Submitted:
17 April 2024
Posted:
18 April 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Background
2.1. Sentiment Analysis
- Document-Level Sentiment Analysis: focuses on the overall sentiment expressed in a document or a piece of text, such as a review, blog post, or social media post. This level of sentiment analysis provides a holistic view of the sentiment associated with the entire document. For example, Pang and Lee [6] conducted research on document-level sentiment analysis, employing machine learning techniques to classify movie reviews as positive or negative based on the overall sentiment expressed in the text.
- Sentence-Level Sentiment Analysis: focuses on analyzing the sentiment of individual sentences within a document. It aims to determine the sentiment polarity (positive, negative, or neutral) of each sentence. This level of sentiment analysis allows for a more fine-grained understanding of sentiment within a document. For instance, Socher and colleagues [7] proposed a recursive neural network model for sentence-level sentiment analysis, achieving state-of-the-art performance on sentiment classification tasks.
- Aspect-Level Sentiment Analysis: focuses on extracting sentiment associated with specific aspects or entities mentioned in the text. It aims to identify the sentiment polarity for different aspects mentioned within a document, allowing for a more detailed analysis. For example, Wang and colleagues [8] proposed a novel neural network-based approach for aspect-level sentiment analysis, which was able to effectively capture sentiment information related to specific aspects in user reviews.
- Machine learning-based: involves training models on labeled data to automatically classify sentiment in text. This approach uses algorithms, such as support vector machines (SVM), random forests, or neural networks to learn patterns and features indicative of sentiment. For instance, Pang and Lee [6] employed a machine learning approach, specifically a SVM classifier, to classify movie reviews as positive or negative based on the presence of sentiment-related features in the text. This approach has also been applied in the food sector for food recognition and classification, more specifically deep learning is used for food quality detection and food safety in food supply chain [14].
-
Lexicon-based: relies on predefined sentiment lexicons or dictionaries to determine the sentiment polarity of text. It involves assigning sentiment scores to individual words or phrases based on their presence in the lexicon, which contains a list of words annotated with their associated sentiment polarities (e.g., positive, negative, or neutral). This approach estimates the overall sentiment expressed in a given text by using the semantic orientation of words. One widely used lexicon-based approach is the Valence Aware Dictionary and Sentiment Reasoner (VADER) lexicon. VADER utilizes a comprehensive sentiment lexicon that incorporates both polarity (positive/negative) and intensity (strength) of sentiment words. It also accounts for the influence of contextual valence shifters (e.g., "but", "however") and punctuation in sentiment analysis [15].In this approach, the sentiment scores of individual words or phrases are aggregated to derive the overall sentiment of a piece of text. This aggregation can be done using various methods, such as summing the scores, calculating the average, or considering the highest/lowest score in the text. The sentiment score represents the overall sentiment polarity of the analyzed text, indicating whether it is positive, negative, or neutral. This approach offers several advantages, as the results are easy to implement, computationally efficient, and interpretable since they rely on predefined sentiment lexicons. Moreover, domain-specific sentiment analysis can be handled by customizing the lexicon, based on the specific domain or application.However, lexicon-based approach may face challenges when encountering words or phrases that are not present in the lexicon or when dealing with sarcasm, irony, or other forms of contextual sentiment expression [16]. Despite these limitations, this approach has been widely applied in sentiment analysis tasks across various domains, including social media, product reviews, and customer feedback analysis. In the food sector, lexicon-based sentiment analysis has been applied to analyze customer sentiments toward food trends. For example, Twitter posts were analyzed in order to detect differences between geographical region regarding new food trends [17].
- Hybrid: comprises the amalgamation of the abovementioned approaches. Machine learning-based approaches offer flexibility and adaptability, while lexicon-based approaches provide simplicity and interpretability. In an effort to achieve better results, researchers are exploring the potential of the combination of various approaches and tools. They continue to refine sentiment lexicons and develop hybrid approaches that combine machine-learning based and lexicon-based approaches with other techniques to improve sentiment analysis accuracy, applicability, and robustness in different contexts. Such is the work of Appel and colleagues (2018), proposing a hybrid approach that uses NLP essential techniques, a sentiment lexicon enhanced with ‘SentiWordNet’, and fuzzy sets to determine the semantic orientation polarity and its intensity for sentences [18].
