JP2001338100A - Evaluating device and evaluating method and recording medium with software for evaluation recorded - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide an evaluating device capable of collecting and providing evaluation data with high precision corresponding to the attribute of an evaluator or the like. SOLUTION: Prescribed questionnaires are carried out, and highly precise attribute discrimination is carried out based on the result of the questionnaires so that evaluation data corresponding to the attribute of an evaluator or a user can be obtained. The evaluation whose quality is non-satisfactory is excluded so that the reliability of evaluation can be improved, and the obtained evaluation is notified to the object of evaluation so that the betterment will of the object of evaluation can be improved. Then, a response from the object of evaluation is received, and commendation or grading is performed so that the evaluation will of the evaluator can be improved. Moreover, a user interface is enriched so that convenience can be improved, and any dirty work or the like is retrieved and processed with a keyword so that public morals can be maintained.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to an improvement of an evaluation technique using the Internet for various evaluation objects such as virtual stores, sightseeing spots, living environments in various places, products, restaurants, etc. of an Internet site. An evaluation device, an evaluation method, and an evaluation software that have been improved so as to be able to collect and provide high-accuracy evaluation data according to attributes of a person who has performed the evaluation, the evaluation itself, and a user to be evaluated. It relates to a recorded recording medium.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art People are involved in a plurality of stores, products, stocks (company),
In selecting and using music, mechanisms, etc., we hope to select the most cost-effective one. An important factor in making that choice is the general public opinion. Accordingly, in recent years, “commodity evaluation site: http://www.epinions.com/” and the like, which can easily collect evaluations of these evaluation targets using the Internet, have appeared.

[0003]

However, it is logically impossible for all members to evaluate whether one evaluation target is good or bad. For example, it is difficult for a person who dislikes sake to evaluate the level of this sake, and it is not possible to obtain an appropriate evaluation. Also, some R
A person who plays and evaluates a PG (registered trademark) game for the first time and a person who plays and evaluates a lot of RPGs will have completely different evaluation results. Criteria can be quite different depending on who just looks at the criteria, who puts it on the combined element of appearance and function, and on gender. Further, as to the motivation to purchase the product, the evaluation is remarkable according to the purchase situation (5W1H) of the purchaser, such as "bought for anyone" or "bought not matching the season but cheap". Will be different.

[0004] As described above, the evaluation of a certain evaluation target differs depending on the so-called attributes such as the sex and age of the person to be evaluated (hereinafter referred to as the evaluator). Because the differences were not taken into account, sufficient recommendations for product evaluation could not be made.

The present invention has been proposed to solve the above-mentioned problems of the prior art.
Provide an evaluation device, an evaluation method, and a recording medium on which evaluation software capable of collecting and providing high-accuracy evaluation data according to attributes of a person who has performed the evaluation, the evaluation itself, and a user to be evaluated. Is to do.

[0006]

In order to achieve the above object, the invention according to claim 1 collects evaluations made on one or more evaluation objects through a computer network and collects the collected evaluations. An evaluation device that discloses an evaluation to a user, an attribute collection unit that collects an attribute of the user, an evaluation reception unit that is activated when the user inputs an evaluation to a certain evaluation target, An attribute evaluation unit that classifies user attributes based on data collected by the attribute collection unit, receives evaluations according to the attributes, and displays these evaluations in accordance with user instructions. It is.

[0007] The invention according to claim 121 is an aspect of the invention according to claim 1, in which an evaluation made on one or a plurality of evaluation objects through a computer network is collected. An evaluation method for publishing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein an attribute collection step of collecting user attributes and an evaluation started when the user inputs an evaluation for a certain evaluation target A receiving step; and an attribute evaluation step of classifying user attributes based on data collected by the attribute collecting step, receiving evaluations according to the attributes, and displaying these evaluations in accordance with user instructions. It is a feature.

[0008] The invention of claim 131 is considered from the viewpoint of a recording medium on which software for executing the invention of claim 1 or 121 is recorded. A recording medium that records evaluation software for collecting evaluations performed on one or a plurality of evaluation targets and disclosing the collected evaluations to a user, and the software stores the evaluation software on the computer. When the user collects attributes and tries to enter an evaluation for a certain evaluation target, the user is required to accept the evaluation, classify the user's attributes based on the data on the collected attributes, and respond to the attribute. The received evaluations are displayed, and these evaluations are displayed in accordance with a user's instruction.

According to the invention described in claim 1, claim 121 or claim 131 having the above structure,
In order to accurately grasp the attributes of the user, the attributes of the user are collected by the attribute collection unit, the attributes of the user are classified based on the data, and the evaluation according to the attribute is received,
By displaying these evaluations in accordance with the user's instructions, accurate evaluations can be obtained.

According to a second aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, the attribute collection unit writes a predetermined questionnaire via a computer network, specifies a number by e-mail, telephone, Or FAX
The questionnaire section is implemented by at least one of the following. According to the invention as set forth in claim 2 having the above-described configuration, a predetermined questionnaire is appropriately performed by using a writing, an e-mail, a telephone number designation, or a facsimile via a computer network. In addition, it is possible to improve the accuracy of determining the attribute of the user.

According to a third aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the second aspect, of the questionnaire conducted by the questionnaire section, a questionnaire on fixed characteristics of the user is made on a computer network, The questionnaire on the detailed items is characterized in that it is configured to be conducted using another communication means. According to the third aspect of the present invention having the above-described configuration, it is possible to save the trouble of repeatedly writing the fixed characteristics of the individual who do not change each time the questionnaire is performed.

According to a fourth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the second aspect, among the questionnaires performed by the questionnaire section, questionnaires regarding a variable characteristic that fluctuates due to a change in situation are sequentially performed. It is characterized by being constituted. According to the invention described in claim 4 having the above-described configuration, it is possible to evaluate each individual attribute that changes when the season or date and time changes.

According to a fifth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the second aspect, the questionnaire conducted by the questionnaire section is conducted after a predetermined period has elapsed after the purchase of a certain evaluation target. It is a feature. According to the invention as set forth in claim 5 having the above-described configuration, it is possible to obtain information on use of a product after the product reaches the user.

According to a sixth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus according to the second aspect, the result of the questionnaire performed by the questionnaire section is automatically totaled. According to the invention as set forth in claim 6 having the above configuration, the questionnaire results can be automatically totaled, so that the number of steps of the site administrator can be reduced.

According to a seventh aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the second aspect, a part of the questionnaire is transmitted by telephone,
It is performed by at least one of facsimile and electronic mail. According to the invention as set forth in claim 7 having the above configuration, a telephone in any home,
A questionnaire can be conducted using at least one of a facsimile and an e-mail, and when a telephone is used, the answer is made with a voice of "yes" or "no", so that the recognition is facilitated. In addition, when a facsimile is used, the person who fills out the questionnaire can fill out the form more carefully than a telephone. Furthermore, when e-mail is used, it is possible to answer the questionnaire slowly in a spare time without charging a telephone charge.

According to an eighth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the seventh aspect, the questionnaire by telephone is configured to be able to respond to the questionnaire by designating a number. . According to the invention described in claim 8 having the above-described configuration, the answer to the questionnaire is made by designating the number, so that the answer can be surely understood.

According to a ninth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, the attribute collecting section collects user attributes by manual input by a Web master. 10. The ninth aspect having the above configuration.
According to the invention described in (1), since the result is accepted by telephone and the result is manually input to the server by the Web master, there is no need for the user to fill out the questionnaire.

According to a tenth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, the attribute collection unit assigns a predetermined score to each attribute for each questionnaire item, and a predetermined function for each attribute. If the calculated value of is greater than or equal to a predetermined value, the questionnaire performer is determined to belong to the attribute. According to the tenth aspect of the present invention having the above-described configuration, it becomes easy to classify the attributes of the questionnaire executor into a system or the like.

According to an eleventh aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the tenth aspect, the evaluation value is displayed only for an evaluator whose calculated value is a predetermined value or more. According to the invention of the eleventh aspect having the above configuration, it is easy for the user to extract a person whose attribute matches that of the user, and it is easy to see the evaluation of the person of the specific attribute. Become.

According to a twelfth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, the evaluation receiving unit is configured to prohibit repeated evaluation by the same person. . Claim 1 having the above configuration.
According to the invention described in Item 2, generalization of evaluation can be achieved, and an evaluator who simply earns points or a so-called “Sakura”
Can be eliminated.

According to a thirteenth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the twelfth aspect, the prohibition of the repeated evaluation of the same person is performed when the repeated evaluation is performed a predetermined number of times or more. Things. According to the invention as set forth in claim 13 having the above-described configuration, it is usually 2 to
It is possible to prevent erroneous rejection of additional writing of evaluation information performed three times.

According to a fourteenth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus of the twelfth aspect, the prohibition of the repeated evaluation of the same person is performed for a predetermined period. According to the invention as set forth in claim 14 having the above configuration, it is possible to avoid the risk of monitoring the evaluation repeatedly by the same person over a long period of time.

According to a fifteenth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus according to the twelfth aspect, the repeated evaluation of the same person is prohibited except when the same person adds or corrects contents. It is a feature. According to the invention as set forth in claim 15 having the above configuration, it is possible to prevent a well-intentioned evaluator from erroneously rejecting the act of adding or modifying the evaluation content.

According to a sixteenth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the fifteenth aspect, the content added or corrected by the same person is limited to a predetermined number of times. According to the invention of the sixteenth aspect having the above-described configuration, addition and correction of the evaluation contents are allowed without any restriction, so that subsequent processing can be prevented from being complicated.

According to a seventeenth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, when the writing of the evaluation at a predetermined time interval with respect to the same evaluation target is equal to or more than a predetermined frequency, the evaluation receiving unit performs the evaluation. It is characterized in that it is configured not to be posted. According to the invention described in claim 17 having the above-described configuration, for example, when a certain store sends information from a different telephone or site, etc. in order to attract customers, it is absolutely necessary to evaluate at regular intervals. Since input is apt to occur, it is possible to prevent input of such an incorrect evaluation.

According to an eighteenth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus according to the first aspect, the display of the evaluation for each evaluation target is displayed only when a predetermined number or more of the evaluation targets are collected. It is characterized by having such a configuration. 19. An image display device having the above configuration.
According to the invention described in (1), it is possible to prevent an evaluation that is different from a fact from being made by a very small number of evaluations in the early days. Further, it is possible to prevent information operation by the evaluation target itself (for example, a store manager).

According to a nineteenth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, the evaluation receiving unit detects that a prohibited word has been input at the time of inputting the evaluation and notifies the Web master. It is characterized by comprising.
According to the invention as set forth in claim 19 having the above-described configuration, a prohibited word can be easily found, and a quick response can be made.

According to a twentieth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, when the evaluation receiving section detects that a prohibited word has been input at the time of evaluation input, the input is rejected. It is characterized in that it is configured to notify the Web master or give attention to the evaluator. According to the invention of the twentieth aspect having the above configuration, it is possible to easily eliminate a slander user.

According to a twenty-first aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus according to the first aspect, the attribute evaluation unit is configured to be able to hierarchically repeat evaluation for each of the attributes. It is characterized by the following.
According to the invention of the twenty-first aspect having the above-described configuration, it is possible to solve the problem that even if evaluations are repeated for evaluations having different attributes, correct evaluations such as practical aspects cannot be performed. it can. For example, if the evaluation target is “clothes for young women”, evaluations of women and children with significantly different ages are adopted, although only people with the same attributes (women in their twenties) actually wear them. However, it is not possible to correctly evaluate practical aspects and the like.

According to a twenty-second aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus according to the twenty-first aspect, the reliability is calculated and displayed according to a degree of the product of evaluations with respect to the evaluation. . According to the invention described in claim 22 having the above-described configuration, when the reliability is simply calculated based on the number of evaluations for the evaluation, the evaluation having the larger number of evaluations can be regarded as being more correct.

According to a twenty-third aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the twenty-second aspect, the intussusception is the total number of votes that are useful. According to the invention of the twenty-third aspect having the above-described configuration, when many useful evaluations are obtained, it is assumed that the evaluation is correct, so that the reliability of the evaluation can be more clearly understood.

According to a twenty-fourth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus according to the twenty-first aspect, the evaluation for the evaluation is repeated hierarchically, and the evaluation for a certain evaluation forming a part of a nested evaluation sequence is accumulated. In such a case, it is characterized in that the same level of reliability as the certain evaluation is given to a higher evaluation than the certain evaluation. According to the invention described in claim 24 having the above-described configuration, the reliability of the evaluation for each attribute can be further improved based on the pluralities of the same type of evaluation.

According to a twenty-fifth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluator according to the twenty-fourth aspect, the reliability is a title set for each step of the total number of useful votes. Is what you do. According to the twenty-fifth aspect of the present invention having the above-described configuration, by expressing the degree of reliability by a title, the authority of evaluation can be understood by reading the title.

According to a twenty-sixth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, the evaluation for each attribute is
It is characterized in that it is configured to vote for or against. According to the invention described in claim 26 having the above configuration, the reliability of evaluation can be improved.

According to a twenty-seventh aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device of the first aspect, a configuration is provided in which a past evaluation history for each evaluator is displayed.
According to the invention described in claim 27 having the above configuration, the evaluator's willingness to evaluate can be improved.

According to a twenty-eighth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the twenty-seventh aspect, the number of votes for which the evaluation is valid is displayed in the past evaluation history for each evaluator. It is a feature. According to the invention described in claim 28 having the above configuration, the evaluator's willingness to evaluate can be further improved.

According to a twenty-ninth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, for a certain evaluation, the number of votes of “approve” of the vote of approval or disapproval or the order of the number of votes of “no” is large.
The evaluation is configured to be preferentially displayed. According to the invention described in claim 29 having the above-described configuration, the evaluator's willingness to evaluate can be improved.

According to a thirtieth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, for a certain evaluation, an evaluator having the highest number of evaluations or an evaluator having the highest number of valid votes is displayed in an award mode. It is characterized by having such a configuration. According to the invention as set forth in claim 30 having the above configuration, the evaluator's willingness to evaluate can be improved.

According to a thirty-first aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, a request for continuation of operation is made when a user attempts to stop writing a questionnaire or an evaluation. Features. According to the invention described in claim 31 having the above-described configuration, a questionnaire can be given to as many people as possible while discouraging the user from stopping writing during the questionnaire or evaluation. You can get it.

According to a thirty-second aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device of the first aspect, when a new evaluation is made,
It is configured to notify the subject to the evaluation itself or a person belonging to the attribute of the evaluator.
According to the invention described in claim 32 having the above-described configuration, it is possible to make a trigger for an evaluation again.

According to a thirty-third aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, when a new evaluation target is registered, a person belonging to the same attribute as the evaluation target is evaluated by the evaluation device. Is configured to be notified. According to the invention according to claim 33 having the above-described configuration, it is possible to eliminate the bias of the evaluation amount and to prevent a situation in which spam is sent to a person who has different attributes and is indifferent to the evaluation target. Can be.

According to a thirty-fourth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, the display of the evaluation target is performed in an order of a small number of evaluations or in an order of a large number of evaluations. According to the invention as set forth in claim 34 having the above-described configuration, when the evaluation targets displayed in ascending order of the number of evaluations already performed are evaluated as charismatic evaluators, the motivation to evaluate is improved. be able to. When the evaluation target is displayed in descending order of the number of evaluations, the evaluation target is displayed at a position that is easy to see, so that a great advertisement effect is obtained and the evaluation target strives to obtain more evaluations.

According to a thirty-fifth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, the display of the evaluation target is performed in a descending order of the average value of the graded evaluation or in a descending order of the average value of the graded evaluation. Features. According to the invention as set forth in claim 35 having the above-described configuration, when displayed in the descending order of the average value of the grading evaluation, the evaluation target is displayed at a position that is easy to see, so that a great advertisement effect is obtained. Is obtained, and the effect is that the evaluation target makes an effort to obtain more evaluations. On the other hand, when the average of the graded evaluations is displayed in descending order, the evaluation target is displayed at a position that is easy to see, so that a great advertising effect can be obtained and a good evaluation will be obtained in the future. The effect that the subject makes an effort is obtained.

According to a thirty-sixth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, the display of the evaluation target is performed in an awarding manner in the order of the number of evaluations or in the order of the number of good evaluations. I do. Claim 3 having the above configuration.
According to the invention described in Item 6, not only a great advertisement effect can be obtained by being awarded, but also an effect that efforts are made to improve other evaluation targets so as to be awarded.

According to a thirty-seventh aspect of the present invention, in the evaluator according to the first aspect, the evaluator is provided such that points with a reward are cumulatively given to the evaluator and the reward is changed according to the point. It is characterized by comprising. According to the invention according to claim 37 having the above configuration, the points do not disappear, so the evaluator is motivated to return and evaluate even if a reward is obtained. In addition, since the content of the reward changes depending on the points, the user feels more likely to visit and evaluate again.

