# Reference Points in LLM Sentiment Analysis: The Role of Structured Context

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.11454 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.11454/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 14 of its 37 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 15 Aug 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 14 of 14)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1409.0473/) (2014)
- [Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1301.3781/) (2013)
- [DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lighter](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.01108/) (2019)
- [DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.03654/) (2020)
- [Enriching Word Vectors with Subword Information](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1607.04606/) (2016)
- [Sentiment Analysis in the Era of Large Language Models: A Reality Check](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.15005/) (2023)
- [Table Meets LLM: Can Large Language Models Understand Structured Table Data? A Benchmark and Empirical Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13062/) (2023)
- [Is ChatGPT a Good Sentiment Analyzer? A Preliminary Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.04339/) (2023)
- [Ensemble Learning for Heterogeneous Large Language Models with Deep Parallel Collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.12715/) (2024)
- [A Simple Ensemble Strategy for LLM Inference: Towards More Stable Text Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.18884/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are now widely used across many fields, including marketing research. Sentiment analysis, in particular, helps firms understand consumer preferences. While most NLP studies classify sentiment from review text alone, marketing theories, such as prospect theory and expectation--disconfirmation theory, point out that customer evaluations are shaped not only by the actual experience but also by additional reference points. This study therefore investigates how the content and format of such supplementary information affect sentiment analysis using LLMs. We compare natural language (NL) and JSON-formatted prompts using a lightweight 3B parameter model suitable for practical marketing applications. Experiments on two Yelp categories (Restaurant and Nightlife) show that the JSON prompt with additional information outperforms all baselines without fine-tuning: Macro-F1 rises by 1.6% and 4% while RMSE falls by 16% and 9.1%, respectively, making it deployable in resource-constrained edge devices. Furthermore, a follow-up analysis confirms that performance gains stem from genuine contextual reasoning rather than label proxying. This work demonstrates that structured prompting can enable smaller models to achieve competitive performance, offering a practical alternative to large-scale model deployment.