Where We Rate: The Impact of Urban Characteristics on Digital Reviews and Ratings
Source abstract
Abstract
In urban environments, eating and drinking out (EDO) is a widespread activity among residents and visitors, generating a wealth of digital footprints that reflect consumer experiences. These digital traces provide businesses with opportunities to enhance their services and guide entrepreneurs in selecting optimal locations for new establishments. This study investigates the relationship among urban spatial features, pedestrians and digital consumer interactions at EDO venues. It highlights the utility of integrating urban mobility and spatial data to model digital consumer behavior, offering potential urban planning and business strategies. By analyzing Melbourne’s city center, we evaluate how factors, such as pedestrian count by sensors on the streets, residential density, the centralities and geometric properties of streets, and place-specific characteristics, influence consumer reviews and ratings on Google Maps. The study employs a random forest machine learning model to predict review volumes and ratings, categorized into high and low classes. The results indicate that pedestrian counts and residential density are key predictors for both metrics, while centrality measures improve the prediction of visitor scores but negatively impact review volume predictions. The geometric features of streets play varying roles across different prediction tasks. The model achieved a 65% F1-score for review volume classifications and a 62% for visitor score. These findings not only provide actionable understanding for urban planners and business stakeholders but also contribute to a deeper understanding of how spatial dynamics affect digital consumer behavior, paving the way for more sustainable urban development and data-driven decision-making.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Digital Marketing and Social Media · Human Mobility and Location-Based Analysis · Social Media and Politics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Geomatic Engineering, Yildiz Technical University, 34220 Istanbul, Türkiye
Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining Laboratory, ISTI-CNR, 56124 Pisa, Italy
Funding
The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Türkiye (TÜBİTAK)
References (55)
Show source-provided references
1. Urban growth modeling using earth observation datasets, Cellular Automata-Markov Chain model and urban metrics to measure urban footprints
2. Comparative analysis for personality prediction by digital footprints in social media
3. Adikari, A., Nguyen, S., Nawaratne, R., De Silva, D., and Alahakoon, D. (2024). Transforming Customer Digital Footprints into Decision Enablers in Hospitality. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14073114 ↗
4. Computational social science10.1126/science.1167742 ↗
5. The data-driven society10.1038/scientificamerican1013-78 ↗
6. Sequences of purchases in credit card data reveal lifestyles in urban populations10.1038/s41467-018-05690-8 ↗
7. Lu, F., and Liu, Y. (2024, November 15). How Valuable Are Consumers’ Digital Footprints?. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4928798.10.2139/ssrn.4928798 ↗
8. Exploring the reviews of Google Maps to assess the user opinions about public libraries10.1108/LM-05-2022-0053 ↗
9. Analysis of factors that influence customers’ willingness to leave big data digital footprints on social media: A systematic review of literature10.1007/s10796-017-9802-y ↗
10. Consumers’ willingness to share digital footprints on social media: The role of affective trust10.1108/ITP-10-2020-0694 ↗
11. Hacar, M., Öztürk Hacar, Ö., Altafini, D., Pappalardo, L., Gülgen, F., and Cutini, V. (2024, January 24–28). From streets to screens: A deep dive into urban configuration and Google reviews. Proceedings of the 14th Space Syntax Conference, Nicosia, Cyprus.
12. Digital Footprinting: Uncovering Tourists with User-Generated Content10.1109/MPRV.2008.71 ↗
13. Taking the urban tourist activity pulse through digital footprints10.1080/13683500.2019.1706458 ↗
14. Shi, C., Meng, B., Yuan, Y., Ou, Z., and Li, X. (2023). Examining Changes in Consumer Spatial Structure and Sustainable Development Issues in Beijing before and after the Outbreak of COVID-19. Sustainability, 15.10.3390/su152316451 ↗
15. The classification of online consumer reviews: A systematic literature review and integrative framework10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.06.038 ↗
16. Do consumers always follow “useful” reviews? The interaction effect of review valence and review usefulness on consumers’ purchase decisions10.1002/asi.24050 ↗
17. 3 Stars on Yelp, 4 stars on google maps: A cross-platform examination of restaurant ratings10.1145/3432953 ↗
18. A machine learning application to Google Maps Reviews as a participatory planning tool10.1080/12265934.2024.2320916 ↗
19. Owuor, I., and Hochmair, H.H. (2020). An overview of social media apps and their potential role in geospatial research. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 9.10.3390/ijgi9090526 ↗
20. Tang, Y., Zhang, J., Liu, R., and Li, Y. (2022). Exploring the impact of built environment attributes on social followings using social media data and deep learning. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 11.10.3390/ijgi11060325 ↗
21. Krefis, A.C., Augustin, M., Schlünzen, K.H., Oßenbrügge, J., and Augustin, J. (2018). How does the urban environment affect health and well-being? A systematic review. Urban Sci., 2.10.3390/urbansci2010021 ↗