According to a thirty-eighth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, a keyword search is performed on the evaluation sentence by a Web master. According to the thirty-eighth aspect of the present invention having the above-described configuration, it is possible to eliminate slander and the like.

According to a thirty-ninth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device of the thirty-eighth aspect, the evaluator is picked up from the evaluation sentence detected by the keyword search, and
It is characterized in that a list of slander users is created and displayed by the b master performing a registration operation. According to the invention of the thirty-ninth aspect having the above configuration, a slander user can be eliminated.

According to a 40th aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus according to the 38th aspect, the evaluation sentence detected by the keyword search is picked up, and the Web master performs a registration operation, thereby causing a problem of the evaluation object to be a problem. A list is created and displayed. According to the invention as set forth in claim 40 having the above-described configuration, the damage to consumers can be minimized by publishing an evaluation target that causes a problem such as flowing lie information.

The invention according to claim 41 is such that, in the evaluation device according to claim 1, at least one of the number of writings, the grade evaluation value, and the number of votes can be visually displayed according to a user's request. It is characterized by comprising. According to the invention as set forth in claim 41 having the above configuration, the predetermined evaluation result is visually displayed by using a picture, a graph, a graphic, or the like, so that the comprehension can be improved.

The invention according to claim 42 is the evaluation device according to claim 41, wherein the visual display is performed for each attribute. According to the invention described in claim 42 having the above-described configuration, the evaluation result according to the attribute can be understood at a glance.

The invention according to claim 43 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 41, the visual display is a display using a radar chart or a bar graph. According to the invention as set forth in claim 43 having the above configuration, the evaluation result according to the attribute can be more easily understood.

According to a forty-fourth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device of the forty-first aspect, the visual display sets one image for each predetermined number of units, and a portion less than the predetermined number of units corresponds to one image. One image is partially displayed to indicate the number of writes or the number of votes. According to the invention as set forth in claim 44 having the above-mentioned configuration, for example, one picture of a chair is 1
In the case of writing “13”, one chair picture and 0.3 chairs are visualized, 0.7 chairs are made invisible, and “13” is converted to “13”. Since it is expressed, the number and the like can be easily grasped.

According to a forty-fifth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus of the first aspect, the evaluation object and the evaluator are:
The attribute image is configured to be displayed. According to the invention as set forth in claim 45 having the above configuration, it is possible to improve and facilitate the expressiveness of the attribute image.

The invention according to claim 46 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 1, a transition of the evaluation with respect to time is displayed. According to the invention as set forth in claim 46 having the above configuration, the transition of the evaluation corresponding to the passage of time can be understood.

The invention according to claim 47 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 46, the evaluation is accumulated on a time axis graph of the evaluation. According to the invention as set forth in claim 47 having the above configuration, it is possible to improve the recognizability of the evaluation reliability.

According to a 48th aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus according to the 1st aspect, an evaluation for each attribute can be presented. According to the invention as set forth in claim 48 having the above-described configuration, since only the evaluation information for each attribute is provided, for the user, who is the customer segment of the store and what kind of evaluation is obtained Is easy to understand.

According to a 49th aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus according to the 48th aspect, the presentation of the evaluation for each attribute is performed by rearranging the evaluations based on a predetermined criterion. Features. According to the invention as set forth in claim 49 having the above-described configuration, a list of evaluations rearranged based on a predetermined criterion can be presented for each attribute. To improve.
For example, a store manager to be evaluated can improve the evaluation target by looking at only the evaluation of the target main customer group.

The invention according to claim 50 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 48, the presentation of the evaluation for each attribute is a notification of the evaluation to the evaluation object. According to the invention described in claim 50 having the above-described configuration, for example, the store manager can know the evaluation of the evaluation target without visiting the evaluation site.

According to a fifty-first aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device of the first aspect, evaluations belonging to a specific attribute are grouped out of evaluations performed on a certain evaluation object, and
It is characterized in that predetermined statistical processing is performed. According to the invention as set forth in claim 51 having the above configuration, the usefulness of various statistical processes is greatly improved.

The invention according to claim 52 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 51, the name of the grouped group is a name from which characteristics of the group can be grasped. . According to the invention as set forth in claim 52 having the above configuration, it is possible for another person to see the profile of the evaluator and to know which Gr it belongs to, and at the same time to understand the contents of the Gr. it can.

The invention according to claim 53 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 51, the specific attribute is a person who has made the same evaluation. According to the invention according to claim 53 having the above-described configuration, it is possible to group by people having a similar sense of value, and to evaluate the group unit or the evaluation performed by another group. , A more multifaceted evaluation result can be obtained. Note that the “same evaluation” means that, for example, good and bad evaluations are the same for the evaluation target.

The invention according to claim 54 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 51, the specific attribute is a combination of a plurality of attributes. According to the invention as set forth in claim 54 having the above-described configuration, a plurality of medium unit and large unit attribute groups can be created by combining the minimum unit of attributes, and the evaluation can be seen for each group. Thus, more multifaceted evaluation results can be obtained.

The invention according to claim 55 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 51, the evaluation results for each of one or a plurality of groups are collectively displayed or notified to a predetermined notification destination. . According to the invention as set forth in claim 55 having the above configuration, for example, it is possible to narrow down the evaluation results for each attribute in response to a request from a store manager or the like.

The invention according to claim 56 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 55, the notification is performed in a report format. According to the invention as set forth in claim 56 having the above-described configuration, for example, the store manager does not need to bother to visit the HP, which can save labor.

According to a fifty-seventh aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the first aspect, the evaluation comment is transmitted by e-mail,
It is characterized in that it is configured to notify the evaluation target by automatic telephone or facsimile. According to the invention as set forth in claim 57 having the above-described configuration, by notifying the evaluation comment using various means, it is possible to improve the willingness to improve the content of the content to be evaluated. In addition, since the notification means is not limited to the electronic mail, it is possible to correspond to a real shop without the Internet.

According to a fifty-eighth aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus according to the fifty-seventh aspect, in response to the notification to the evaluation target, a thank-mail from the evaluation target is returned to the corresponding evaluator. It is characterized by the following. According to the invention as set forth in claim 58 having the above configuration,
By receiving a thank-mail from the evaluation target, the evaluator's motivation for evaluation can be improved. Further, even if a misunderstanding occurs between the evaluation target and the evaluator, the mutual misunderstanding can be eliminated.

The invention according to claim 59 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 57, the notification to the evaluation object is made in a list for each attribute. According to the invention described in claim 59 having the above-described configuration,
The evaluation accuracy can be improved by the evaluation for each attribute.

According to a 60th aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the 1st aspect, when the object to be evaluated is a store, when the store is newly opened, the evaluation value is changed. It is characterized by the following. According to the invention described in claim 60 having the above-described configuration, when the evaluation target is a store, the store manager's willingness to open a new store can be improved.

The invention according to claim 61 is the evaluation apparatus according to claim 60, wherein the change of the evaluation value is reset to 0 when the evaluation is bad, and further changed in the positive direction when the evaluation is good. And a predetermined value. According to the invention as set forth in claim 61 having the above-described configuration, it is possible to start over from 1 when the evaluation is bad, while, when the evaluation is good,
Further, by adding only a predetermined value in the plus direction, it is possible to further increase the desire to improve the evaluation target.

The invention according to claim 62 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 60, the change of the evaluation value is performed by setting the evaluation value on the evaluation object itself. The invention according to claim 63 is the evaluation device according to claim 60, wherein the change of the evaluation value is performed by reducing the weight of the weighted average of the evaluation value based on a predetermined criterion. It is characterized by. According to the invention described in claim 62 or claim 63 having the above configuration, by appropriately changing the evaluation value,
The motivation for further improvement of the evaluation target can be improved.

According to the invention of claim 64, in the evaluation device of claim 1, when the reputation of the object to be evaluated is poor,
It is characterized in that an e-mail requesting the improvement is sent. According to the invention as set forth in claim 64 having the above configuration, it is possible to improve the awareness of improvement of the evaluation target.

The invention according to claim 65 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 64, the e-mail requesting improvement is set so that the e-mail frequency is reduced as time passes. I do. According to the invention as set forth in claim 65 having the above-mentioned configuration, a lot of improvement requests are issued to an evaluation object having a bad reputation so that the evaluation object can be improved as soon as possible, but the evaluation object which nevertheless does not improve On the other hand, such mails are only annoying, so the mail frequency can be reduced.

According to a 66th aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation device according to the 1st aspect, the first display order of the evaluation target is:
It is characterized in that it is configured to be displayed preferentially according to the advertisement fee paid by the evaluation object. According to the invention as set forth in claim 66 having the above-described configuration, the initial display with a high advertisement effect can increase the advertisement fee.

The invention according to claim 67 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 66, a predetermined mark is given to an evaluation object whose advertisement fee is equal to or more than a predetermined amount. According to the invention as set forth in claim 67 having the above-described configuration, by giving a prominent mark to an evaluation target paying an advertisement fee of a predetermined amount or more,
A higher advertising effect can be obtained.

The invention according to claim 68 is an evaluation apparatus for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and for releasing the collected evaluations to a user. Regarding the evaluation, ask whether the evaluation is useful to the user, and if the answer that it is not useful is judged to be useless because it is above a predetermined level, detect the evaluation,
It has a useless evaluation processing unit for notifying the Web master or automatically deleting the evaluation.

The invention according to claim 122 is the invention according to claim 68.
The invention described in 1 above is viewed from a method point of view. The evaluation method collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and discloses the collected evaluations to a user. Then, for each evaluation, it is asked whether or not the evaluation is useful to the user. If the answer that the evaluation is not useful is judged to be useless because the answer is equal to or higher than a predetermined level, the evaluation is detected. It has a useless evaluation processing step of notifying the master or automatically deleting the evaluation.

The invention according to claim 132 is the invention according to claim 68.
Alternatively, the present invention is grasped from the viewpoint of a recording medium on which software for executing the invention according to claim 122 is recorded, and collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets using a computer. In addition, a recording medium recording evaluation software for publishing the collected evaluations to the user, the software causes the computer to inquire whether the evaluation is useful to the user for each of the evaluations. In the case where it is judged that the evaluation is not useful because the answer indicating that it is not useful is equal to or higher than a predetermined level, the evaluation is detected, and then the Web master is notified or the evaluation is automatically deleted. Things.

According to the invention described in claim 68, claim 122 or claim 132 having the above-described configuration, when the evaluation is completely out of target, or when the evaluation target is harassed, the evaluation target side is temporarily visited. If a false evaluation is placed for the purpose, the wrong evaluation is notified to the Web master depending on the pluralities of the correct evaluation, and the Web master is checked for the truth or falseness. High evaluation can be obtained.

[0079] The 69th aspect of the present invention is the evaluation apparatus according to the 68th aspect, wherein said predetermined level is a predetermined value or a predetermined ratio set in advance.
According to the invention as set forth in claim 69 having the above-described configuration, since the answer that “the evaluation is useless” is greater than or equal to a predetermined value or a predetermined ratio, a predetermined process is performed. An objectively fair evaluation result can be obtained.

An invention according to claim 70 is an evaluation apparatus for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and for releasing the collected evaluations to a user. A feature is that a priority display unit is provided which preferentially displays a specific evaluation in accordance with a user's selection instruction among one or a plurality of priority display conditions for evaluation.

The invention according to claim 123 is the invention according to claim 70.
The invention described in 1 above is viewed from a method point of view. The evaluation method collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and discloses the collected evaluations to a user. There is provided a priority display step of displaying a specific evaluation preferentially in accordance with a user's selection instruction among one or a plurality of priority display conditions for the evaluation.

The invention according to claim 133 is the invention according to claim 70.
Alternatively, the present invention is viewed from a viewpoint of a recording medium on which software for executing the invention according to claim 123 is recorded, and collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets using a computer. And a recording medium on which evaluation software for releasing the collected evaluations to the user is recorded. The software stores, on the computer, one or more priority display conditions of the evaluations of the user. According to the selection instruction, a specific evaluation is preferentially displayed.

According to the 70th, 123rd, or 133rd aspect of the present invention having the above-described configuration, a certain evaluation target can be preferentially displayed based on a predetermined criterion. It helps the subject to improve when they receive it.

According to a seventy-first aspect of the present invention, in the evaluation apparatus according to the seventy-fourth aspect, the priority display condition is such that the number of votes that the evaluation is useful and the number of votes that the evaluation is useless are large. It is characterized in that either the number is large, the number of writes for the evaluation is large, or the number of writes for the evaluation is small.

According to the invention as set forth in claim 71 having the above-described structure, when the priority display condition is “the number of votes that the evaluation is useful” is high, the evaluation with high reliability is made. Can be picked up, and the priority display condition is that "there are many votes that the evaluation is useless."
In the case of, it is known which evaluation is gaseneta. Also, if the priority display condition is that “the number of writes for the evaluation is large”, it is possible to judge a lot of writes although there is a possibility that the information may be included. Can be determined. Further, when the priority display condition is “the number of writes for the evaluation is small”, the number of evaluations is small, that is,
It is possible to select an evaluation target that easily obtains the title of the charismatic evaluator for the evaluation target.

According to the invention of claim 72, in the evaluation device of claim 70, the display preferentially includes
It is characterized in that it is either displayed on the upper part that is easy to see on the screen or displayed on the same screen that can be viewed simultaneously. According to the invention described in claim 72 having the above-described configuration, when the information is displayed on the upper part that is easy to see on the screen, the lower part can be viewed by scrolling from the upper part and can be viewed simultaneously on the same screen. , It is possible to turn over the screen (page) every predetermined number.

The invention according to claim 73 is an evaluation apparatus for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation objects through a computer network and for releasing the collected evaluations to a user, the evaluation device comprising: According to another feature of the present invention, there is provided a ranking unit for ranking a level as an evaluator in accordance with a predetermined classification logic regarding the ranking.

The invention according to claim 124 is the invention according to claim 73.
The invention described in 1 above is viewed from a method point of view. The evaluation method collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and discloses the collected evaluations to a user. And having a ranking step of ranking the level as an evaluator according to a predetermined classification logic for ranking.

The invention described in claim 134 is the invention according to claim 73.
Alternatively, the present invention is grasped from a viewpoint of a recording medium on which software for executing the invention according to claim 124 is recorded, and collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets using a computer. And a recording medium recording evaluation software for releasing the collected evaluations to the user, wherein the software ranks the level as the evaluator in accordance with a predetermined case-related logic for ranking on the computer. It is characterized by the following.

According to the invention described in claim 73, claim 124 or claim 134 having the above-described configuration, by giving the evaluator performing the evaluation authority according to his or her experience, The reliability of evaluation can be improved.

The invention according to claim 74 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 73, the ranking is performed based on a predetermined experience of the evaluator. According to the invention as set forth in claim 74 having the above configuration, the reliability of the evaluation can be increased by authorizing the evaluation of the person based on the predetermined experience of the evaluator. .

[0092] The invention described in Item 75 is the evaluation device described in Item 74, wherein the experience of the evaluator is a shopping experience. According to the invention described in claim 75 having the above-described configuration, it is possible to authorize the evaluation of the evaluator based on the shopping experience of the evaluator.

The invention according to claim 76 is the evaluation device according to claim 74, characterized in that the experience of the evaluator is belongings of the evaluator. According to the invention described in claim 76 having the above-described configuration, it is possible to authorize the evaluation of the evaluator based on the experience of the evaluator having the use.

The invention according to claim 77 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 74, the experience of the evaluator is the evaluation experience of the evaluator. According to the invention as set forth in claim 77 having the above-described configuration, it is possible to authorize the evaluation of the evaluator based on the evaluation experience of the evaluator, so that the reliability of the evaluation can be increased. it can.

The invention according to claim 78 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 73, a predetermined illustration is provided according to the ranking. According to the invention as set forth in claim 78 having the above configuration, the authority status of the rank can be recognized at a glance.

The invention according to claim 79 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 73, according to the ranking, the evaluation having a higher rank is preferentially displayed at a position that is easy to see. 79. The apparatus according to claim 79, having the above configuration.
According to the invention described in (1), the evaluation of the evaluator having the higher rank can be handled with priority.

An eighteenth aspect of the present invention is the evaluation device of the thirty-third aspect, wherein the number of votes is increased as the rank increases. According to the invention as set forth in claim 80 having the above configuration, it is possible to preferentially evaluate an evaluator with a high rank.

The invention according to claim 81 is an evaluation apparatus for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation objects through a computer network, and for releasing the collected evaluations to a user. The attribute collection unit that collects the attributes of the users and the plurality of users who read the evaluations determine whether or not the attributes obtained by the attribute collection unit match each other. Is provided.

