When the Umpire is also a Player: Bias in Private Label Product Recommendations on E-commerce Marketplaces
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Algorithmic recommendations mediate interactions between millions of customers and products (in turn, their producers and sellers) on large e-commerce marketplaces like Amazon. In recent years, the producers and sellers have raised concerns about the fairness of black-box recommendation algorithms deployed on these marketplaces. Many complaints are centered around marketplaces biasing the algorithms to preferentially favor their own `private label' products over competitors. These concerns are exacerbated as marketplaces increasingly de-emphasize or replace `organic' recommendations with ad-driven `sponsored' recommendations, which include their own private labels. While these concerns have been covered in popular press and have spawned regulatory investigations, to our knowledge, there has not been any public audit of these marketplace algorithms. In this study, we bridge this gap by performing an end-to-end systematic audit of related item recommendations on Amazon. We propose a network-centric framework to quantify and compare the biases across organic and sponsored related item recommendations. Along a number of our proposed bias measures, we find that the sponsored recommendations are significantly more biased toward Amazon private label products compared to organic recommendations. While our findings are primarily interesting to producers and sellers on Amazon, our proposed bias measures are generally useful for measuring link formation bias in any social or content networks.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 30 Jan 2021.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 2; 2023: 3.
7 papers.
- 2022Fairness in Recommender Systems: Research Landscape and Future Directionscited by 30
- 2022Fair ranking: a critical review, challenges, and future directionscited by 21
- 2021Two-Face: Adversarial Audit of Commercial Face Recognition Systemscited by 8
- 2021Towards Fair Recommendation in Two-Sided Platformscited by 8
- 2023Interpolating Item and User Fairness in Multi-Sided Recommendationscited by 3
- 2023Fairness Vs. Personalization: Towards Equity in Epistemic Utilitycited by 2
- 2023In-processing User Constrained Dominant Sets for User-Oriented Fairness in Recommender Systemscited by 1
- 2023Fairness Vs. Personalization: Towards Equity in Epistemic Utility5 Sep 2023
- 2023In-processing User Constrained Dominant Sets for User-Oriented Fairness in Recommender Systems4 Sep 2023
- 2023Interpolating Item and User Fairness in Multi-Sided Recommendations12 Jun 2023
- 2022Fairness in Recommender Systems: Research Landscape and Future Directions23 May 2022
- 2022Fair ranking: a critical review, challenges, and future directions29 Jan 2022
- 2021Towards Fair Recommendation in Two-Sided Platforms26 Dec 2021
- 2021Two-Face: Adversarial Audit of Commercial Face Recognition Systems17 Nov 2021