Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 40 references

Appsent A Tool That Analyzes App Reviews

T0 review · 1 major / 0 minor · reviewed 2026-05-24 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Appsent extracts and visualizes user perceptions from app reviews to reveal opinions on software features.

desk verdict Appsent is a tool paper that identifies gaps in existing review analyzers and builds a mobile prototype, but the evaluation has no visible methodology so the positive usability claims can't be checked. read the letter →

arxiv 1907.10191 v1 pith:SFFTN2LJ submitted 2019-07-24 cs.SE

Saurabh Malgaonkar , Chan Won Lee , Sherlock A. Licorish , Bastin Tony Roy Savarimuthu , Amjed Tahir This is my paper
classification cs.SE
keywords appreviewsmobileanalyticsuserfeedbackreviewanalysissoftwarefeaturesvisualizationusabilityevaluationproduct
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper presents Appsent, a mobile analytics tool built as an app to help developers analyze app reviews without the usual labor of reading them all. After a literature review showed gaps in existing tools, the authors designed Appsent to extract and visualize key perceptions from end-user feedback. They then ran an empirical evaluation from the users' perspective. That evaluation found the tool supplies user-friendly interfaces, helpful functionalities, and meaningful analytics that identify insights into opinions about various software features. The same approach may apply to product reviews more broadly.

What carries the argument

Appsent, the mobile app that analyzes reviews by extracting and visualizing user perceptions about software features.

What would settle it

A controlled comparison measuring the time developers take and the quality of insights they obtain when using Appsent versus reading the same app reviews manually.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Appsent is a mobile analytics tool presented as an app to facilitate the analysis of app reviews. Following a literature review that identified gaps in current solutions, the tool was designed and developed to extract and visualize important perceptions from end-user feedback. An empirical evaluation from the users' perspective shows that Appsent provides user-friendly interfaces, helpful functionalities, and meaningful analytics that identify insights into end-users' opinions about various aspects of software features. The tool may also have utility for analyzing product reviews more generally.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that feedback from users in an empirical evaluation of the prototype is enough to confirm the tool's usability and helpfulness for broader review analysis.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper presents Appsent, a mobile analytics tool for analyzing app reviews. Development was guided by a literature review identifying gaps in existing solutions. The authors then conducted an empirical evaluation from the users' perspective, claiming that the tool offers user-friendly interfaces, helpful functionalities, and meaningful analytics that extract and visualize user perceptions about software features. The paper suggests potential utility beyond app reviews to product reviews more generally.

Significance. A validated mobile tool for app review analysis would address a practical need in software engineering for reducing the labor of processing user feedback. However, because the reported positive outcomes rest on an evaluation whose design, participants, tasks, and measures are not described, the significance cannot be assessed and the claims cannot be reproduced or generalized.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that 'Outcomes of this evaluation reveal that Appsent provides user-friendly interfaces, helpful functionalities and meaningful analytics' is unsupported because the abstract (and the manuscript) supplies no protocol, participant count, tasks, metrics, or results breakdown for the 'empirical evaluation to validate Appsent usability and the helpfulness of analytics features from users perspective.'

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We agree that the empirical evaluation requires substantially more detail to support the claims made and will revise the paper accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that 'Outcomes of this evaluation reveal that Appsent provides user-friendly interfaces, helpful functionalities and meaningful analytics' is unsupported because the abstract (and the manuscript) supplies no protocol, participant count, tasks, metrics, or results breakdown for the 'empirical evaluation to validate Appsent usability and the helpfulness of analytics features from users perspective.'

    Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript does not currently provide the necessary details on the evaluation design. In the revised version we will add a dedicated section describing the evaluation protocol, including the number and demographics of participants, the tasks they performed, the metrics collected, and a breakdown of the quantitative and qualitative results. This will allow readers to assess the strength of the evidence for the usability and helpfulness claims. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: tool description paper contains no derivations or self-referential claims

full rationale

The paper presents a mobile analytics tool for app reviews, developed after a literature review and evaluation of existing solutions, followed by an empirical usability evaluation. No equations, parameters, predictions, or mathematical derivations are present. The central claims about tool usability rest on an empirical evaluation whose methodology is not detailed in the provided text, but this constitutes an evidentiary gap rather than circularity. No self-citations, ansatzes, or fitted inputs are invoked to support any result by construction. The derivation chain is empty, making the paper self-contained against the circularity criteria.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The work relies on the domain assumption that app reviews contain actionable insights for software improvement and that user evaluations can validate tool utility; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption App reviews have been assessed as useful for guiding improvement efforts and software evolution
    Stated directly in the abstract as background motivation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Appsent A Tool That Analyzes App Reviews." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SFFTN2LJ