The invention according to claim 125 is the invention according to claim 81.
The invention described in 1 above is viewed from a method point of view. The evaluation method collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and discloses the collected evaluations to a user. Then, for an attribute collection step of collecting user attributes and for a plurality of users who read the evaluation, it is determined whether or not the attributes obtained by the attribute collection step match each other. And an attribute matching processing step of performing a predetermined process for

The invention according to claim 135 is the invention according to claim 81.
Alternatively, the present invention is viewed from a viewpoint of a recording medium on which software for executing the invention described in claim 125 is recorded, and collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets using a computer. Along with, a recording medium recording evaluation software for publishing the collected evaluations to the user, the software makes the computer collect attributes of the user, and for a plurality of users reading the evaluation, It is characterized in that it is determined whether or not the attributes match each other, and a predetermined process is performed for a user having the same attribute.

According to the invention as set forth in claim 81, claim 125 or claim 135 having the above-mentioned configuration, in order to provide a pleasure for having been evaluated on purpose, when attributes are matched, they are notified to each other. It is possible to have more friends with the same attributes (hobbies, similar tastes). Also, they can deepen their knowledge about their hobbies.

The invention according to claim 82 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 81, the predetermined processing is to notify each user of related information to a user having the same attribute. 82. A structure as described above.
According to the invention described in (1), it is easy to notify users having the same attribute of the evaluator's related information.

The invention according to claim 83 is based on the evaluation apparatus according to claim 81, wherein the predetermined processing notifies each related information to a user having the same attribute when there is a request for notification. It is characterized by doing.
According to the invention described in claim 83 having the above configuration, it is possible to flexibly cope with a person who does not like to be notified.

The invention according to claim 84 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 81, the predetermined processing is to notify each e-mail address to a user having the same attribute. I do. According to the invention as set forth in claim 84 having the above-described configuration, even a friend who seems to be friendly can start with an e-mail at first.

The invention according to claim 85 is based on claim 82,
An evaluation device according to claim 83 or claim 84,
When both users who have been notified of the respective related information and have the same attribute desire to contact with each other, they present mutual contact information. According to the invention as set forth in claim 85 having the above configuration, only when both users having the same attribute desire contact with the other party, the mutual contact information is presented, so that the user is reluctant. Avoid contact with the other party.

The invention according to claim 86 is characterized in that, in the evaluation apparatus according to claim 81, the predetermined processing preferentially displays an evaluation of an evaluator having a matching attribute at a position easily viewable. I do. The invention according to claim 87 is the evaluation device according to claim 81, wherein the predetermined processing is:
It is characterized in that only evaluations with matching attributes are displayed.
Claim 86 or Claim 87 having the above configuration.
According to the invention described in (1), processing for users with the same attribute can be performed efficiently.

[0107] The invention according to claim 88 is the evaluation apparatus according to claim 81, wherein the determination as to whether or not the attributes match each other is made for one or a plurality of attributes selected by the user. Features. According to the invention as set forth in claim 88 having the above-described configuration, a person who is likely to be fit can be selected based on the criteria set by the user.

[0108] The invention according to claim 89 is an evaluation apparatus for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation objects through a computer network, and making the collected evaluations available to users. And a notification processing unit that performs a predetermined process after notifying the evaluation target to which the input has been made and receiving a comment on the evaluation as necessary.

The invention according to claim 126 is the invention according to claim 89.
The invention described in 1 above is viewed from a method point of view. The evaluation method collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and discloses the collected evaluations to a user. There is provided a notification processing step of notifying the evaluation target to which the evaluation has been input of the evaluation, receiving a comment on the evaluation as necessary, and performing a predetermined process.

The invention according to claim 136 is the invention according to claim 89.
Alternatively, the present invention is understood from a viewpoint of a recording medium on which software for executing the invention according to claim 126 is recorded, and collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets using a computer. And a recording medium recording evaluation software for releasing the collected evaluations to the user, the software causing the computer to notify the evaluation target to which the evaluation has been input of the evaluation, and After receiving a comment for the evaluation, predetermined processing is performed.

According to the invention as set forth in claim 89, claim 126 or claim 136 having the above structure, the evaluation is notified to the evaluation object, and the evaluation object is returned with a comment on the evaluation. By providing a place for resolving the misunderstanding of the evaluation or by making a promise to implement the improvement of the evaluation target, the rate of actual improvement can be increased.

[0112] The invention according to claim 90 is the evaluation apparatus according to claim 89, wherein the predetermined processing is performed when a comment for the evaluation from an evaluation target is received.
The comment is displayed on an interactive bulletin board provided for each evaluation. According to the invention as set forth in claim 90 having the above configuration, it is possible to provide a place for resolving misunderstandings by being able to reply to each evaluation.

The invention according to claim 91 is such that in the evaluation apparatus according to claim 90, for each comment displayed on the interactive bulletin board, a useful / standless vote is accepted and the result of the vote is displayed. It is characterized by comprising. According to the invention as set forth in claim 91 having the above configuration, it is easy to know which comment is worthy of trust.

The invention according to claim 92 is the evaluation device according to claim 90, wherein the dialogue bulletin board receives a question about the dialogue to be evaluated with the evaluator,
It is characterized in that an answer to the question is accepted and displayed on another Q & A bulletin board. According to the invention described in claim 92 having the above configuration, it is possible to obtain knowledge deeper than the level of this question.

The invention according to claim 93 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 92, a useful / ineffective vote is accepted for each comment displayed on the Q & A bulletin board. I do. According to the invention described in claim 93 having the above configuration, it is easy to know which comment is worthy of trust.

The invention according to claim 94 is characterized in that, in the evaluation device according to claim 92, when a comment is written on the Q & A bulletin board, a request for evaluation of the evaluation object is made. . The invention described in Item 95 is the evaluation device described in Item 94, in which before the request for the evaluation, whether or not the user has experience with the evaluation target is asked, and if the user has the experience, the writing of the evaluation is permitted. It is characterized by the following. 10. The ninth aspect having the above configuration.
According to the invention described in Item 4 or Claim 95, it is possible to have a person who is interested in the evaluation object or a person who is judged to be qualified to make an evaluation.

The invention as set forth in claim 96 is based on the evaluation device as set forth in claim 89, wherein, when the predetermined processing receives a comment on the evaluation from an evaluation target,
It is characterized by returning to the evaluator. According to the invention described in claim 96 having the above-described configuration, by directly returning to the evaluator, it is possible to ensure that the evaluator can see the evaluator.

An invention according to claim 97 is an evaluation apparatus for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation objects through a computer network and for releasing the collected evaluations to a user. At least one of a predetermined weight and a function is set for each evaluation item relating to the evaluation target, and a comprehensive evaluation unit that calculates a comprehensive evaluation value for each evaluation target is provided.

The invention according to claim 127 is the invention according to claim 97.
The invention described in 1 above is viewed from a method point of view. The evaluation method collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and discloses the collected evaluations to a user. In addition, there is provided a comprehensive evaluation step in which at least one of a predetermined weight and a function is set for each evaluation item relating to each evaluation object, and an overall evaluation value is calculated for each evaluation object.

The invention described in claim 137 is the invention described in claim 97.
Alternatively, the present invention is viewed from a viewpoint of a recording medium on which software for executing the invention described in claim 127 is recorded, and collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets using a computer. Together with a recording medium recording evaluation software for publishing the collected evaluations to the user, the software provides the computer with at least one of a predetermined weight and a function for each evaluation item for each evaluation target. This is characterized in that a total evaluation value is calculated for each evaluation target.

According to the invention described in claim 97, claim 127 or claim 137 having the above-mentioned structure, weighting of evaluation items can be freely performed, and an overall evaluation point can be obtained based on the weighting. Since the function can be freely set, the comprehensive evaluation of the evaluation target can be accurately performed, so that the user can make a correct selection.

The invention according to claim 98 is the evaluation apparatus according to claim 97, wherein the weight is a numerical value of 0 to 1.0 set for each evaluation item, and the sum is 1.0. It is characterized by being. According to the invention of claim 98 having the above configuration, even if there are a plurality of evaluation items, the weight is set to a simple numerical value such as 1.0,
Since numerical values are set for each evaluation item, it is possible to calculate the total evaluation score with emphasis on the predetermined evaluation item by dividing the evaluation items that are emphasized and the evaluation items that are not so important. The evaluation becomes easy to understand,
A relative evaluation of the evaluation itself can be obtained.

The invention according to claim 99 is characterized in that, in the evaluation apparatus according to claim 98, the numerical value is set to a predetermined value for each of the step evaluation values for each of the evaluation items. I do. According to the invention according to claim 99 having the above-described configuration, a numerical value of 0 to 1.0 is assigned to each level of the level evaluation value for each evaluation item. It is easy to reduce the variation among evaluators. Also, the evaluation value can be intuitively understood by the user of the evaluation.

The invention described in claim 100 is the invention described in claim 97.
The weighting is a numerical value of 0 to 1.0 set for each predetermined group of each evaluation item, the sum of each group is 1.0, and each weight in the same group is The sum of numerical values of 0 to 1.0 set for each evaluation item is 1.0. According to the invention as set forth in claim 100 having the above configuration, even if there are a plurality of predetermined groups of each evaluation item, the weight is set to 1.0.
The numerical values are set for each group as a simple numerical value as described above, so that a group of evaluation items to be emphasized and a group of evaluation items not to be important can be used to calculate a comprehensive evaluation score with a priority on a predetermined group. Then, the numerical value of the total score makes the evaluation value intuitively understandable even for the user of the evaluation, and a relative evaluation of the evaluation itself can be obtained.

The invention according to claim 101 is the invention according to claim 97.
In the evaluation device described in the above, the function and the weighting value are respectively displayed and made public, and in a bulletin board for writing a correction value or a correction formula for them, a question or rejection of the correction value or the correction formula is asked, and the total number of votes is predetermined. It is configured to notify the Web master when the value exceeds the value. According to the invention described in claim 101 having the above-described configuration, it is possible to make general settings for the function and the weighting value without biasing to personal preference.

The invention according to claim 102 is the invention according to claim 97.
Wherein the evaluation genre is provided for each setting variation of the function and the weighting value. Claim 10 having the above configuration.
According to the invention described in item 2, for example, ramen can be divided into soup-oriented groups and noodle-oriented groups.

The invention described in claim 103 is the invention described in claim 97.
Wherein the function and the weighting value can be set for each user, so that a desired evaluation target can be searched. According to the invention described in claim 103 having the above-described configuration, a human resource, a company, a favorite store, and the like required by each user can be hit by general evaluation.

An invention according to claim 104 is an evaluation apparatus for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network, and displaying the collected evaluations to a user. An attribute collection unit that collects the attributes of the players, and a game addition unit that provides a game for writing an evaluation or filling out a questionnaire for collecting the attributes of the attribute collection unit.

[0129] The invention of claim 128 is the invention of claim 10
4. An invention as set forth in claim 4, wherein the invention is viewed from a method viewpoint.
An attribute collection step of collecting evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein an attribute collection step of collecting user attributes is provided. A game adding step of providing a game for writing or filling out a questionnaire for collecting attributes in the attribute collecting step is provided.

The invention according to claim 138 is the invention according to claim 10
The present invention is understood from a viewpoint of a recording medium on which software for executing the invention according to Claim 4 or Claim 128 is recorded, and collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets using a computer. And a recording medium recording evaluation software for publishing the collected evaluations to the user, wherein the software causes the computer to collect the attributes of the user and write the evaluation or collect the attributes. It is characterized in that a game is provided for filling in a questionnaire.

[0131] Claim 104, which has the above configuration.
According to the invention described in claim 128 or claim 138, by adding a game after writing an evaluation or the like, it is possible to add fun after writing and encourage more active writing. .

The invention according to claim 105 is the invention according to claim 10
5. The evaluation device according to 4, wherein the type of the game is set so as to be changeable according to the number of evaluation comments. Claim 1 having the above configuration.
According to the invention described in 05, by writing more, more interesting games can be enjoyed, so that as many as possible can be written.

The invention according to claim 106 is the invention according to claim 10
5. The evaluation device according to item 4, wherein the game is set so that the probability of winning can be changed according to the number of evaluation comments. According to the invention as set forth in claim 106 having the above-described configuration, by writing more data, the probability of winning is increased, so that as many data as possible can be received.

[0134] The invention according to claim 107 is the evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation device and the mobile communication device communicate with each other.
A mobile device processing unit that specifies an evaluation target and performs at least one of an upload function and a download function of the evaluation information is provided.

The twelfth aspect of the present invention relates to the tenth aspect.
7. An invention according to claim 7, wherein the invention is viewed from a method viewpoint.
122. The evaluation method according to claim 121, further comprising a mobile device processing step of specifying an evaluation target and performing at least one of an evaluation information upload function and a download function with the mobile communication device. It is.

[0136] The invention of claim 139 is the invention of claim 10
A storage medium storing software for executing the invention according to claim 7 or claim 129, wherein the evaluation medium according to claim 131 is recorded on a storage medium, wherein the mobile communication device In this method, an evaluation target is specified to perform at least one of an upload function and a download function of the evaluation information.

[0137] Claim 107 which has the above configuration.
According to the invention described in claim 129 or claim 139, when a user inputs a currently walking place and a desired product to the evaluation site, the address of a nearby store, the evaluation information of the store, and the store The evaluation information of the product handled in the above can be freely taken out by specifying the evaluation site. In this way, you can get what you want in a genre that is better and cheaper at reputable stores.

The invention according to claim 108 is the invention according to claim 10
7. In the evaluation device according to 7, the identification of the evaluation target includes:
It is characterized in that the selection is performed by a user using a mobile communication device from a predetermined evaluation target list.
According to the invention described in claim 108 having the above-described configuration, information on an evaluation target (for example, a store) in a city can always be obtained, and an evaluation target (for example, in a city) can be obtained.
Store) information can be uploaded to inform people who do not know the subject of the evaluation.

[0139] The invention described in claim 109 is the invention according to claim 10:
7. In the evaluation device according to 7, the identification of the evaluation target includes:
It is characterized in that the selection is performed by using a mobile communication device from a list of evaluation targets presented by a user based on a genre selected from a list of genres to be evaluated. According to the invention as set forth in claim 109 having the above configuration, it is possible to specify the evaluation target from the genre, and it is not necessary to spend much time.

The invention according to claim 110 is the invention according to claim 10
9. In the evaluation device according to item 9, the genre list includes:
It is characterized by including a place list. The invention according to claim 111 is the evaluation apparatus according to claim 109, wherein
The genre list is an alphabetical index list. 110. The above-described configuration.
According to the invention described in claim 111, the usefulness of the genre list is greatly improved.

The invention according to claim 112 is the invention according to claim 10.
7. The evaluation device according to 7, wherein the evaluation information is at least one of a sentence in which the evaluation is described, a grade evaluation value, and the number of evaluations. According to the invention as set forth in claim 112 having the above configuration, it is possible to obtain easy-to-understand evaluation information.

The invention according to claim 113 is the invention according to claim 10
7. The evaluation device according to 7, wherein the evaluation information is evaluation information totalized for each attribute of the evaluator. According to the invention as set forth in claim 113 having the above-described configuration, it is not necessary to look at the evaluation of a person who does not agree with the taste, so that it is possible to obtain evaluation information correct for the user.

The invention according to claim 114 is the invention according to claim 10
7. The evaluation device according to 7, wherein the evaluation target is a store. According to the invention as set forth in claim 114 having the above-described configuration, when the general service of the shop is received, it is easy to determine if this information is present.

The invention according to claim 115 is the invention according to claim 10
7. The evaluation device according to 7, wherein the evaluation target is a product being handled. According to the invention as set forth in claim 115 having the above-described configuration, it is easy to determine that there is this information when a partial service of a store is received.

The invention according to claim 116 is the invention according to claim 10.
7. In the evaluation device according to 7, the specification of the evaluation target is
It is configured to be able to be performed by keyword search. 12. An eleventh embodiment having the above configuration.
According to the invention described in Item 6, the evaluation target can be specified by a keyword search, so that the convenience is greatly improved.

The invention according to claim 117 is the invention according to claim 10.
7. The evaluation device according to 7, wherein the evaluation information is configured to be transmitted and received at least one of audio and video. According to the invention as set forth in claim 117 having the above configuration, the trouble of writing an evaluation sentence is not required.

The invention according to claim 118 is the invention according to claim 10
7. The evaluation device according to 7, wherein a cashback is provided to a user who inputs the evaluation information. According to the invention as set forth in claim 118 having the above configuration, input of information can be promoted.

