Sergey Brin, R. M. and Winograd, T. 1998. The pagerank citation ranking: Bringing order to the Web. Stanford Manuscript, http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/422/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. }}Levien, R. 2002. Attack resistant trust metrics. Manuscript, University of California - Berkeley. http://www.levien.com/thesis/compact.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. }}Levien.com. 2002. Attack resistant trust metric metadata howto. http://www.levien.com/free/tmetric-HOWTO.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. }}Ma, H., Yang, H., Lyu, M. R., and King, I. 2008. Sorec: Social recommendation using probabilistic matrix factorization. In Proceeding of the 17th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM’08). ACM, New York, 931--940. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. }}MacInnes, I. 2005. Causes of disputes in online auctions. Electron. Mark. 15, 2, 146--157.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. }}Mui, L., Mohtashemi, M., Ang, C., Szolovits, P., and Halberstadt, A. 2001. Ratings in distributed systems: A Bayesian approach. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Information Technologies and Systems (WITS).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. }}Reichling, F. 2004. Effects of reputation mechanisms on fraud prevention in ebay auctions. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. }}Srivatsa, M., Xiong, L., and Liu, L. 2005. Trustguard: Countering vulnerabilities in reputation management for decentralized overlay networks. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’05). ACM, New York, 422--431. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. }}Stone, B. 2007. Ebay says fraud crackdown has worked. New York Times 6/14/07. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/14/technology/14ebay.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. }}Swaminathan, A., Cattelan, R. G., Mathew, C. V., Wexler, Y., and Kirovski, D. 2009. Relating reputation and money in online markets. In Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conferences on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technologies. 639--646. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. }}Swamynathan, G. 2007. Reputation management in decentralized networks. Tech. rep., University of California, Sta. Barbara.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. }}Trevathan, J. and Reed, W. 2008. Detecting shill bidding in online english auctions. In Handbook of Research on Social and Organizational Liabilities in Information Security. Chapter XXVII Information Science Reference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. }}Wang, Y. and Vassileva, J. 2003. Bayesian network-based trust model. In Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC International Conference on Web Intelligence (WI’03). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, 372. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. }}Whitby, A., Josang, A., and Indulska, J. 2005. Filtering out unfair ratings in Bayesian reputation systems. Icfain J. Manage. Resear. 48--64.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. }}Xiong, L. and Liu, L. 2004. Peertrust: Surting reputation-based trust for peer-to-peer electronic communities. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Engin. 16, 7, 843--857. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. }}Zhang, J. and Cohen, R. 2006. Trusting advice from other buyers in e-marketplaces: The problem of unfair ratings. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Electronic Commerce (ICEC’06). ACM, New York, 225--234. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. }}Zhang, J. and Cohen, R. 2007. Design of a mechanism for promoting honesty in e-marketplaces. In Proceedings of the 22nd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’07). AAAI Press, 1495--1500. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Relating Reputation and Money in Online Markets

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on the Web
      ACM Transactions on the Web  Volume 4, Issue 4
      September 2010
      173 pages
      ISSN:1559-1131
      EISSN:1559-114X
      DOI:10.1145/1841909
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2010 ACM

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 1 September 2010
      • Accepted: 1 April 2010
      • Revised: 1 January 2010
      • Received: 1 May 2009
      Published in tweb Volume 4, Issue 4

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!