@misc{pith2026190710191,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Appsent A Tool That Analyzes App Reviews},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SFFTN2LJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1907.10191}
}
read the original abstract

Enterprises are always on the lookout for tools that analyze end-users perspectives on their products. In particular, app reviews have been assessed as useful for guiding improvement efforts and software evolution, however, developers find reading app reviews to be a labor intensive exercise. If such a barrier is eliminated, however, evidence shows that responding to reviews enhances end-users satisfaction and contributes towards the success of products. In this paper, we present Appsent, a mobile analytics tool as an app, to facilitate the analysis of app reviews. This development was led by a literature review on the problem and subsequent evaluation of current available solutions to this challenge. Our investigation found that there was scope to extend currently available tools that analyze app reviews. These gaps thus informed the design and development of Appsent. We subsequently performed an empirical evaluation to validate Appsent usability and the helpfulness of analytics features from users perspective. Outcomes of this evaluation reveal that Appsent provides user-friendly interfaces, helpful functionalities and meaningful analytics. Appsent extracts and visualizes important perceptions from end-users feedback, identifying insights into end-users opinions about various aspects of software features. Although Appsent was developed as a prototype for analyzing app reviews, this tool may be of utility for analyzing product reviews more generally.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.10191 by the authors.

Figure 3
Figure 3. Appsent’s star rating analy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    By 2017, the App Market Will Be a $77 Billion Industry

    Clifford, C. By 2017, the App Market Will Be a $77 Billion Industry . 2017; Available from: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/236832

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    Statista, Number of apps available in leading app stores as of March

    work page

  3. [3]

    Smartphones - Statistics & Facts

    Statista. Smartphones - Statistics & Facts . 2017; Available from: https://www.statista.com/topics/840/smartphones/

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    2012, ACM: Melbourne, Australia

    Vasa, R., et al., A preliminary analysis of mobile app user reviews , in Proceedings of the 24th Australian Computer -Human Interaction Conference. 2012, ACM: Melbourne, Australia. p. 241-244

    work page 2012

  5. [5]

    Ghose, A. and P.G. Ipeirotis, Estimating the Helpfulness and Economic Impact of Product Reviews: Mining Text and Reviewer Characteristics. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 2011. 23(10): p. 1498-1512

    work page 2011

  6. [6]

    , in 21st Americas Conference on Information Systems

    Licorish, S., Lee, C., Savarimuthu, B., Patel, P., & MacDonell, S., They’ll Know It When They See It: Analyzing Post -Release Feedback from the Android Community. , in 21st Americas Conference on Information Systems. 2015. p. 1-11

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Savarimuthu, and S

    Licorish, S.A., B.T.R. Savarimuthu, and S. Keertipati, Attributes that Predict which Feature s to Fix: Lessons for App Store Mining , in Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering . 2017, ACM: Karlskrona, Sweden. p. 108-117

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Jusoh, and W.R.S

    Fawareh, H.M.A., S. Jusoh, and W.R.S. Osman. Ambiguity in text mining. in 2008 International Conference on Computer and Communication Engineering. 2008

    work page 2008

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    Savarimuthu, and S.A

    Keertipati, S., B.T.R. Savarimuthu, and S.A. Licorish, Approaches for prioritizing feature improvements extracted from app reviews , in Proceedings of the 20th Inter national Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering. 2016, ACM: Limerick, Ireland. p. 1- 6

    2016

  2. [10]

    SIGKDD Explor

    Popowich, F., Using text mining and natural language processing for health care claims processing. SIGKDD Explor. Newsl., 2005. 7(1): p. 59-66

    2005

  3. [11]

    Selamat, and R

    Achimugu, P., A. Selamat, and R. Ibrahim. A Clustering Based Technique for Large Scale Prioritization during Requirements Elicitation . 2014. Cham: Springer International Publishing

    2014

  4. [12]

    2013, ACM: Chicago, Illinois, USA

    Fu, B., et al., Why people hate your app: making sense of user feedback in a mobile app store , in Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. 2013, ACM: Chicago, Illinois, USA. p. 1276-1284

    2013

  5. [13]

    Harrison, and S

    Iacob, C., R. Harrison, and S. Faily. Online Reviews as First Class Artifacts in Mobile App Development. 2014. Cham: Springer International Publishing

    2014

  6. [14]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering,

    Harman, W.M.F.S.Y.J.Y.Z.M., A Survey of App Store Analysis for Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering,

  7. [15]

    Liu, B., Sentiment Analysis and Subjectivity , in Handbook of Natural Language Processing. 2010

    2010

  8. [16]

    Romero, C. and S. Ventura, Educational Data Mining: A Review of the State of the Art. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews), 2010. 40(6): p. 601-618