The invention according to claim 119 is the invention according to claim 10
7. The evaluation device according to 7, wherein a discount service is provided to a user who has input the evaluation information at the next use. According to the invention as set forth in claim 119 having the above-described configuration, it is possible to promote input of information and to promote returning to the store.

The present invention according to claim 120 is an evaluation apparatus for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation objects through a computer network, and for releasing the collected evaluations to a user. An attribute collection unit that collects user attributes, an evaluation reception unit that is activated when a user inputs an evaluation for a certain evaluation target, and a user attribute based on data collected by the attribute collection unit. Attribute evaluation unit that categorizes, receives evaluations according to the attributes, and displays these evaluations according to the user's instructions. For each evaluation, asks whether the evaluation is useful to the user and answers that it is not useful Is judged to be useless due to being over a predetermined level, the evaluation is detected, and then the Web master is notified or the evaluation is automatically deleted. A useless evaluation processing unit, a priority display unit that preferentially displays a specific evaluation according to a user's selection instruction from one or more priority display conditions for the evaluation, According to the case classification logic, a ranking unit that ranks the level as an evaluator, and for a plurality of users who read the evaluation, determine whether or not the attributes obtained by the attribute collection unit match each other, An attribute matching processing unit that performs a predetermined process for a user having the same attribute, notifies the evaluation target to which the evaluation has been input of the evaluation, receives a comment for the evaluation as necessary, and then executes the predetermined process. The notification processing unit to be performed and at least one of a predetermined weight and a function are set for each evaluation item for each evaluation object, and a comprehensive evaluation value is calculated for each evaluation object. A general evaluation unit to be issued, a game addition unit that provides a game for evaluation writing or a questionnaire entry for collecting the attribute of the attribute collection unit, and a mobile communication device to specify an evaluation target, and A mobile device processing unit that performs at least one of an evaluation information upload function and a download function.

The invention according to claim 130 is the twelfth invention.
The invention described in Item 0 is viewed from a method viewpoint,
An attribute collection step of collecting evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein an attribute collection step of collecting user attributes is provided. A user, an evaluation receiving step started when inputting an evaluation to a certain evaluation target, and classifying a user attribute based on data collected by the attribute collecting step, receiving an evaluation according to the attribute, An attribute evaluation step for displaying these evaluations according to the user's instructions, and for each evaluation, asking whether or not the evaluation is useful to the user. The evaluation is detected, and then the Web
Useless evaluation processing steps for notifying the master or automatically deleting the evaluation, and one or more priority display conditions for the evaluation, and specifying a specific evaluation according to the user's selection instruction. A priority display step of displaying priority, a ranking step of ranking a level as an evaluator according to a predetermined classification logic for ranking, and a plurality of users reading the evaluation are obtained by the attribute collection step. Attribute matching processing step of determining whether or not the attributes match each other, and performing a predetermined process for a user having the same attribute;
After notifying the evaluation target of the evaluation input and accepting comments on the evaluation as necessary,
A notification processing step of performing a predetermined process, a general evaluation step of setting at least one of a predetermined weight and a function for each evaluation item for each evaluation object, and calculating an overall evaluation value for each evaluation object, A game addition unit that provides a game to a questionnaire entry for collecting attributes in the attribute collection step;
A mobile device processing step of specifying an evaluation target and performing at least one of an upload function and a download function of the evaluation information with the mobile communication device.

The invention according to claim 140 is the twelfth invention.
0 or from the viewpoint of a recording medium on which software for executing the invention according to claim 130 is recorded, wherein evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets are collected using a computer. And a recording medium recording evaluation software for releasing the collected evaluations to the user, the software causing the computer to collect the attributes of the user, When trying to input an evaluation, the user is required to accept the evaluation, classify the user's attributes based on the collected attribute data, accept evaluations in accordance with the attributes, and instruct these evaluations to the user. And ask each user whether the evaluation is useful to the user. In the case where the evaluation is judged to be useless, the evaluation is detected, and then the Web master is notified, or the evaluation is automatically deleted, and the user is included in one or more priority display conditions for the evaluation. According to the selection instruction of, the specific rating is displayed preferentially, the level as the evaluator is ranked according to the predetermined classification logic for ranking, and the attributes of multiple users who read the rating match each other After making the user judge whether or not to perform the predetermined processing for the user having the same attribute, letting the evaluation target to which the evaluation is input be notified of the evaluation, and receiving a comment on the evaluation as necessary, A predetermined process is performed, and at least one of a predetermined weight and a function is set for each evaluation item for each evaluation object. Calculate the overall evaluation value, provide a game for writing a questionnaire for writing evaluations or collecting attributes, specify the evaluation target with mobile communication devices and upload or download the evaluation information At least one of which is fulfilled.

(120) The above-mentioned structure,
According to the invention described in claim 130 or claim 140, in order to accurately grasp the attributes of the user, the attributes of the user are collected by the attribute collection unit, and the attributes of the user are classified based on the data. By receiving evaluations according to the attributes and displaying these evaluations in accordance with the user's instructions, accurate evaluations can be obtained.If the evaluation is completely wrong, or the evaluation target is harassed, When a fake evaluation for temporary customer visits on the evaluation target side is posted, the wrong evaluation is notified to the Web master depending on the pluralities of the correct evaluation, and the Web master is asked to confirm the truth or falseness. , A highly accurate evaluation can be obtained.

In addition, since a certain evaluation target can be preferentially displayed on the basis of a predetermined standard, it is useful to improve the evaluation target in order to receive a good evaluation, and to the evaluator who is performing the evaluation, By granting authority according to experience, the reliability of the evaluation can be improved, and in order to provide pleasure for having the evaluation performed, notification should be given to each other when the attribute matches, and the same attribute You can get more friends who have similar interests (hobbies and interests are similar). Also, they can deepen their knowledge about their hobbies.

Further, by notifying the evaluation target to the evaluation target and returning a comment on the evaluation from the evaluation target, a place for resolving the misunderstanding of the evaluation is provided. The rate of actual improvement can be increased, the evaluation items can be freely weighted, and the function can be set freely so that a comprehensive evaluation point can be obtained based on the weighting. Since the evaluation can be performed accurately, the user can make a correct selection.

[0155] Furthermore, by adding a game after writing the evaluation, it is possible to add fun after writing and to encourage more active writing. When the user enters the evaluation site, the address of the nearby store, the evaluation information of the store, and the evaluation information of the products handled in the store can be freely retrieved by specifying the evaluation site. You can get what you want in a genre that is better and cheaper at reputable stores.

[0156]

DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Next, embodiments of the present invention (hereinafter, referred to as embodiments) will be specifically described with reference to the drawings. That is, the present embodiment is an evaluation device that performs an evaluation according to an evaluator, an evaluation itself, or an attribute of a user to be evaluated, and is realized as an evaluation site H illustrated in FIG. In addition, the present embodiment can be understood as a recording medium that records an evaluation method according to an attribute and evaluation software according to the attribute.

[1. Configuration] As shown in FIG. 1, an evaluation site H, which is a server, uses an Internet N1, which is a computer network, to look for a person to be evaluated (for example, a store manager) and evaluation information (mouth information). It is connected to a plurality of user terminal devices T used by a person who uses the above evaluation site H (hereinafter, referred to as a user) such as a visitor and an evaluator. The evaluation site H is connected to a plurality of facsimile transceivers F and telephone telephones t owned by the user via a telephone communication network N2.

The user terminal device T is a personal computer, a game machine, a TV, a mobile phone, or the like. The user terminal device T transmits data to and receives data from the Internet N1, and receives data from the Internet N1. A data input unit T3 such as a keyboard, a mouse, a microphone, and voice recognition software for recognizing a voice from the microphone for transmitting settings to the Internet N1 and a display unit T4 for displaying these data are provided. ing.

The facsimile transceiver F has a facsimile receiving unit F1 for receiving facsimile data and a facsimile transmitting unit F2 for transmitting facsimile data. The telephone talker t speaks and dials a desired numerical value. Alternatively, a desired numerical value can be designated by pushing.

The evaluation site H is a server, and is a data receiving unit H01 and a data transmitting unit H02 for transmitting / receiving data to / from the Internet N1, and for setting related to reception from the Internet N1 or for transmitting to the Internet N1. And a data input unit H03 such as a keyboard, a mouse, a microphone, and voice recognition software for recognizing voice from the microphone, and a display unit H04 for displaying these data.

The evaluation site H is connected to the telephone communication network N
FAX receiving unit H05 that receives FAX data via the FAX 2
And a facsimile transmission unit H06 for transmitting facsimile data. The facsimile transmission unit H06 further converts text data into voice to make a telephone call to the telephone talker t, and transmits a voice (including a dial number identification) from the telephone talker t. A telephone voice conversion unit H07 for converting text data is provided. Further, a FAX data converter H08 is connected to the FAX receiver H05 and the FAX transmitter H06. This fax data converter H
A character recognition unit 08 performs character recognition from a document transmitted from a user by facsimile.
Processing such as converting the image data sent by X into predetermined data, or converting various data into image data is performed.

The evaluation site H includes an attribute evaluation unit H09, which is a characteristic part of the present invention, that receives evaluations according to the attributes of the evaluator and displays these evaluations in accordance with the instructions of the user. When the evaluation itself or the attribute collection unit H10 that collects the attributes of the user to be evaluated and, for each evaluation, a voting result indicating that the evaluation is useless, the evaluation is picked up and notified to the Web master. The evaluation processing unit H11 which does not help or delete the evaluation, the priority display unit H12 which preferentially displays a specific evaluation at a position where it is easy to see, and the ranking unit H13 which ranks the level as an evaluator are the same. An attribute matching processing unit H14 for introducing the attributed people to each other, and notifying the evaluation target, for example, a store manager of the evaluation, and commenting on the evaluation. Notification processing unit H15 that return to the evaluator
A comprehensive evaluation unit H16 for setting a weighted numerical value for each evaluation item, or for setting a function for calculating an overall evaluation value using the numerical value, and performing an overall evaluation for the evaluation target; At the end, etc., a game addition unit H17 for having the user enjoy playing the game thanks to the written information, a mobile device processing unit H18 that performs an uploading and downloading function of evaluation information between the mobile device, and an evaluator. And an evaluation receiving unit H19 activated by turning on the evaluation input switch.

The attribute collection unit H10 may execute a predetermined questionnaire via a computer network, at least one of writing, e-mail, telephone number designation, and facsimile, or a questionnaire. Is received by telephone, and the result is manually input to the server by the Web master.

In the questionnaire section, predetermined questionnaire items are set, and some of the questionnaire items, such as an e-mail address and name, are questionnaire on the site. It can also be configured to be implemented as a questionnaire by e-mail, FAX or telephone. In the following embodiment, a case will be described in which a questionnaire section is used as the attribute collection section H10.

The priority display section H12 includes means for counting the number of votes for which an evaluation is useful / not valid, and means for counting the number of writings, and one or a plurality of priorities for the evaluation. A specific evaluation is preferentially displayed according to a user's selection instruction among display conditions.

[2. Operation and Effect] The present embodiment configured as described above operates as follows.

[2-1. Summary] The evaluation site H conducts a predetermined questionnaire and performs highly accurate attribute discrimination based on the above questionnaire results in order to obtain evaluation data according to the attributes of the evaluator and the user, and evaluates the reliability of the evaluation. In order to improve the quality of the evaluation, it is necessary to notify the evaluation target of the obtained evaluation and obtain a response from the evaluation target in order to eliminate poor quality evaluations and to increase the willingness to improve the evaluation target. it can. Awards and ratings are given to improve the evaluator's willingness to evaluate.Furthermore, to improve usability, the user interface is enhanced, and in order to maintain the public order and morals of evaluation, search for dirty words, etc. by keywords. Can be processed.

[2-2. Specific procedure] [2-2-1. Evaluation site main routine] where
FIG. 2 shows the processing procedure of the main routine of the evaluation site in the present embodiment. This procedure is realized by infinitely repeating the evaluation software according to the attributes in addition to the other system processing, the subroutines corresponding to steps 201 (indicated as S201 in the figure) to step 210, respectively. Note that each of the subroutines described in detail below is not always executed in the order shown in FIG. 2, and may be selectively executed as needed.

That is, as shown in FIG. 2, first, in step 201, the attribute collection unit (questionnaire unit) H
When a questionnaire for investigating the attributes of the evaluator is executed by the operation of 10, immediately at step 202, the attributes of the evaluator who executed the questionnaire are evaluated by the operation of the attribute evaluation unit H09. Then, step 20
In the step 3, the game adding unit H17 provides an enjoyment so that the user can enjoy the game at the end of the evaluation writing or at the end of the questionnaire.

Next, in step 204, the evaluation which is judged to be “useless” by the evaluator and the user by the operation of the useless evaluation processing section H11 is deleted or notified to the Web master in some cases. Next, in step 205, the evaluator is ranked by the action of the ranking section H13, and in step 206, the evaluation result is prioritized in various modes according to the request of the user or the like by the action of the priority display section H12. Is displayed.

In step 207, people with the same attribute are introduced to each other by the action of the attribute matching processing unit H14, and in step 208, weighting is performed or a function is set for each evaluation item by the action of the comprehensive evaluation unit H16. Then, a comprehensive evaluation of the evaluation target is performed. Further, in step 209, by the operation of the notification processing unit H15,
The evaluation result is notified to the evaluation target, and a comment on the evaluation result is obtained from the evaluation target. In step 210,
The operation of the mobile device processing unit H18 uploads or downloads the evaluation information (mouth information) in a mode requested by the user. Hereinafter, each of the above subroutines will be described in detail with reference to flowcharts.

[2-2-2. Questionnaire execution processing in questionnaire section] FIG. 3 is an attribute collection section (questionnaire section)
It is the flowchart of the questionnaire execution process in H10.

First, in step 301, it is determined whether registration by the questionnaire performer (evaluator, user, or the like) is the first time. If registration is to be performed for the first time, the process proceeds to step 302, and the questionnaire on the Web site ( (Primary questionnaire). It is preferable that the contents of this questionnaire are minimum items such as an e-mail address and a name as fixed attributes of the individual that are hardly changed. This is because, in order to accurately determine the attributes of the evaluator and the like, since the questionnaire is long, there is a problem that it takes a lot of telephone charges and it is difficult to write in the middle. It is also to save the trouble of repeatedly writing fixed characteristics of an individual that hardly changes.

Next, at step 303, in order to finely classify the attributes of the questionnaire performer, telephone, FA
Conduct a more detailed questionnaire (secondary questionnaire) using X, e-mail, etc. The content is a fixed attribute, such as the area where you live, your age, your gender, your preferences, your hobbies, your occupation, your experience with each evaluation target (purchasing experience, your evaluation experience, etc.). The answer to this questionnaire is received by e-mail or the like, and is automatically read into the attribute evaluation unit H09 described later and classified according to the attribute (see the attribute classification flowchart in FIG. 7).

On the other hand, if the surveyor has already been registered and is going to make a new evaluation,
In step 301, it is determined that the registration by the person is not the first time, and the process proceeds to step 304, where a questionnaire on the Web site is performed. Note that the questionnaire automatically describes the evaluation target evaluated by the evaluator and the words specifying the evaluation itself.

This questionnaire is based on the contents of the questionnaire in step 302, that is, whether there is no change in the e-mail address, the variable attribute related to the evaluation at this time, that is, when the evaluation target can be known (when), the evaluation is performed. The target location (where), the contents of use of the evaluation target (what), the reason for using the evaluation target (wh)
y) and who used the evaluation target (wh
o) How the evaluation target is used (for example, purchase, reference, etc.) is selected by selecting a preset check box. Alternatively, the shopping experience may be confirmed.

Subsequently, at step 305, a more detailed questionnaire is conducted. That is, when “others” is selected in the preset check box, the above 5W2H (5W1H, How much)
At least one of the following:
AX, e-mail and send to the questionnaire implementer,
Conduct a more detailed questionnaire on the person's variable attributes. For example, fixed attributes such as area of residence, age,
The gender, preference, hobby, occupation, experience with each evaluation object, etc. are described and sent to the questionnaire implementer using telephone, facsimile, e-mail, or the like, so that the person can correct these fixed attributes.

Since the text of the questionnaire which takes a long time can be input without connecting to the Web site and at the time when the questionnaire is taken,
It is possible to reduce the telephone charge of the questionnaire implementer, and it is possible to prevent the questionnaire from being troublesome on the way.

With such a questionnaire, it is possible to grasp the situational characteristics of an individual that change each time the evaluation is made, so that a more detailed evaluation according to the individual's variable attributes becomes possible. In addition, when it is desired to obtain an evaluation for a certain evaluation target (for example, a certain product), if a questionnaire is conducted after a predetermined period has elapsed after purchasing the evaluation target, use of the product after the purchase of the product has been completed. Information can be obtained.