2.2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
- The “price” regards the pricing of the order.
- The “speed” refers to the delivery time of the order.
- The “‘quality” concerns the overall quality of the order.
- The “behavior” refers to the delivery personnel’s behavior.
- The “hygiene” regards the restaurant’s hygiene.
- The “overall impression” concerns the restaurant’s overall image.
- The “portion size” refers to the portion size of the order.
- The “service” regards the customer service received by the restaurant.
Analysis with Meaning Cloud
- “Verbose”, more information is provided about the analysis and different polarities of the entities are detected.
- “Model”, is the default sentiment model which is used for the analysis but there is also an option for the user to upload his own model.
- “Relaxed Typography”, indicates how reliable the text to analyze is (as far as spelling, typography, etc. are concerned), and influences how strict the engine will be when it comes to take these factors into account in the analysis.
- “Expand Global Polarity”, allows to choose between two different algorithms for the polarity detection of entities and concepts. Enabling the parameter gives less weight to the syntactic relationships, so it's recommended for short texts with unreliable typography.
- “Guess unknown words”, adds a stage to the sentiment analysis in which the engine tries to find a suitable analysis to the unknown words resulted from the initial analysis assignment. It is especially useful to decrease the impact typos have in text analyses.
- “Disambiguation level”, contains the semantical and morphosyntactic disambiguation in order to determine the meaning of a word or its specific usage in a particular sentence.
- No Polarity - NONE
- Strong Negative - N+
- Negative - N
- Neutral - NEU
- Positive - P
- Strong Positive - P+
4. Results
Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- B. Nguyen, V.-H. Nguyen, and T. Ho, “Sentiment Analysis of Customer Feedback in Online Food Ordering Services,” Business Systems Research Journal, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 46–59, Dec. 2021. [CrossRef]
- N. Sakinah Shaeeali, A. Mohamed, and S. Mutalib, “Customer reviews analytics on food delivery services in social media: A review,” IAES International Journal of Artificial Intelligence (IJ-AI), vol. 9, no. 4, p. 691, Dec. 2020. [CrossRef]
- A. Adak, B. Pradhan, and N. Shukla, “Sentiment Analysis of Customer Reviews of Food Delivery Services Using Deep Learning and Explainable Artificial Intelligence: Systematic Review,” Foods, vol. 11, no. 10, p. 1500, May 2022. [CrossRef]
- A. Magueresse, V. Carles, and E. Heetderks, “Low-resource languages: A review of past work and future challenges,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.07264, 2020. [CrossRef]
- G. Aivatoglou, A. Fytili, G. Arampatzis, D. Zaikis, N. Stylianou, and I. Vlahavas, “End-to-End Aspect Extraction and Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis Framework for Low-Resource Languages,” 2024, pp. 841–858. [CrossRef]
- B. Pang and L. Lee, “Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis,” Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval, vol. 2, no. 1–2, pp. 1–135, 2008. [CrossRef]
- R. Socher and colleagues, “Recursive deep models for semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank,” EMNLP, vol. 1631, pp. 1631–1642, Nov. 2013.
- Y. Wang, M. Huang, X. Zhu, and L. Zhao, “Attention-based LSTM for Aspect-level Sentiment Classification,” Nov. 2016, pp. 606–615. [CrossRef]
- M. Birjali, M. Kasri, and A. Beni-Hssane, “A comprehensive survey on sentiment analysis: Approaches, challenges and trends,” Knowl Based Syst, vol. 226, p. 107134, 2021. [CrossRef]
- Z. Madhoushi, A. R. Hamdan, and S. Zainudin, “Sentiment analysis techniques in recent works,” in 2015 Science and Information Conference (SAI), 2015, pp. 288–291. [CrossRef]
- H. Thakkar and D. Patel, “Approaches for Sentiment Analysis on Twitter: A State-of-Art study,” Nov. 2015. [CrossRef]
- Z. Nasim, Q. Rajput, and S. Haider, “Sentiment analysis of student feedback using machine learning and lexicon based approaches,” Nov. 2017, pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
- A. Sadia, F. K. Khan, and F. Bashir, “An Overview of Lexicon-Based Approach For Sentiment Analysis,” 2018. [Online]. Available: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:201105314.
