Hijacking online reviews: sparse manipulation and behavioral buffering in popularity-biased rating systems
Itsuki Fujisaki, Kunhao Yang

TL;DR
This paper analyzes how malicious reviewers exploit popularity bias in online rating systems and finds that sparse attacks are more damaging, but behavioral diversity among users can mitigate some effects.
Contribution
It introduces a minimal agent-based model to compare attack strategies and examines how user heterogeneity influences system robustness against manipulation.
Findings
Sparse attacks are more harmful than broad attacks.
Attack damage is highest when honest reviews are scarce.
Contrarian user diversity partially buffers manipulation effects.
Abstract
Online reviews and recommendation systems help users navigate overwhelming choice, but they are vulnerable to self-reinforcing distortions. This paper examines how a single malicious reviewer can exploit popularity-biased rating dynamics and whether behavioral heterogeneity in user responses can reduce the damage. We develop a minimal agent-based model in which users choose what to rate partly on the basis of currently displayed averages. We compare broad attacks that perturb many items with sparse attacks that selectively boost low-quality items and suppress high-quality items. Additional analyses not shown here indicate that sparse attacks are substantially more harmful than broad attacks because they better exploit popularity-based exposure. The main text then focuses on sparse attacks and asks how their effects change as the fraction of contrarian users increases. Three results…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