As will be described later, after a certain evaluator performs this questionnaire and presses the evaluation input button, the evaluator determines whether or not the evaluator is qualified for evaluation in accordance with the flowchart shown in FIG. Is determined, and when it is determined that there is eligibility, the evaluation is permitted, and the evaluator can input his / her own evaluation (see FIG. 8). See flowchart).

On the other hand, when it is determined that there is no experience that can be evaluated, or when the questionnaire at the time of the initial registration has not been completed, the evaluation performed by another evaluator can be referred to. It is configured so that you cannot enter your own rating.

Further, as a form of the questionnaire, for example, when “Cooking likes Chinese food” is selected,
The menu of Chinese food is shown in the child window,
By adopting a brunch-type questionnaire system in which individual dishes such as “gyoza” can be checked and selected, comprehensive evaluation of the evaluation target is facilitated (FIG. 12).
See the flowchart of the comprehensive evaluation section.

[2-2-3. Processing in attribute evaluation unit]
4 to 6 show flowcharts of attribute evaluation processing in the attribute evaluation unit H09. It should be noted that all the steps shown in this flowchart are not always executed in the order shown in FIGS. 4 to 6, and may be selectively performed according to the request of the user of the evaluation site according to the present invention. , Or may be executed in a different order.

In the attribute evaluation unit H09, the above-described attribute classification subroutine of step 401 is used to obtain evaluation data corresponding to the attributes of the evaluator who has been determined to be appropriate as a person who uses the evaluation or the evaluator. Highly accurate attribute discrimination is performed based on the results of the questionnaire.

That is, at the evaluation site H according to the present invention, at least one new evaluation (evaluation sentence, good / bad five-level evaluation, useful / standless vote, etc.)
Or the questionnaire section H10
If you get a new questionnaire in this, this attribute evaluation unit H09
In, the attributes are classified for each evaluation, evaluator, and evaluation target and stored in a database (step 401). Subsequently, the processing in the attribute classification subroutine will be described.

[2-2-3-1. Processing in Attribute Classification Routine] FIG. 7 shows a flowchart of the attribute classification subroutine in the attribute evaluation unit H09.

First, in step 701, a primary questionnaire for extracting fixed attributes at the time of initial registration (FIG.
Or 302 for extracting a variable attribute when a new rating (evaluation sentence, at least one of good / bad five-level rating, useful / ineffective vote, etc.) is input. Based on the questionnaire results (see step 304 in FIG. 3), the attribute No. obtained by selecting which attribute the evaluator or the like corresponds to from the preset attributes (where No is an identification code) ID),
It stores the evaluation target No. (In addition to the person or thing to be evaluated, the evaluation itself is also an object because it is the evaluation of the evaluation), the evaluation itself No, and the member No. if the member is a new member.

Subsequently, in step 702, the evaluator's member No. and evaluation No. are stored in the database to be evaluated. This evaluation target may be, for example, a food, a song, a specific area of a travel destination, or other evaluations in addition to a person or a thing. In addition,
The evaluator's member number and the like stored in each evaluation target by the processing of step 702 will be described later in step 40 of FIG.
5, Step 407 and Step 409 of FIG.

Next, in step 703, based on the questionnaire at the time of initial registration performed by the questionnaire section H10,
Attributes are assigned to fixed characteristics of the individual, such as the age, hobbies, preferences, objects of interest, gender, location, occupation, affiliated organization, etc. of the individual. Here, “attribute allocation” means, for example, by age (10 to 19 years old, 20 to 29 years old, 30 to 39 years old).
Age, 40-49 years old), hobbies (outdoors, fishing,
Member Nos. Are stored in a preset database of attribute category groups, such as for khakis, preferences (colors, seasons, Chinese foods, etc.), and locations (** City, Aichi Prefecture, ** Ward, Tokyo). This means that the No of the evaluation itself is stored. The “attribute category group” refers to, for example, each group listed in parentheses for each attribute.

Subsequently, in step 704, from the questionnaire conducted for each evaluation input, a target characteristic using the evaluation target, a situation characteristic such as 5W1H, etc., is assigned as a variable attribute. In other words, this “attribute allocation” means, for example, whether the purpose of using the evaluation target (for example, the purpose of buying a coat at the store being evaluated) has moved to the northern country but purchased for the first time because there is no coat, The quality of evaluation differs depending on the purpose of repurchasing, because the coat I had was outdated. Also, depending on whether you buy in Tokyo with an average temperature of 5 ° C or in Hokkaido with an average temperature of -20 ° C, the requirements for the coat to buy are different, and when buying in a warm area, ease of movement is more important than thermal insulation, When buying in a cold area, warmth is important.

As described above, the evaluation of the product purchased is
It is necessary to classify by the purpose of purchase. Further, this evaluation is more preferably classified every 5W1H. Therefore, the purpose set for each evaluation object, or 5W1H
The number of the evaluation itself and the evaluated member number are stored in the database of each attribute category group.

Subsequently, at step 705, F
(A, b, c, d,...) = A * pa + b * pb + c * p
pa, pb, and c + d * pd + set for each attribute
When this numerical value is equal to or greater than a predetermined value,
"This person is included in the attribute" is determined.

That is, in the case of the khaki attribute, a, b
Is “on” when Yes is selected in the CheckBox or “off” when No is selected. Note that this pa =
Numerical values such as 0.9, pb = 0.9, pc = 0, pd = 0,... Are set by the Web master. Also, this Che
The ckBox is automatically activated when answering “I like cars” in the questionnaire. For example, as to whether or not the fuel efficiency of a commercial vehicle is known, a = 1: familiar with the fuel efficiency of a commercial vehicle, a = 0. 5: The fuel efficiency of a commercial vehicle is fairly known, a = 0: The fuel efficiency is not known at all.
Perform a stage check. Similarly, b (three stages, 0, 0.
5, 1): Know the price of a commercial vehicle, c (0,0.
5, 1): know the output performance, d (0, 0.5,
1): The same check is performed for various questionnaire items such as those familiar with the appearance. When the attributes are determined in this way, the attribute classification subroutine ends, and the process proceeds to step 402 in FIG.

[2-2-3-2. Continuation of Processing in Attribute Evaluation Unit] It is determined whether or not the user whose attribute has been determined in step 401 of FIG. Step 402) When the list of the evaluation targets is first seen, the process proceeds to Step 403, and the evaluation targets are displayed in the order of the advertisement fee and the like. Among them, the evaluation target for which a predetermined mark fee has been paid is marked with a prominent mark and displayed at the upper part which is easy to see. On the other hand, if it is not the first time, step 40
Proceed to 4.

Subsequently, in step 404, it is determined whether or not there is a new evaluation input. If there is a new evaluation input, the process proceeds to step 405, where the evaluation target No.
The evaluation content is displayed in association with the evaluation target or the evaluation itself for each belonging attribute.

For example, when the input of a new evaluation is made by “text”, at step 405, the text of the evaluation is displayed in association with the evaluation target of the evaluation target No or the evaluation itself for each belonging attribute. As this display method, for example, there is a method of enclosing the evaluation target (evaluation) with a rectangle or the like, enclosing the current evaluation sentence with a rectangle or the like, and displaying the evaluation sentence by connecting them with a line.

The input of the new evaluation is “5-level evaluation”.
If so, in step 405,
The average value of the five-level evaluation is calculated and displayed in association with the evaluation target of the evaluation target No or the evaluation itself for each belonging attribute. For example, the average value of the five-level evaluation for each attribute that the evaluator is a woman of 20 to 29 years is displayed.

When the input of a new evaluation is made by “voting whether or not the evaluation made for a certain evaluation object is useful for the evaluator”, in step 405, the evaluation object No. The total number of votes on whether the evaluation is useful or not is calculated and displayed in association with the evaluation itself for each belonging attribute. That is, as a result of repeating the evaluation evaluation, an evaluation set having a tree structure is completed. For example, the evaluations on which the branches of the evaluation set are based are displayed by adding the number of votes of “useful” for some middle branches and all of the twig evaluations from these middle branches.

However, if an evaluation object has not been evaluated a predetermined number of times or more (for example, 20 times or more), it is preferable that the evaluation is not displayed in all the modes. Further, the evaluation sentence, the number of evaluations, the number of useful votes, and the five-level evaluation value may be displayed in a light color, or may be always displayed at the lowermost position. At this time, a comment such as "start evaluation analysis when n more are collected" or "display" may be displayed. By increasing the time and effort for writing in this way, the writing of false information can be prevented, and the accuracy of evaluation can be improved by treating it as a regular evaluation when a certain number of evaluations are collected.

Next, in step 406, the reliability of the evaluation for each evaluation target No is displayed. This "reliability"
Is calculated, for example, by calculating the indulgence of evaluation for each evaluation target No, and according to this calculated value, referring to a map in which numerical values of 0 to 1.0 of generalization and normalization are assigned. Is displayed as “reliability” or the evaluation target No.
Each time, the sum of the integrative degrees from the lower layer is calculated and displayed as “reliability”.

The “accumulation degree of evaluation” refers to the number of evaluations, the number of votes for usefulness, or the title level determined by the number of evaluations or the number of votes for usefulness. The reliability of the evaluation for each evaluation target No.
Is stored in the database of the evaluation specified by (1), and is finally displayed as the “reliability” of the evaluation target which is the base point of the evaluation.

Next, in step 407, the e-mail, F-mail, etc. are sent to the evaluation itself (store or composer of the song) that has become the target of the new evaluation, or to the people belonging to the attribute of the new evaluator.
Using an AX, a telephone, or the like, the user is notified that a new evaluation has been made. This triggers the user who has seen the new evaluation to perform the evaluation again.

In step 408, points with a reward are given to the evaluator. This point will not be lost even if the reward is obtained, and the content of the reward will be changed according to the point. As a result, since the points do not disappear, the evaluator is motivated to return and evaluate even if a reward is obtained. In addition, since the content of the reward changes depending on the points, it is tempting to return and evaluate.

Subsequently, as shown in FIG.
At step 09, various information on the evaluation or the evaluator who performed the evaluation is displayed according to the request of a person who views the evaluation (hereinafter referred to as a viewer). In this way, the viewer can confirm what kind of evaluator the person who made the evaluation is, and thus can judge the credibility of the evaluation. on the other hand,
For the evaluator himself, looking at his own evaluation history,
Since the motivation of "let's evaluate again" can be motivated, evaluation motivation can be improved.

[0205] The display request by the viewer is a button,
This is configured to be performed by a pull-down menu or the like. Alternatively, one of the listed evaluators may be selected to display information about the evaluator. Further, the “viewer” includes not only a person who has come to see the evaluation but also the evaluator itself.

Examples of the “information on the evaluator” include the past evaluation history of the evaluator, the past effective evaluation history of each evaluator, the number of useful / useless votes, and the past number of the evaluator. And the number of effective evaluations. In addition, the above-mentioned "valid evaluation history" refers to an evaluation history that has not been erased by voting for uselessness,
"Effective ratings" means ratings that have not been erased by a vote of no use.

[0207] The display mode of these information is as follows.
Such information may be displayed as it is, or an evaluator with a higher evaluation number or an evaluator with a higher effective evaluation number may be displayed in an award mode. By displaying in the form of award as described above, the willingness to evaluate can be further improved.
In addition, by selecting a predetermined number of pieces of information on the evaluator and the like and displaying the selected information from the upper part that is easy to see, the list of the evaluators and the like fits on the screen and there is no need to scroll.

Next, at step 410, a request to continue browsing is made. In other words, if the mouse pointer is approaching the back button, "favorite", "file" or "x button" during the questionnaire or evaluation, it is considered that the questionnaire or the evaluation is about to be stopped halfway. Therefore, an arbitrary statement such as “Don't stop survey” is generated or displayed. As a result, it is possible to deter a user who is dissatisfied with writing during a questionnaire or evaluation from acting to quit on the way, and have as many people as possible answer the questionnaire.

In step 411, an evaluation reminder mail is transmitted. That is, an e-mail for urging the newly registered person of the belonging attribute of the evaluation target (store) to evaluate the evaluation target is given. As a result, the evaluation amount can be increased for a new evaluation object, and the bias of the evaluation amount can be eliminated. In addition, since the evaluation is urged only for persons with belonging attributes that are likely to be interested in the evaluation target, the probability of obtaining a new evaluation increases and high-quality evaluation can be obtained. Furthermore, it is also possible to send a spam mail to an indifferent person whose attributes do not match, thereby preventing a situation where the number of withdrawals increases.

In step 412, priority display of the evaluation result is performed according to the request of the viewer. As a mode of the priority display of the evaluation result, for example, the evaluation targets (for each same attribute) can be displayed from the upper part where the predetermined number is easy to see in ascending order of the evaluation number. When the evaluation target having a small number of evaluations in the past is evaluated in this way, it is easy to become a charismatic evaluator, and thus the evaluation motivation can be improved.

[0211] In addition, the evaluation targets (for each attribute) may be displayed in a descending order of the number of evaluations, from the upper part which is easy to see. By displaying in an easy-to-see position in this way, the advertising effect on the evaluation target is exerted, and on the other hand, the evaluation target also strives to obtain more evaluations. Furthermore, the evaluation targets (for each attribute) may be displayed in awarding manner from the upper part where the predetermined number is easy to see in the descending order of the number of evaluations. By displaying in an easy-to-view position and by awarding, a higher advertising effect can be obtained, so that other stores are improved to be awarded.

[0212] The above-mentioned "award mode" refers to a mark, a frame, a person, or a pet on which a word for identifying an evaluation object is attached on a podium from first to third or sixth place. In the list from the first place to the predetermined lower rank, put words that can identify the evaluation target, and immediately next to it, gold, silver and copper, diamond, ruby, sapphire and other crowns, rings,
A pendant or the like may be marked. Of course, it is good to describe the numerical value of the number of evaluations that is the basis of the award.

As a mode of preferential display of the evaluation result, a predetermined number of evaluation targets (for each same attribute) may be displayed in the descending order of the average value of the five-level evaluation from the upper part which is easy to see. The average value of the five-level evaluation is calculated for each of the evaluation targets up to the decimal point, and is ranked in consideration of the value below the decimal point. In this way, by displaying in an easy-to-see position in the descending order of the average value of the five-level evaluation, an advertising effect is exhibited, and efforts are made to obtain a higher evaluation even in the evaluation target.

Furthermore, in the descending order of the average value of the five-level evaluation,
A predetermined number can also be displayed in an award form from the top which is easy to see. In addition to displaying in such an easy-to-see position and awarding, higher advertising effectiveness can be obtained,
Other stores improve to be awarded.

Conversely, a predetermined number of evaluation targets (for each attribute) may be displayed in the order from the lowest average value of the five-level evaluation from the upper part which is easy to see. By displaying the information in such an easy-to-see position, the advertising effect is obtained, and the store makes an effort to obtain a good evaluation in the future.

In step 413, a malicious evaluator and an evaluation target are registered and displayed by the Web master. That is, a malicious evaluator and a malicious evaluation target are registered by a keyword search for an evaluation sentence by the Web master, and a list is created. This makes it possible to eliminate slander or the like by the malicious evaluator, and also to publicize a shop where lie information is flown or a shop where the information is circulated, thereby minimizing damage to consumers. Note that the above “keyword search” refers to a flowchart of an evaluation reception unit described later (a prohibited word for each belonging attribute that could not be found by the automatic search in step 813 in FIG. Words) as a keyword.

In step 414, the number of writes, the five-level evaluation value, the number of votes, and the like are displayed visually by pictures, graphs, figures, and the like for each attribute in accordance with the request of the viewer. This makes the evaluation data easier to understand. In this case, the attributes are gender, age, and the like.

As an example of the above visual display,
There are radar charts and bar graphs. Further, the number of writes, the number of votes, and the like may be displayed in one image for each predetermined unit number for each attribute. For example, if the number of units represented by one chair is 5, and the number of writings is 7, one chair, 2/5 are colored, and the remaining 3/5 are uncolored chairs. Represents "7". In this case, it is preferable to write an explanatory note indicating that "one chair corresponds to five writings" on a help screen or the like.

At step 415, attribute images of the store manager, evaluator and the like are displayed. As an image display of the store manager, for example, the store is a high-grade bar, and the store manager is 40 years old.
For example, if you are a teenager, you have a black hat in a tuxedo and a beard in a tuxedo.If you are in your 60s, you have a white beard. Each feature is displayed as an image that expresses it simply. This attribute image may be selected from a preset image list by the store manager or the evaluator, or image data created by the user may be used as it is. Alternatively, a photograph of oneself captured by an image scanner may be used. As a result, the expressive power of the attribute image can be improved and facilitated.