- L. Zhou, C. Zhang, F. Liu, Z. Qiu, and Y. He, “Application of Deep Learning in Food: A Review,” Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, vol. 18, no. 6. Blackwell Publishing Inc., pp. 1793–1811, Nov. 01, 2019. [CrossRef]
- B. S. Rintyarna, “MAPPING ACCEPTANCE OF INDONESIAN ORGANIC FOOD CONSUMPTION UNDER COVID-19 PANDEMIC USING SENTIMENT ANALYSIS OF TWITTER DATASET,” J Theor Appl Inf Technol, vol. 15, no. 5, 2021, [Online]. Available: www.jatit.org.
- M. Polignano, V. Basile, P. Basile, G. Gabrieli, M. Vassallo, and C. Bosco, “A hybrid lexicon-based and neural approach for explainable polarity detection,” Inf Process Manag, vol. 59, no. 5, p. 103058, Sep. 2022. [CrossRef]
- E. Pindado and R. Barrena, “Using Twitter to explore consumers’ sentiments and their social representations towards new food trends,” British Food Journal, vol. 123, no. 3, pp. 1060–1082, Feb. 2021. [CrossRef]
- O. Appel, F. Chiclana, J. Carter, and H. Fujita, “A Hybrid Approach to Sentiment Analysis with Benchmarking Results,” Nov. 2016, pp. 242–254. [CrossRef]
- F. M. Khan, S. A. Khan, K. Shamim, Y. Gupta, and S. I. Sherwani, “Analysing customers’ reviews and ratings for online food deliveries: A text mining approach,” Int J Consum Stud, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 953–976, May 2023. [CrossRef]
- S. K. Trivedi and A. Singh, “Twitter sentiment analysis of app based online food delivery companies,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:233967660.
- W. Liu, A. Alqhatani, F. Asiri, and E. Salwana, “Customer preference analysis towards online shopping decisions based on optimized feature extraction,” Expert Syst, Oct. 2023. [CrossRef]
- R. Vatambeti, S. V. Mantena, K. V. D. Kiran, M. Manohar, and C. Manjunath, “Twitter sentiment analysis on online food services based on elephant herd optimization with hybrid deep learning technique,” Cluster Comput, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 655–671, Feb. 2024. [CrossRef]
- T. Teichert, S. Rezaei, and J. C. Correa, “Customers’ experiences of fast food delivery services: Uncovering the semantic core benefits, actual and augmented product by text mining,” British Food Journal, vol. 122, no. 11, pp. 3513–3528, May 2020. [CrossRef]
- L. Li, L. Yang, and Y. Zeng, “Improving Sentiment Classification of Restaurant Reviews with Attention-Based Bi-GRU Neural Network,” Symmetry (Basel), vol. 13, no. 8, p. 1517, Aug. 2021. [CrossRef]
- J. Jang, E. Lee, and H. Jung, “Analysis of Food Delivery Using Big Data: Comparative Study before and after COVID-19,” Foods, vol. 11, no. 19, p. 3029, Sep. 2022. [CrossRef]
- A. Altaf and colleagues, “Deep Learning Based Cross Domain Sentiment Classification for Urdu Language,” IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 102135–102147, 2022. [CrossRef]
- S. Zulfiker, A. Chowdhury, D. Roy, S. Datta, and S. Momen, “Bangla E-Commerce Sentiment Analysis Using Machine Learning Approach,” in 2022 4th International Conference on Sustainable Technologies for Industry 4.0 (STI), IEEE, Dec. 2022, pp. 1–5. [CrossRef]
- A. Kumar, S. Chakraborty, and P. K. Bala, “Text mining approach to explore determinants of grocery mobile app satisfaction using online customer reviews,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, vol. 73, p. 103363, Jul. 2023. [CrossRef]
