3 ms·
While I agree with you about the title of the article, it is not true at all that "all non-removed reviews are assumed, in the data, to be real." In fact, in ou
by gzervas 13y ago
While I agree with you about the title of the article, it is not true at all that "all non-removed reviews are assumed, in the data, to be real." In fact, in our analysis we explicitly allow for the filter misclassifying reviews (that is to say filtering real reviews, or publishing fakes.)
- enoch_r 13y agoSorry about my imprecise wording. I wasn't intending to criticize your study, which did acknowledge potential misclassifications (and was very interesting and deserves attention on its own merits). I'm criticizing MW's interpretation, which assumed that your proxy was very accurate in terms of providing the proportion of fake reviews, but went on to imply that your proxy was highly inaccurate by talking about fake but visible reviews.