In step 416, according to the request of the viewer, the transition of the evaluation with respect to time or the product of the evaluation nest structure with respect to time are displayed. That is, when the transition of the evaluation with respect to time is displayed, the change of the evaluation with respect to the evaluation target is represented by a five-step evaluation value on the vertical axis and the elapsed time on the horizontal axis, so that the transition of the evaluation for each elapsed time can be displayed. it can. The five-level evaluation value may be obtained by a moving average calculation formula (Equation 1) described later. In this way, for example, a change in the evaluation when a new song appears can be recognized at a glance. Note that this 5
The grade evaluation value may be an evaluation value according to the attribute of the evaluator, or may be an evaluation value for each evaluation item such as rhythmic feeling, tragicness, and enjoyment of the music.

When the product of the evaluation nest structure with respect to time is displayed, the horizontal axis represents time,
Alternatively, the evaluation order is set, and the vertical axis is the total number of evaluations. Then, when a plurality of evaluations are performed for a certain evaluation, from the time when the certain evaluation is performed or the order of evaluation, when the evaluation performed for a certain evaluation occurs, one by one is plotted with the same color. , The total number of evaluations on the vertical axis is increased. In this way, it is possible to see at a glance that an evaluation is an evaluation that has triggered a lot of further evaluations. As a result, it is possible to improve the recognizability of the evaluation reliability.

Subsequently, as shown in FIG.
At 17, an evaluation list for each attribute is displayed according to the request of the viewer. That is, if the viewer wants to display only the evaluation information of a specific attribute, and the viewer selects the attribute, only the evaluation performed by the evaluator of the attribute is displayed in a list. Here, "attribute" refers to gender, age, past purchased products, past online shopping amount, average value of online shopping amount (moving average), time of purchase, specific magazine purchasing experience, These are the attributes that were picked up in the questionnaire, such as whether or not they are owned. As a result, it is possible to provide only the evaluation information for each attribute, so that it becomes easier for the user to know who the customer group of the shop is and what kind of evaluation is obtained.

At step 418, grouping statistical processing is performed. That is, useful evaluation data can be obtained by grouping persons who have performed the same evaluation on a certain evaluation target and performing various statistical processes. In this case, by naming the group name “-store-evaluation Gr”, it is possible to easily grasp the characteristics of the group. It makes it easier to understand what the group is about.

It is desirable that such a group name is determined as follows. That is, among the keywords in the evaluation sentences of this group,
Naming is performed by determining the group name by combining the top and second keywords, or by combining this first keyword with the name to be evaluated. For example,
By giving a name such as "Yakiniku Korean Hotel Tasty Gr" and making the name express the state, other people can see the profile of the evaluator and easily know which Gr it belongs to, and at the same time, The content can be easily understood.

Also, by grouping persons who have made the same evaluation for a certain evaluation object, in other words, by grouping people having similar values, how this group makes other evaluation objects You can easily know if you are evaluating Further, when a new evaluation is received for this group, a mail notifying the fact can be easily sent to the members of this group automatically (see step 407 in FIG. 4). This triggers another evaluation.

Also, in response to a request from a general viewer or a store manager who wishes to formulate a business policy in the future, a regular (for example, 3
Each month), set a group from a plurality of attributes as desired, statistically process each evaluation for each group, display the result, and attach a report destination and a standard sentence such as a greeting as destination. You can also report in the form of a report. Note that a manager who does not need such a standard sentence may be notified by attaching the graphed data as it is. Here, "notification" means that notification can be made in different modes according to requests, such as e-mail, automatic mechanical voice telephone, and facsimile.

In step 419, the evaluation comment is notified to the evaluation target. As a result, the evaluation target can be motivated to improve the content and the like based on the notified evaluation comment. For example, if the store to be evaluated is a store, an evaluation comment is sent to the store manager of the store. As a result, it is possible to improve motivation to improve the contents of the shop based on the notified evaluation comment.

As a means for notifying the above-mentioned evaluation object (store manager, etc.), e-mail, telephone, FAX or the like is used. When this notification is performed by telephone, a text including an evaluation sentence, for example, a standard greeting sentence on the telephone is added, the evaluation sentence is read out, and a text that ties together is read out and notified.

[0229] The notification to the above-mentioned evaluation target can be made into a list for each attribute and notified in response to a request from the evaluation target. In other words, a person with the same attribute often uses the same notification text, so by listing it, it is easy for the evaluator with this attribute to understand the overall text to be written. It may be possible to collectively reply to evaluators having the same attribute.

[0230] In step 420, a thank-mail from the evaluation target (for example, a store manager) is returned to the evaluator or the like. This thank-you email is sent to the evaluator or the like using facsimile, telephone, e-mail, etc., and serves as a means of resolving misunderstandings and as an appealing means for purchasing or visiting the evaluation target again. I do.

That is, the evaluation subject comments on this evaluation by e-mail, facsimile, telephone, or the like to the evaluator or the like who has evaluated the evaluation target. In the case of FAX, the data may be temporarily converted to text data by OCR and then transferred by e-mail from the server. In the case of a telephone call, it can be converted into an e-mail by automatic voice-to-text conversion and returned.

When a request for changing the evaluation value is sent from a certain evaluation object to the Web master (step 42).
1), in step 422, the Web master determines whether or not to permit the change of the evaluation value of the evaluation object. If so, the process proceeds to step 423. Can be changed. For example, a Web site is notified by a notification from (a store manager of) an evaluation target.
When the master understands that the store is new and improved, the Web master permits the change of the evaluation value of the evaluation target.

On the other hand, if the Web master does not permit the change of the evaluation value in step 422, step 4
24, it is determined whether or not any improvement has been made to the evaluation object. If it is determined that the evaluation object has been improved, the processing proceeds to step 425, and the evaluation value of the evaluation object is changed by a method described later. You. On the other hand, if it is determined that no improvement has been made, the evaluation value is not changed, and the process proceeds to step 426, where an improvement request mail is sent to the evaluation target.

Here, a method of changing the evaluation value for the evaluation object will be described. For example, when the evaluation target (store manager) self-reports that a new store has been opened so that the evaluation result can be canceled, the weighted average weight is reduced. That is, the “average value of the five-level evaluation” described in step 405 of FIG. 4 is a weighted average, and the calculation formula at that time is as follows.

(Equation 1)

In the above equation, when X is small (light), the weighted average value as the evaluation value is easy to change, and when X is large (heavy), it is hard to change. Therefore, for example, when a new store is opened in a certain evaluation target (store), by setting X to gradually change from a small value to the original heavy value for each input of the evaluation after the new store is opened. In addition, the evaluation of the state immediately after the refurbishment can invalidate the past accumulation so far to make a correct evaluation.

As another example of a method of changing the evaluation value for the evaluation object, when the five-level evaluation so far is poor, that is, when “3.0 or less (average or less)”, When the evaluation value is set to “3 (average)” or when the five-level evaluation is good (3.0 or more), a predetermined value may be added to further increase the evaluation value in the positive direction.

In step 426, an improvement request mail is sent to an evaluation object with a bad reputation whose five-level evaluation is equal to or less than a predetermined value. As a result, it is possible to increase the consciousness of improving the evaluation target. It is desirable to set the frequency of the improvement request mail so that the mail frequency decreases with time. We send lots of improvement request emails to poorly-reputed evaluation targets so that they can be improved as soon as possible. However, for evaluation targets that do not dare to improve, such emails are just noisy, so we reduce the frequency of emails. Further, it is desirable that the improvement request mail be stopped when the evaluation of the evaluation target becomes 3.0 or more and started when the evaluation target mail becomes equal to or less than a predetermined value.
As described above, the attribute evaluation unit ends and the process returns.

[2-2-4. Processing in evaluation reception section]
This subroutine is started by pressing an evaluation input switch or the like when an evaluator tries to input his / her own evaluation to an evaluation target.

As shown in FIG. 8, first, at step 80
In step 1, the identification code ID of the evaluator who wants to input an evaluation is input. In step 802, the ID
A window is opened to hear whether or not the evaluator is suitable for evaluating the evaluation target, for example, whether or not the evaluator has necessary experience as an evaluator such as purchasing a certain product. If the evaluator is not suitable for the evaluation, the evaluator returns an apology sentence indicating that the evaluation cannot be performed. On the other hand, if it is determined that it is suitable for evaluation, the process proceeds to step 803.

At step 803, it is checked whether or not the same evaluator has repeatedly performed the evaluation more than a predetermined number of times. Specifically, for one evaluation target, the same IP
Check if the address is accessed from the site. It is also possible to check whether the number is the same telephone or mobile phone number, or whether the user has the same mail address. Here, it is determined whether or not the evaluation has been repeatedly performed a predetermined number of times or more. This is because there is a case where the access is repeatedly performed two or three times in order to add or change the evaluation content.

If the same evaluator has repeatedly evaluated the same evaluation target a predetermined number of times or more, the process proceeds to step 804, where it is determined whether or not the repeated evaluation is valid. to decide. As a result, it is possible to eliminate mere point earning and so-called “Sakura”, and generalization of evaluation can be achieved.

That is, in step 804, in order to determine whether or not the repeated evaluation is valid,
It is asked whether the repeated evaluation has been performed after a predetermined period. This is because usually two or three times of information addition can be considered. If the predetermined period has passed, the process proceeds to step 805, where the evaluation history is repeatedly cleared, and the process proceeds to step 806.

On the other hand, if the predetermined period has not passed, it is asked in step 807 whether or not the current evaluation is a correction of the previous evaluation. Because it is high, return as it is. On the other hand, if the current evaluation is a correction of the previous evaluation, it is determined in step 808 whether or not the number of corrections is greater than a predetermined number. If less than the predetermined number, the flow proceeds to step 806. On the other hand, if the number of corrections is equal to or more than the predetermined number, the correction is not permitted and the process returns.

Next, in step 806, it is determined whether or not the evaluation input is the same evaluation target at fixed time intervals. If it is determined that the evaluation input is at fixed time intervals, the flow advances to step 809. The reason for determining whether or not the evaluation input is at a fixed time interval in this way is that when a certain store sends information from a different telephone or site to make it different from the actual one to attract customers, usually at regular intervals Is likely to be evaluated.

Subsequently, in step 809, it is determined whether or not the evaluation frequency of the evaluation target is equal to or more than a predetermined number.
If the number of times is equal to or less than the predetermined number, the evaluation at regular intervals returns without doing anything because there is a suspicion that false information may be flowing due to intentional information manipulation by the hacker. On the other hand, when the evaluation frequency is equal to or more than the predetermined number, the evaluation value does not change even if the information is slightly manipulated. Note that the “constant time interval” refers to a case where an interval between the input of a certain evaluation and the input of the next evaluation is just an interval for making a call again.

Next, at step 810, the identification code ID of the evaluator is the same as the ID of the experienced purchaser provided from the partner site or the ID of the experienced person who has used the functions of the site. It is determined whether or not. If they are not the same, the process returns without receiving the evaluation input.
Move to 1. The “identification code ID” may be an e-mail address, a telephone number, an address, or the like.

Subsequently, in step 811, when the evaluator selects an evaluation target, the evaluation target is accepted.
If this evaluation target is “other evaluations” itself, the evaluation target is automatically jumped to the evaluation input routine by pressing the evaluation input button when browsing the evaluation. Is selected. On the other hand, when the evaluation target is a person or an object, the evaluation target is selected by a click operation or the like from a list of evaluation targets set in advance.

In step 812, it is determined whether or not there is a request for input of an evaluation. If there is no request for input of an evaluation, the process returns. On the other hand, if there is an input request, the flow shifts to step 813 to receive an evaluation.

It should be noted that it is desirable to configure so that a predetermined prohibited word is automatically searched when receiving an evaluation in step 813. That is, when the mode of the evaluation by the evaluator is an evaluation sentence, it is searched whether or not the input sentence is included in the evaluation sentence. It is configured to notify the master or warn the evaluator. Here, keywords that are generally rude or dropped are detected. In addition, words that should never be used in the evaluation, such as "death", are refused to input, and furthermore, attention is given to words that seem to be somewhat problematic in terms of level. Take.

Further, a configuration may be adopted in which the evaluator is picked up from the evaluation sentence detected by the keyword search, and the Web master performs a registration operation, thereby creating and displaying a list of slander users. Furthermore, the evaluation sentence detected by the keyword search is picked up, and W
The eb master may perform a registration operation to create and display a list of evaluation targets in question. This returns.

[2-2-5. Process in Useless Evaluation Processing Unit] As shown in FIG. 9, in step 901, it is determined whether or not a certain evaluation performed by another evaluator is useful for a user of the evaluation site H according to the present invention. Vote “useful” or “useless” to get an answer. Then, in step 902, it is determined whether or not the number of votes “useless” is equal to or higher than a predetermined level. On the other hand, if the number of votes “useless” is less than the predetermined level, it means that the evaluation is recognized as valid, and the process returns as it is. The “predetermined level” refers to a predetermined value or a predetermined ratio set in advance.

Next, in step 903, it is determined whether or not there is a vote of "useful" for the evaluation.
Then, the process goes to No. 4 and the Web master is notified and the process returns. This allows legitimate evaluations made by multiple evaluators to be
Even if the evaluation target side intentionally deletes it, the Web master can be overlooked by judging the situation that the number of votes "useless" is concentrated in a certain period etc. There is.

On the other hand, if there is no vote of “useful” in step 903, the evaluation is automatically deleted in step 905. This is because it is considered that it is not worth posting since only the vote of "useless" is given. In this way, by automatically deleting the evaluations that have been rendered useless, appropriate processing can be performed without increasing the number of steps of the Web master.

[2-2-6. Processing in Ranking Unit] As shown in FIG. 10, in step 1001, evaluators are ranked. As a method of this ranking, first, for each of predetermined items such as the shopping experience of the evaluator obtained from the questionnaire, the number and quality of belongings, the evaluation experience, etc., the average value of these items is obtained. The overall rating of the evaluator is given.

For example, as a ranking based on shopping experience, the user may have purchased 10 or more times, 20 or more times,
It is ranked in a stepwise numerical value such as 30 times or more, and the highest rank is "super shopper". In addition, as the ranking based on the evaluation experience, for example, the ranking is based on a numerical value such as (the number of evaluations + the number of effective evaluations * 2) / 3, and the highest rank is "charismatic evaluator".
And the highest rank of the overall rank is "TV appearance recommended critic"
Etc., and as a critic, introduce it with a profile with a highly accurate questionnaire with the name turned down to TV stations etc.
Promote appearance requests and talk requests from TV stations and the like.

Next, in step 1002, an illustration corresponding to the rank is given to the ranked evaluator. For example, a higher rank gives an authoritative and dignified illustration. As a result, the state of authority of the evaluator can be understood at a glance.

At step 1003, the evaluation comment of the higher-ranked evaluator can be preferentially displayed in accordance with the rank of the evaluator at the request of the viewer. That is, usually, the evaluation comment is displayed as a tree structure according to the attribute, but a button for displaying by evaluator rank is provided at the place, and when the viewer presses the button, the evaluation comment is displayed according to the evaluator rank. , The evaluation comment by the evaluator is displayed in the upper part that is easy to see in the order of higher rank. Thus, the viewer can easily obtain the evaluation comment of the evaluator having the higher rank.

In step 1004, according to the rank of the evaluator, a weight for scoring the evaluator is set.
That is, useful / standless votes are usually one vote per person, but for those with a high evaluator rank, several votes are given to one person according to their level, and a weighted average of five-level evaluation values In the calculation, a flag is set so that the calculation is performed in five loops as if the five-level evaluation values for several persons were input. As a result, it is possible to preferentially evaluate an evaluator with a high rank.

[2-2-7. Processing in priority display section]
As shown in FIG. 11, in step 1101, each evaluation is displayed in various modes according to the display mode specified by a person (viewer) who views a certain evaluation.
In step 102, it is determined whether or not the display mode matches the title of the display mode is equal to or greater than a predetermined value. If the value is equal to or greater than the predetermined value, the process proceeds to step 1103. Will be displayed. On the other hand, if the value is less than the predetermined value, the process returns. Alternatively, in step 1102, it is determined whether or not the one that matches the title of the display mode is equal to or less than a predetermined value. May be displayed on the screen.

That is, a button for each display mode is placed on the screen for viewing a normal evaluation, and when this button is clicked, a check button for each display mode is displayed so that the display mode can be checked and selected. . Further, the present invention is not limited to a certain evaluation, and can be displayed in a similar manner for the entire evaluation or a certain genre.