- Liapakis, T. Tsiligiridis, and C. Yialouris, “A Sentiment Lexicon-based Analysis for Food and Beverage Industry Reviews. The Greek Language Paradigm,” International Journal on Natural Language Computing, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 21–42, Apr. 2020. [CrossRef]
- J. R. Landis and G. G. Koch, “The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data,” Biometrics, vol. 33, no. 1, p. 159, Mar. 1977. [CrossRef]
- T. K. Koo and M. Y. Li, “A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research,” J Chiropr Med, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 155–163, Jun. 2016. [CrossRef]
- D. V. Cicchetti, “Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology.,” Psychol Assess, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 284–290, Dec. 1994. [CrossRef]
| 1 | E-food. Available online: https://www.e-food.gr/ ( accessed on 15 May 2023 ) |
| 2 | Data Miner. Available online: https://dataminer.io/ ( accessed on 10 March 2023 ) |
| 3 | Meaning Cloud. Available online: https://www.meaningcloud.com/ ( accessed on 27 June 2023 ) |
| 4 | Meaning Cloud Documentation. Available online: https://learn.meaningcloud.com/developer/sentiment-analysis/2.1/doc/request#model ( accessed on 27 June 2023 ) |






| Predicted Positive | Predicted Negative | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Actual Positive | True Positive (tp) | False Negative (fn) | Total Positive |
| Actual Negative | False Positive (fp) | True Negative (tn) | Total Negative |
| (1) | ||
| (2) | ||
| (3) | ||
| (4) | ||
| Predicted Positive | Predicted Negative | Total | Actual | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual Positive | 135 | 5 | 140 | 179 |
| Actual Negative | 13 | 40 | 53 | 94 |
| Total Positive | Total Negative | |
|---|---|---|
| Precision | 91.12% | 88.88% |
| Recall | 96.42% | 75.47% |
| F-Score | 93.70% | 81.62% |
| Accuracy | 90.67% | |
| Cohen’s κw | 95% CI | Fleiss’ κ | 95% CI | Krippendorff’s α | 95% CI | ICC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fast Food | .26 | .12-.39 | .25 | .11-.38 | .67 | .11-37 | .72 |
| Italian Restaurant | .25 | .11-.39 | .22 | .09-.36 | .62 | .06-.37 | .73 |
| Coffee shop | .28 | .12-.45 | .28 | .13-.43 | .63 | .44-.45 | .74 |
| Total | .27 | .18-.36 | .26 | .18-.34 | .64 | .55-.71 | .74 |
| Fast-Food | Italian | Coffee Roaster Shop | Total | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 6 | 12 | 6 | 24 | 8.2% |
| Speed | 38 | 44 | 49 | 131 | 44.7% |
| Quality | 56 | 46 | 50 | 152 | 51.8% |
| Behavior | 6 | 15 | 13 | 34 | 11.6% |
| Hygiene | 11 | 9 | 2 | 22 | 7.5% |
| Overall Impression | 18 | 20 | 7 | 45 | 15.3% |
| Portion Size | 15 | 5 | 0 | 20 | 6.8% |
| Service | 21 | 30 | 18 | 69 | 23.5% |
| Fast-Food | Italian | Coffee Roaster Shop | Total | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0% |
| Speed | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0.7% |
| Quality | 30 | 38 | 25 | 93 | 31.7% |
| Behavior | 2 | 7 | 3 | 12 | 4% |
| Hygiene | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0% |
| Overall Impression | 17 | 17 | 6 | 40 | 13.6% |
| Portion Size | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0% |
| Service | 9 | 14 | 9 | 32 | 10.9% |
| None | 31 | 30 | 56 | 117 | 39.9% |
| Other | 15 | 6 | 5 | 26 | 8.8% |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