    2010

  9. [17]

    Lawrence, and D.M

    Dave, K., S. Lawrence, and D.M. Pennock, Mining the peanut gallery: opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews , in Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web . 2003, ACM: Budapest, Hungary. p. 519-528

    2003

  10. [18]

    2012: Springer Science Business Media

    Aggarwal, C., & Zhai, C., Mining Text Data . 2012: Springer Science Business Media

    2012

  11. [19]

    Iacob, C. and R. Harrison. Retrieving and analyzing mobile apps feature requests from online reviews . in 2013 10th Working Conference o n Mining Software Repositories (MSR). 2013

    2013

  12. [20]

    Augmenting Text Mining Approaches with Social Network Analysis to Understand the Complex Relationships among Users' Requests: A Case Study of the Android Operating System

    Lee, C.W., et al. Augmenting Text Mining Approaches with Social Network Analysis to Understand the Complex Relationships among Users' Requests: A Case Study of the Android Operating System . in 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). 2016

    2016

  13. [21]

    May 2017; Available from: http://www.apptrace.com

    AppTrace. May 2017; Available from: http://www.apptrace.com

    2017

  14. [22]

    May 2017; Available from: https://appfigures.com/

    AppFigures. May 2017; Available from: https://appfigures.com/

    2017

  15. [23]

    May 2017; Available from: http://www.apptentive.com/

    Apptentive. May 2017; Available from: http://www.apptentive.com/

    2017

  16. [24]

    May 2017; Available from: https://sensortower.com/

    SensorTower. May 2017; Available from: https://sensortower.com/

    2017

  17. [25]

    Liu, and Y

    Haddi, E ., X. Liu, and Y. Shi, The Role of Text Pre -processing in Sentiment Analysis. Procedia Computer Science, 2013. 17: p. 26-32

    2013

  18. [26]

    2017; Available from: http://www.ranks.nl/stopwords

    Stopwords. 2017; Available from: http://www.ranks.nl/stopwords

    2017

  19. [27]

    1 ed.: Cambridge University Press

    Christopher, D., Manning., Prabhakar, R., & S.,H., Introduction to Information Retrieval. 1 ed.: Cambridge University Press

  20. [28]

    2003, Association for Computational Linguistics: Edmonton, Canada

    Toutanova, K., et al., Feature-rich part -of-speech tagging with a cyclic dependency network, in Proceedings of the 2003 Conference of the N orth American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics on Human Language Technology - Volume 1 . 2003, Association for C...

    2003

  21. [29]

    2017; Available from: http://nlp.stanford.edu/

    Standford NLP API. 2017; Available from: http://nlp.stanford.edu/

    2017

  22. [30]

    Wu, Jason Chuang, Christopher D

    Richard Socher, A.P., Jean Y. Wu, Jason Chuang, Christopher D. Manning, Andrew Y. Ng and Christopher Potts. Deeply Moving: Deep Learning for Sentiment Analysis . 2017; Available from: https://nlp.stanford.edu/sentiment/

    2017

  23. [31]

    2017; Available from: https://wordnet.princeton.edu/

    WordNet. 2017; Available from: https://wordnet.princeton.edu/

    2017

  24. [32]

    1997: Addison -Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc

    Shneiderman, B., Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effect ive Human-Computer Interaction . 1997: Addison -Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc. 639

    1997

  25. [33]

    2017; Available from: https://developer.andriod.com/studio

    Android Studio . 2017; Available from: https://developer.andriod.com/studio

    2017

  26. [34]

    2017; Available from: https://www.sqlite.org

    SQLite Database. 2017; Available from: https://www.sqlite.org

    2017

  27. [35]

    2017; Available from: http://stanfordnlp.github.io/CoreNLP

    Stanford CoreNLP 3.6.0 . 2017; Available from: http://stanfordnlp.github.io/CoreNLP

    2017

  28. [36]

    2017; Available from: http://krcadinac.com/synesketch/#download

    Synesketch 2.0 . 2017; Available from: http://krcadinac.com/synesketch/#download

    2017

  29. [37]

    2017; Available from: https://github.com/PhilJay/MPAndroidChart

    MPAndriodChart. 2017; Available from: https://github.com/PhilJay/MPAndroidChart

    2017

  30. [38]

    Runaway 2017; Available from: http://www.runawayplay.com/

    2017

  31. [39]

    Jafari, and S

    Ghazanfari, M., M. Jafari, and S. Rouhani, A tool to evaluate the business intelligence of enterprise systems. Scientia Iranica, 2011. 18(6): p. 1579 - 1590

    2011

  32. [40]

    Faraway, J.J., Practical Regression and ANOVA using R. 2002

    2002

Pith tools

Reviewed May 24, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.