For example, when the viewer wants to display from the viewpoint of “how many people think this evaluation is useful”, in step 1102,
It is determined whether or not the sum of a certain evaluation target (evaluation itself, the entire evaluation, a specific genre, a person or an object, etc.) and the number of votes of “useful” among the evaluations below the evaluation target is equal to or more than a predetermined value C. If it is determined that the value is equal to or larger than the predetermined value C, in step 1103, each of the evaluations constituting the tree structure below the evaluation target is evaluated as “useful”.
Are displayed on the screen from the top which is easy to see, or by designating, in the order of the most votes. On the other hand, if the value is less than the predetermined value C, the process returns. This allows viewers to
Highly reliable evaluations can be easily picked up.

If the viewer wants to display from the viewpoint of "how many people consider this evaluation useless", similarly, in step 1102, a certain evaluation object and its It is determined whether or not the total number of votes “useless” among the evaluations lower than the evaluation target is equal to or greater than a predetermined value C. If the total is greater than or equal to the predetermined value C, in step 1103, the evaluation target Each of the evaluations that make up the lower tree structure is displayed on the screen from the top, which is easy to see, or as specified, in the order of the most voting “useless”. On the other hand, if the value is less than the predetermined value C, the process returns.
Thus, the viewer can easily recognize which evaluation is the gaseneta.

In the case where the viewer wants to display an evaluation object having a large number of evaluations (including the number of evaluation comments, the number of evaluations on a five-point scale, and the number of useful / ineffective votes), Similarly, in step 1102, it is determined whether or not the sum of the number of writings of a certain evaluation target and the evaluations below the evaluation target is equal to or greater than a predetermined value C. In 1103, each of the evaluations that constitute the tree structure below the evaluation target is sorted in descending order of the number of writes.
It is displayed on the screen from the top which is easy to see or specified. On the other hand, if it is less than the predetermined value D, the process returns. Accordingly, when the number of evaluations is large, the viewer can easily determine which evaluation is the gaseneta by himself / herself.

Further, if the viewer wants to display from the viewpoint of "Which evaluation target has a small number of writes," in step 1102, a certain evaluation target and an evaluation lower than the evaluation target are evaluated. It is determined whether or not the sum of the number of write operations is equal to or smaller than a predetermined value E.
In the following cases, in step 1103, each of the evaluations constituting the tree structure below the evaluation target is displayed on the screen from the upper part that is easy to see or by designation in ascending order of the number of writings. on the other hand,
If it is larger than the predetermined value E, the process returns. Thereby, if the number of evaluations is small, in other words, if the evaluation target is evaluated, it is possible to easily select an evaluation target that is easy to obtain the title of the charismatic evaluator.

[2-2-8. Processing in the comprehensive evaluation section]
As shown in FIG. 12, in step 1201, an overall evaluation value that seems to be general is obtained for each evaluation item for each evaluation object as an evaluation method for previously obtaining an overall evaluation value for each evaluation object by the Web master. For this purpose, a weighting value of 0 to 1.0 or a predetermined function is set (input). In step 1202, the viewer assigns a weighting value of 0 to 1.0 or a predetermined value in order to distinguish the evaluation item of interest from the others for each evaluation item for each evaluation object according to his / her own values. Set (input) the function. For example, if the viewer likes Chinese food, especially if he likes dumplings, evaluation items are provided for each skin, sauce, and ingredient, and a weight value (0 to 1) is set for each of those items. .0) or a predetermined function can be set.

It is to be noted that the check box of the five-level evaluation value for each evaluation item is checked here. That is, for example, if the gyoza skin is set to be very good, 1.0, slightly good, 0.7, normal, 0.5, slightly bad, 0.3, and no use at all, The evaluator is easy to evaluate, and the variation in evaluation among evaluators is reduced. In addition, it is preferable for the user of the evaluation who sees the evaluation to understand the relative relationship between the numerical value and the good or bad because it is easy to understand.

Then, in step 1203, based on the weighting value or predetermined function set by the viewer and the evaluation method set in advance by the Web master in step 1201, the evaluation object desired by the viewer is searched.
Display the search results. In this case, for each evaluation target, an evaluation genre may be provided for each setting variation of the function and the weighting value, and, for example, a classification such as “soup-oriented” or “noodle-oriented” in ramen may be made. Thereby, only the evaluation for each genre can be displayed.

Here, in step 1201, W
An evaluation method for obtaining an overall evaluation value for each evaluation target set in advance by the eb master will be described. That is, as a first example (Case 1) of this evaluation method, for example, a numerical value s (0 to 1.0) set for each evaluation item * its evaluation value h (very good 1.0, good 0.75, ordinary 0.
There is a method of calculating the sum total of 5, 0.25 and 0). Thus, even if there are a plurality of evaluation items, the evaluation result is represented by a numerical value such as "1.0", whereby the evaluation becomes easy to understand intuitively, and the relative evaluation of the evaluation itself can be performed.

For example, in the case of a Chinese restaurant, the clerk's attitude (s * h) = 0 * 1 Nirareba = 0.2 * 0.5 Sweet pork = 0.2 * 0.5 Gyoza = 0.6 * 1.0 And the sum is 0 * 1 + 0.2 * 0.5 + 0.2 * 0.5
As in the case of + 0.6 * 1.0 = 0.8, the sum of the evaluation values is calculated for all the evaluation targets of the evaluation target, the evaluation target group, and the evaluation target genre specified by the viewer.

Therefore, when a person wants to eat gyoza, in examining a Chinese restaurant with a good gyoza, in step 1202, the value s for the gyoza is set to “1” and the others are set to “0”. For example, since items other than “gyoza” are “0”, in step 1203, a delicious dumpling store can be picked up from Chinese restaurants.

The second example of the above evaluation method (Case)
As 2), for example, a numerical value (0 to 1.0) for each evaluation item for each evaluation group * its evaluation value (very good 1.0, good 0.75, ordinary 0.5, bad 0.25, very bad Bad 0)
Is calculated, and a numerical value (0 to 0) for each evaluation group is calculated.
1.0) * There is a method of calculating the sum of the sum 1 of the evaluation groups. Thereby, evaluation can be performed for each group.

For example, in the case of a Chinese restaurant, (a) the sum of the clerk attitude groups 1: a sense of cleanliness (s0.1 *
h0.5) + language usage (s0.2 * h0.5) + disposition of tableware (s0.7 * h1) = 0.85 (b) Nila Leba Group's sum 1: Nirayaki Kagen (s
0.5 * h0.5) + liver fried chicken (s0.5 * h)
0.5) + Shigeken (s0.5 * h0.5) = 0.75 (c) Sum of the sour pork group 1: Sauce (s1.0 * h0.
5) + Potato (s1.0 * h0.5) + Mushroom (s0.2 * h0) + Onion (s0.5 * h1.0)
+ Meat (s1.0 * h1.0) = 2.5 (d) Sum of gyoza group 1: skin (s1.0 * h0.2)
5) + sauce (s0 * h0) + tool (s1.0 * h1.0)
= 1.25, and if you mainly eat sour pork and gyoza, total = attitude group: s0 * 0.85 + leek group: s0.5 *
h0.75 + Sugar pork group: s1 * h2.5 + Gyoza group: s1 * h1.25 = 4.125 This is a Chinese restaurant with an overall evaluation of 4.125.

Therefore, when a person wants to eat delicious skin dumplings, when examining a Chinese restaurant of delicious skin dumplings, in step 1202, the value s of the skin dumplings is set to “1”, and the others are set to “1”. If it is set to “0”, in step 1203, a delicious skin dumpling shop can be picked up.

Further, a third example of the above evaluation method (Case)
3) is a numerical value (0 for each evaluation item) for each evaluation group.
-1.0) * Its evaluation value (very good 1.0, good 0.7
5, normal 0.5, bad 0.25, very bad 0) Function A
Is calculated, and the numerical value (0 to
1.0) * There is a method of calculating the function A of the evaluation group.

For example, in the case of a Chinese restaurant: (a) Clerk attitude group: X = cleanliness (s0.1 * h
0.5) * Wording (s0 * h0.5) * How to place tableware (s0.7 * h1) = 0, and set to "0" if the attitude of the clerk is a little strange. (B) Leek Lever Group: Y = Nara Yaki Kagen (s0.
5 * h0.5) + liver fried chicken (s0.5 * h0.
5) + Shigeken (s0.5 * h0.5) = 0.75 (c) Sweet and sour pork group: Z = sauce (s1.0 * h0.5)
+ Potatoes (s1.0 * h0.5) + bamboo shoots (s
0.2 * h0) + onion (s0.5 * h1.0) + meat (s1.0 * h1.0) = 2.5 (d) Gyoza group sum 1: G = peel (s1.0 * h)
0.25) + sauce (s0 * h0) + tool (s1.0 * h)
1.0) = 1.25, and the function A = X * (Y * s0.1 + Z * s1.0) *
By substituting the above values for (G * s1.0) * (G * s1.0), the function A = 0, and in step 1203, a store with a bad attitude of the clerk is not selected even if the gyoza and the sour pork are delicious. You can do so.

In step 1203, the user searches for the evaluation target desired by the viewer, and when the search result is displayed, it is determined in step 1204 whether the search result is satisfactory for the viewer. And
If satisfied, return. On the other hand, if the user is not satisfied, the process proceeds to step 1205, where the weighting value or function is corrected by the viewer, and the corrected content is displayed on the bulletin board (step 120).
6).

Subsequently, in step 1207, a vote for or against this correction is made, and in step 1208, it is determined whether the number of votes in favor of the correction is greater than or equal to a predetermined value. If the number of votes in favor of the correction is less than a predetermined value, the number of people who approve the correction is small, in other words, the conventional evaluation method is sufficient, and the process returns.

On the other hand, if the number of votes in favor of the correction is equal to or more than the predetermined value, the flow advances to step 1209 to "the evaluation method set in advance by the Web master is not appropriate, and it is appropriate to correct". Is notified to the Web master,
In step 1210, the evaluation method is changed by the Web master, and the process returns. With this, the general form of the evaluation method for obtaining the overall evaluation value for each evaluation target can be determined by voting, so that it is possible to set a general function and a weighted numerical value that are not biased toward personal preference. .

[2-2-9. Processing in notification processing unit]
As shown in FIG. 13, in step 1301, it is determined whether or not there is a new evaluation input. If there is no new evaluation input, the process proceeds to step 1302, where the evaluation target has Notify the evaluator of the response (return) from the evaluator and display it on the interactive bulletin board.

Note that the response from the above-mentioned evaluation target is FA
X, telephone, e-mail, or the like is used, and the display on the interactive bulletin board is performed using each identification code to maintain anonymity. Further, the interactive bulletin board is configured so that a change in the content of the notice from the evaluation target is accepted, but no other change is made. The reason is that it is preferable that the store manager to be evaluated is provided with an opportunity to excuse the evaluation so that the manager can rewrite it once again even after defending it once. In addition, it is not preferable that another person rewrites the clerk's defense without permission, and it is not preferable that another person rewrites the evaluation. In addition, it is OK for the person who made the evaluation to rewrite the evaluation by himself, but if the manager's explanation is on, the conversation will be lost, and the answer will generally end with the manager's explanation, so only the manager can change it It is what it was. In addition, each evaluation target can be directly written on the interactive bulletin board in addition to the response to the evaluator by e-mail or the like.

Here, the “interactive bulletin board” refers to a mode for displaying a normal evaluation for a certain evaluation target, such as time series (oldest), reverse timeseries (newest),
One of the modes of the check boxes that enumerate the order of ascending order, the order of ascending order, the order of ascending order, the order of ascending order, etc. is provided with an "interactive mode between the evaluation target and the evaluator". In the evaluation display mode.

Subsequently, in step 1303, a question from the viewer is accepted. For example, when a question BOX button provided in a screen displaying an interactive bulletin board is pressed, a question entry board for a Q & A bulletin board is displayed, and the question is written on the writing board and stored. And, at the request of the viewer,
The Q & A bulletin board is displayed, and the contents of this question are displayed on the Q & A bulletin board (step 1304).

In step 1305, when the "useful button" provided on the comment side of the representative (store manager, etc.), questioner, or respondent of each evaluation target is pressed on the interactive bulletin board or the Q & A bulletin board, The voting result is counted for the comment of and the result is displayed near each comment. This makes it easy to see which comments are worthy of trust.

In step 1306, while the Q & A bulletin board is being displayed, if a person who can see and answer this Q makes a request by clicking on the comment itself, a reply writing board for the Q & A bulletin board is displayed, and Have them write on the writing board and memorize them.

At step 1307, when the writing of A of Q & A is completed, the system asks the respondent whether or not they have experience (purchase, reservation, use experience). The judge judges that the person is appropriate as the evaluator, and requests the respondent for a new evaluation (step 1308). Then, when there is a response that a new evaluation may be made, an evaluation input board is displayed, and the evaluation is written on the evaluation input board.
On the other hand, if the respondent is determined to be inappropriate as an evaluator, the process returns without doing anything.

On the other hand, if there is a new evaluation input in step 1301, the process proceeds to step 1309,
The new evaluation is notified to the evaluation target by facsimile, telephone, e-mail, or the like, and in step 1310, the new evaluation is displayed on a public bulletin board. And step 131
In 1, it is determined whether or not there is a response (return) from the evaluation target. If there is a response from the evaluation target, the process proceeds to step 1302, and the normal processing as described above is continued to step 1308. . On the other hand, if there is no response from the evaluation target in step 1311, the process returns.

Steps 1309 to 131
1 is activated each time a new evaluation is input during normal processing. That is, when a new evaluation is input, the content is immediately notified to the evaluation target.

As described above, when a new evaluation is made, the contents are immediately notified to the evaluation target and displayed on the bulletin board. Therefore, even if the new evaluation is an invalid evaluation, A response from the evaluation target for solving the misunderstanding can be made in a public place, and the user can grasp all the exchanges between the two, so that damage to the evaluation target can be reduced.

In addition, by returning a comment on the evaluation from the evaluation target (such as a store manager) by displaying the information on the interactive bulletin board provided for each evaluation or returning directly to the evaluator, the misunderstanding can be solved. Place can be provided. As a method of this return, a return may be made from the evaluation target using E-mail or the like, and in this case, the evaluator can surely see the evaluator. Further, by repeating the question-and-answer session between the evaluator and the evaluation target, it is possible to obtain knowledge deeper than the level of this question.

[2-2-10. Processing in Attribute Matching Processing Unit] As shown in FIG. 14, in step 1401, the number of members belonging to a certain attribute is entered in a workinggram (hereinafter referred to as wk) n. In step 1402, it is determined whether or not n = 0. If n = 0, the process is terminated. If n is not 0, the process proceeds to step 1403, and the number of members belonging to another attribute is set in i of wk. .

In step 1404, it is determined whether or not i = 0. If i = 0, the flow advances to step 1414; if not, the flow advances to step 1405. In step 1405, for a certain attribute (for example, a specific music genre), the designation of the number n is determined in order to determine whether the number n corresponds to each attribute item that specifies the favorite partner of the number i. Multiply the attribute numerical value degree required for the partner set for each attribute item to be set for each attribute item of number i, and calculate the sum of the multiplied values for all the attribute items. The function G1 [i] (n) is input to z1 [i]. It can be said that the greater the calculated value of G1 [i] (n), the higher the degree to which the attribute belongs. As a result, a person who seems to be fit can be selected by himself.

Also, in step 1406, S14
In order to determine whether the number n corresponds to each attribute item that specifies a favorite partner of the number i for an attribute different from 05 (for example, outdoor),
Similarly to step 1405, the attribute numerical value degree required for the partner set for each attribute item specified by the number n is multiplied by the attribute numerical value degree set for each attribute item of the number i, to obtain the attribute item. A function G2 [i] (n) for calculating the sum of the multiplied values for all is z2
Enter in [i].

Here, G1 [i] (n) and G2 [i]
As for (n), the former indicates, for example, the degree of belonging to a specific music genre, and the latter indicates the degree of belonging to outdoor. In this way, a plurality of belonging degrees can be set. Thereby, the association of the introduced person can be changed for each of the groups.

Next, at step 1407, it is determined whether or not the combination of Mr. i and Mr. n is the first time.
In the case of the first time, that is, in the case of TT [i] [n] = 0, the process proceeds to step 1409. On the other hand, if the meeting between Mr. i and Mr. n is not the first time, but he does not like the contact with Mr. i, that is, if TT [i] [n] = 1, the process proceeds to step 1408, and the bulletin board dedicated to Mr. n 1 and the bulletin board 2, delete the written contents relating to Mr. i.

If n wants to contact with i, that is, if TT [i] [n] = 2, the process proceeds to step 1409. This allows the user to select whether or not contact is possible by looking at relevant information such as shape and profile, and when both are “OK”, presents each other's contact information. can do. Note that the TT [i] [n] is configured so that when the user looks at the bulletin boards 1 and 2 and selects whether or not to contact the user, the above numerical value is input.