22. An Examination and Analysis of the Clustering of Healthcare Centers and their Spatial Accessibility in Tehran Metropolis: Insights from Google POI Data10.1016/j.scs.2024.105845 ↗
23. Google star ratings of Canadian hospitals: A nationwide cross-sectional analysis10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002713 ↗
24. Perceived image of accessible tourism destinations: A data mining analysis of Google Maps reviews10.1080/13683500.2023.2230338 ↗
25. Tracing tourists by their digital footprints: The case of Austria10.1177/0047287514563985 ↗
26. The influence of online ratings and reviews on hotel booking consideration10.1016/j.tourman.2017.10.018 ↗
27. Chen, W., Xu, Z., Zheng, X., and Luo, Y. (2019). Geo-Tagged Photo Metadata Processing Method for Beijing Inbound Tourism Flow. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 8.10.3390/ijgi8120556 ↗
28. Domènech, A., Mohino, I., and Moya-Gómez, B. (2020). Using Flickr Geotagged Photos to Estimate Visitor Trajectories in World Heritage Cities. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 9.10.3390/ijgi9110646 ↗
29. Mining Tourists’ Destinations and Preferences through LSTM-based Text Classification and Spatial Clustering Using Flickr Data10.1007/s41324-021-00397-3 ↗
30. Wang, P.Y., Liu, K.P., Wang, D.J., and Fu, Y.J. (2021). Measuring Urban Vibrancy of Residential Communities Using Big Crowdsourced Geotagged Data. Front. Big Data, 4.10.3389/fdata.2021.690970 ↗
31. Bishop, M.V., Ólafsdóttir, R., Michaud, T., and Metcalf, C. (2024). Crowdsourced mapping of tourism distribution and dynamics in Iceland using Flickr. Scand. J. Hosp. Tour., 1–17.10.1080/15022250.2024.2355905 ↗
32. Maldonado-Gil, G., and Psarra, S. (2022, January 20–24). Constructing Sociospatial Maps from Instagram Images. Proceedings of the 13th Space Syntax Symposium, Bergen, Norway.
33. Palacio Buendía, A.V., Pérez Albert, M.Y., and Serrano Giné, D. (2019). PPGIS and public use in protected areas: A case study in the Ebro Delta Natural Park, Spain. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 8.10.3390/ijgi8060244 ↗
34. Predicting numeric ratings for google apps using text features and ensemble learning10.4218/etrij.2019-0443 ↗
35. User-generated data in cultural mapping: Analyzing Google point of interest reviews in Dublin
36. Bernabeu-Bautista, Á., Serrano-Estrada, L., Perez-Sanchez, V.R., and Martí, P. (2021). The geography of social media data in urban areas: Representativeness and complementarity. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 10.10.3390/ijgi10110747 ↗
37. A comparative analysis of major online review platforms: Implications for social media analytics in hospitality and tourism10.1016/j.tourman.2016.10.001 ↗
38. Kang, M., Sun, B., Liang, T., and Mao, H.Y. (2022). A study on the influence of online reviews of new products on consumers’ purchase decisions: An empirical study on JD. com. Front. Psychol., 13.10.3389/fpsyg.2022.983060 ↗
39. Eftimov, D. (2024, November 15). The Influence of Online Reviews on Consumer Behaviors and Purchasing Decisions: A Narrative Review. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4770343.10.2139/ssrn.4770343 ↗
40. The influence of online ratings and reviews in consumer buying behavior: A systematic literature review
41. de Kerviler, G., Demangeot, C., and Dolbec, P.Y. (2024). Why and How Consumers Perform Online Reviewing Differently. J. Consum. Res., ucae040.10.1093/jcr/ucae040 ↗
42. The Impact of Online Reviews on Consumers’ Purchase Intentions: Examining the Social Influence of Online Reviews, Group Similarity, and Self-Construal10.3390/jtaer19020055 ↗
43. Online Reviews Meet Visual Attention: A Study on Consumer Patterns in Advertising, Analyzing Customer Satisfaction, Visual Engagement, and Purchase Intention10.3390/jtaer19040150 ↗
44. Buchanan, R., Scevak, J., Smith, S.P., and Southgate, E. (December, January 28). What do students understand about digital footprint management? Examining social media education for career guidance. Proceedings of the Australian Association for Research in Education Conference (AARE), Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
45. Google LLC (2024, November 15). Google Maps API. Available online: https://developers.google.com/maps.
46. BBBike (2024, November 15). Index of OSM. Available online: https://download.bbbike.org/osm/bbbike/.
47. OpenStreetMap Wiki (2024, November 15). Map Features. Available online: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features.
48. (2024, November 15). NetworkX Python Package. Available online: https://networkx.org/.
49. City of Melbourne (2024, November 15). “Pedestrian Counting System” in CoM Open Data Portal, Available online: https://data.melbourne.vic.gov.au/explore/dataset/pedestrian-counting-system-monthly-counts-per-hour/information/.
50. City of Melbourne (2024, November 15). “Sensor Locations” in CoM Open Data Portal. Available online: https://melbournetestbed.opendatasoft.com/explore/dataset/pedestrian-counting-system-sensor-locations/information/.
51. City of Melbourne (2024, November 15). “Residential dwellings” in CoM Open Data Portal, Available online: https://data.melbourne.vic.gov.au/explore/dataset/residential-dwellings/information/.
52. (2024, November 15). QGIS, Firenze Version 3.28 LTR. Available online: http://www.qgis.org/en/site/index.html.
53. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python
54. Baskin, C.W. (1933). Central Places in Southern Germany, Prentice Hall.
55. Gehl, J. (2011). Life Between Buildings, Island Press.