Subsequently, steps 1409 and 14
In 10, it is determined whether each of Mr. i and Mr. n wants notification, and if at least one of Mr. i and Mr. n does not want to notify, step 1413.
The process proceeds to step 1411 if both i and n want to notify. Thereby, it is possible to cope with a person who does not like to be notified.

At step 1411, step 1
If z1 [i] input in 406 is larger than a predetermined value A, that is, if the degree of belonging of the attribute exceeds a certain level, an array zz1 [n] arranged in descending order of the degree of belonging
And stored. Similarly, for other attributes, if z2 [i] input in step 1407 is larger than a predetermined value B, that is, if the degree of belonging of the attribute exceeds a certain level, an array zz2 [ n] and stored (step 1412).

Subsequently, in step 1413, wk
Is decremented by 1, and the process returns to step 1404. If i = 0 in step 1404, step 1405 and the subsequent steps are repeated to check whether all members have the same attribute. If i = 0, step 1 is executed.
Proceed to 414.

[0299] In step 1414, related to the i in the order of the degree of the attribute 1 belonging to the bulletin board 1 of the dedicated bulletin board of the n, that is, the person with the number described in zz1 [n] [] Related information including the e-mail address is displayed in an easy-to-read order. Similarly, in step 1415, in the bulletin board 2 of the dedicated bulletin board of n, the i-th person is assigned in the descending order of the degree to which the attribute 2 belongs, that is, in order from the person whose number is described in zz2 [n] []. The related information including the e-mail address related to is displayed in an easy-to-read order. As a result, the user can be notified of the related information, and even a friend who seems to be able to get along can start by e-mail at first.

Subsequently, at step 1416, n is set to -1 in order to perform attribute matching check for other persons.
(Decrement), and the process returns to the step 1402. If n = 0 is not satisfied in step 1402, step 1403 is performed to check whether all members have the same attribute.
Thereafter, when n = 0, it is determined that the examination of the attribute matching of all the members has been completed, and the process returns.

[2-2-11. Processing in Game Addition Unit] As shown in FIG. 15, in step 1501, a random number from 0 to 1 and an evaluation writing number represented by a numerical value from 0 to 1 or an evaluation level indicating a level as an evaluator (In the questionnaire process in the questionnaire section above,
An evaluation level indicating that the purchase experience or evaluation in the evaluation target field is equal to or more than a predetermined value by voting “useful”, or F of these functions (an evaluation level indicating the number of written evaluations or a level as an evaluator) ) Is compared to determine whether the random number is larger. If the random number is larger, the process proceeds to step 1502, where 0 is inserted per flag. On the other hand, if the random number is smaller, the process proceeds to step 1503, where 1 is added per flag and used later.

In step 1504, the predetermined value 1 (the most incentive)> the predetermined value 2> the predetermined value 3 (the least incentive) is set.
At 05, the number of evaluation writings represented by numerical values from 0 to 1 or an evaluation level indicating a level as an evaluator, or the F of these functions is compared with the predetermined value, and the number of evaluation writings or the evaluation level is When the value is larger than the predetermined value 3 and is equal to or smaller than the predetermined value 2, that is, when there is little evaluation result, the game bingo is performed in steps 1506 to 1509.

Note that the reason for setting the predetermined value 1> the predetermined value 2> the predetermined value 3 is ambiguous for a human being with nuances such as "large / medium / small". For example, it is determined by the level of the incentive given by the game and the balance of the work evaluated.

When the number of evaluation writings or the evaluation level is
If the value is larger than the predetermined value 2 and equal to or smaller than the predetermined value 1, that is, if the evaluation result is medium, the steps 1510
In step 1513, game three 7 (slot machine) is performed. Further, when the value is larger than the predetermined value 1, that is, when the evaluation result is considerable, step 1514
At Step 1518, a game roulette is performed.

(Bingo) It is assumed that the bingo of the above-mentioned game has a fixed flag hit for a plurality of predetermined times from the start. Each time you write or answer a questionnaire, multiple vertical and horizontal squares are set, and the coordinates of the squares are referenced to mark the squares at those coordinates.
If the same mark is displayed side by side on a slanted grid, it will be a "hit", and if the number of pairs displayed side by side is large, the score will increase.

That is, in step 1506, it is determined whether or not the previously set flag per unit is 0. If the flag is 0, in step 1507, “bingo / miss” is set in the square so as to be in the form of the miss. Mark is displayed. On the other hand, in step 1506, fl
If the ag hit is 1, a mark is displayed in the box as “bingo hit” in step 1508 so as to achieve the hit state, and in step 1509, the point is point level 1 (for example, 1 point 1 point). (100 yen of the product discount ticket of yen). Note that there are a plurality of ways of hitting this bingo, and the multiplied value of the number of pairs displayed side by side and the point level 2 is given to the point.

(Three 7) In step 1510,
It is determined whether or not the previously set flag is 0, and 0
In the case of, in step 1511, “Three 7.
Is displayed. On the other hand, if the flag is 1 in step 1510, it is displayed in step 1512 in the form of “three 7 hits”, and in step 1513, the point is point level 2 (for example,
1000 points of 1 point 1 yen merchandise discount coupon).

(Roulette) In step 1514, m = {F (evaluation writing number or the like (variation similar to the above))-random number}% 256, and m is calculated as a numerical value from 1 to 256. In step 1515, the numerical value of 0 or 1 stored in [bet position] [m] per roulette as an array is read. This [Bet Position]
This is the position on the roulette designated by the player of this game, and the probability of hitting varies depending on the location. The greater the track record of evaluation, the easier it will be.

[0309] If [bet position] [m] = 0,
In step 1516, the mode of the loss is displayed. On the other hand, if [bet position] [m] = 1, step 1
At 517, the winning mode is displayed and step 15
At 18, a point level 3 (for example, 10000 yen of 1 point 1 yen commodity discount ticket) is given. The point level 3 has a different value depending on the betting position.

The routine of the game addition section may be executed not only at the time of writing the evaluation but also at the time of answering the questionnaire, or may be executed each time writing of one sentence or item for the questionnaire is completed. It may be. Needless to say, the type of game to be added is not limited to bingo, three 7, and roulette.

[2-2-12. Processing in Mobile Device Processing Unit] As shown in FIG. 16, in step 1601, a keyword search is executed in response to a request from a user of a mobile device whose membership has been registered, and one or more keywords related to the keyword are searched. List genres or evaluation targets. Note that the mobile device refers to a mobile phone, PHS, mobile PC, or the like.

At step 1602, the genre list listed by the keyword search or a part of the genre list in a tree structure is downloaded to the user's mobile device in response to the user's request. Here, "on request" specifies whether the content that the user wants to download is a list of keyword search results or a part of a tree-structured list. It is.

At step 1603, a certain genre selected by the user from the downloaded genre list is accepted by a number from a mobile phone or the like (this number matches the list number). The designation from the genre list may be made by voice instead of the number.

At step 1604, the evaluation target list is downloaded to the user's mobile device in response to the user's request. Here, the “request” refers to designating an evaluation target list or a specific evaluation target group from the genre specified by the number received in step 1603.

In other words, “on demand” means a genre with a wider range of tree-structured branches (for example, a restaurant), a genre in the middle region of Nakaeda (for example, a Chinese restaurant), In addition to the designation that it is a gyoza of twigs, the location information is also a designation such as Tokyo of Oeda, Minato-ku of Nakaeda, Higashi-Azabu-cho of twigs, etc. In step 1603, "Gyoza genre" and "Higashi-Azabu-cho" In step 1604, the mobile user downloads the list of "stores selling gyoza in Higashiazabu" desired by the user. The genre list is a Japanese syllabary index (alphabet index) list including a place list. As a result, information on a specific store in the city can be obtained.

In step 1605, a certain evaluation target selected by the user from the downloaded evaluation target list is accepted. This reception is performed by recognizing a number from a mobile phone or recognizing a voice, as in step 1603. In this way, the genre list to be evaluated is obtained from the evaluation site, the desired genre selected from the genre list is returned to the evaluation site, and the evaluation target list included in the selected genre is obtained, and the evaluation is performed. Since a desired evaluation target can be selected from the target list using the mobile communication device, the evaluation target can be selected in a short time.

Subsequently, in step 1606, it is determined whether the user's designated mode is a download mode for providing evaluation information (mouth information) or an upload mode for receiving evaluation information (mouth information). In step 1607, the evaluation information (oral information) of the designated evaluation target is downloaded. E-mail may be used as the format of this download. The evaluation information (oral information) includes a graded evaluation value, a voice comment, a written comment, and the number of evaluations according to an instruction from the user.

On the other hand, in the case of the upload mode, in step 1608, the evaluation information (mouth information) uploaded for the designated evaluation target is received and stored. The evaluation information (oral information) includes a graded evaluation value, a voice comment, a text comment, and the like according to an instruction from the user. The step evaluation value is performed by designating a dial number or by recognizing a voice. In addition, voice comments may be stored as they are,
Speech may be recognized and written. Textual comments are e-mails from mobile phones.

Subsequently, in step 1609, the information input person is thanked for being evaluated, and the information input person is designated (pre-registered) a bank account.
When the cash transfer procedure, the evaluator's evaluation target and the information input person are specified, the discount amount is displayed or voiced in a form that can be confirmed by the store's people (a computer connected to the Internet, a mobile phone, a dedicated phone, etc.). Be able to present.

[3. Other Embodiments] The present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiment, and collects evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network as described in claim 1 and An attribute collection unit that collects user attributes in an evaluation device that publishes the collected evaluations to a user, an evaluation reception unit that is activated when the user inputs an evaluation for a certain evaluation target, An attribute evaluation unit may be provided which classifies user attributes based on data collected by the attribute collection unit, receives evaluations according to the attributes, and displays these evaluations in accordance with user instructions.

Further, as described in claim 68, an evaluation device that collects evaluations performed on one or a plurality of evaluation targets through a computer network and discloses the collected evaluations to a user includes: Regarding evaluation,
Inquire whether the evaluation is useful for the user, and if the answer that it is not useful is judged to be useless because it is above a predetermined level, the evaluation is detected and then notified to the Web master, or A useless evaluation processing unit for automatically deleting the evaluation may be provided.

Further, as described in claim 70, an evaluation device that collects evaluations performed on one or a plurality of evaluation targets through a computer network and discloses the collected evaluations to a user is provided in the evaluation device. A priority display unit that preferentially displays a specific evaluation according to a user's selection instruction among one or a plurality of priority display conditions for evaluation may be provided.

[0323] As described in claim 73, an evaluation device that collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and that discloses the collected evaluations to users is provided with a rank. A ranking unit for ranking the level as an evaluator may be provided in accordance with a predetermined logic for classification.

[0324] Further, as described in claim 81, an evaluation apparatus that collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and that discloses the collected evaluations to a user is used. The attribute collection unit that collects the attributes of the users and the plurality of users who read the evaluations determine whether or not the attributes obtained by the attribute collection unit match each other. May be provided.

[0325] As described in claim 89, an evaluation device that collects evaluations made on one or a plurality of evaluation targets through a computer network and discloses the collected evaluations to a user is provided. A notification processing unit may be provided that notifies the evaluation target to which the input has been made, receives the comment on the evaluation as needed, and then performs a predetermined process.

In addition, as described in claim 97, an evaluation device that collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and discloses the collected evaluations to a user includes: At least one of a predetermined weight and a function may be set for each evaluation item related to the evaluation target, and a comprehensive evaluation unit that calculates a comprehensive evaluation value for each evaluation target may be provided.

[0327] As described in claim 104, an evaluation apparatus for collecting evaluations made on one or a plurality of evaluation targets through a computer network, and disseminating the collected evaluations to a user is provided. An attribute collection unit that collects the attributes of the players and a game addition unit that provides a game for writing the evaluation or filling out a questionnaire for collecting the attributes of the attribute collection unit may be provided.

[0328] Throughout, voice and video can be transmitted over the Internet without stress as infrastructure capacity increases in the future. Therefore, in the present invention, the electronic mail, the bulletin board, and the comment are not limited to character information, but may be information configured of at least one of audio and video. Furthermore, writing to an e-mail, a bulletin board, or the like is not limited to input using a keyboard, and may be input by voice recognition.

[0329]

As described above, according to the present invention, it is possible to collect and provide highly accurate evaluation data according to the attributes of the person who made the evaluation, the evaluation itself, the user to be evaluated, and the like. An evaluation apparatus, an evaluation method, and a recording medium on which evaluation software is recorded can be provided.

[Brief description of the drawings]

FIG. 1 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration of an embodiment of an evaluation device according to attributes according to the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure of a main routine of an evaluation site.

FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure in an attribute collection unit.

FIG. 4 is a flowchart showing an upper part of a processing procedure in an attribute evaluation unit.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing a middle part of a processing procedure in an attribute evaluation unit.

FIG. 6 is a flowchart showing the lower part of the processing procedure in the attribute evaluation unit.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure in an attribute classification routine.

FIG. 8 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure in an evaluation receiving unit.

FIG. 9 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure in a useless evaluation processing unit.

FIG. 10 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure in a ranking unit.

FIG. 11 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure in a priority display unit.

FIG. 12 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure in a comprehensive evaluation unit.

FIG. 13 is a flowchart illustrating a processing procedure in a notification processing unit;

FIG. 14 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure in an attribute matching processing unit;

FIG. 15 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure in a game addition unit.

FIG. 16 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure in a mobile device processing unit.

[Explanation of symbols]

 H: Evaluation site N1: Internet N2: Telephone communication network T: User terminal device F: User FAX transceiver H01: Data receiving unit H02: Data transmitting unit H03: Data input unit H04: Display unit H05: FAX receiving unit H06 ... Fax transmission unit H07 ... Telephone voice conversion unit H08 ... Fax data conversion unit H09 ... Attribute evaluation unit H10 ... Attribute collection unit H11 ... Useless evaluation processing unit H12 ... Priority display unit H13 ... Ranking unit H14 ... Attribute matching processing unit H15: Notification processing unit H16: Overall evaluation unit H17: Game addition unit H18: Mobile device processing unit H19: Evaluation reception unit

 ──────────────────────────────────────────────────続 き Continuing on the front page (72) Inventor Midori Ono 1-5-2 Higashiazabu, Minato-ku, Tokyo Tosen Higashiazabu Building F-term in ECwatchdotcom, Inc. (Reference) 5B049 AA02 CC00 CC01 CC02 DD01 EE02 FF03 GG02 GG04 GG07 GG09

Claims (140)

[Claims] 1. An evaluation device for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network, and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein the attribute collects user attributes. A collection unit, an evaluation reception unit started when the user inputs an evaluation to a certain evaluation target, and a user attribute is classified based on data collected by the attribute collection unit, and the user is classified according to the attribute. And an attribute evaluation unit for receiving the evaluations and displaying the evaluations according to a user's instruction. 2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the attribute collection unit writes a predetermined questionnaire via a computer network,
The evaluation device according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation device is a questionnaire unit that is implemented by at least one of an e-mail, a telephone number designation, and a facsimile. 3. A questionnaire regarding fixed characteristics of a user among questionnaires performed by the questionnaire section is performed on a computer network, and a questionnaire regarding other detailed items is performed using other communication means. The evaluation device according to claim 2, wherein: 4. The evaluation according to claim 2, wherein, out of the questionnaires performed by the questionnaire section, questionnaires relating to a variable characteristic that fluctuates due to a change in situation are configured to be sequentially performed. apparatus. 5. The evaluation device according to claim 2, wherein the questionnaire performed by the questionnaire unit is performed after a predetermined period has elapsed after purchasing a certain evaluation target. 6. The evaluation device according to claim 2, wherein a result of the questionnaire conducted by the questionnaire section is automatically totaled. 7. A part of the questionnaire is transmitted by telephone, FA
The evaluation device according to claim 2, wherein the evaluation is performed by at least one of X and electronic mail. 8. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the telephone questionnaire is configured so that the questionnaire can be answered by designating a number. 9. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the attribute collection unit collects user attributes by manual input by a Web master. 10. The attribute collecting unit assigns a predetermined score to each questionnaire item for each attribute, and when an operation value of a predetermined function for each attribute is equal to or more than a predetermined value, the questionnaire performer is assigned to the attribute collection unit. The evaluation device according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation device determines that the attribute belongs to an attribute. 11. The evaluation device according to claim 10, wherein an evaluation of only the evaluator whose calculated value is equal to or more than a predetermined value is displayed. 12. The evaluation device according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation reception unit is configured to prohibit repeated evaluation of the same person. 13. The prohibition of repeated evaluation of the same person,
13. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the evaluation is performed when the repeated evaluation is equal to or more than a predetermined number. 14. The prohibition of repeated evaluation of the same person,
13. The evaluation device according to claim 12, wherein the evaluation is performed for a predetermined period. 15. The prohibition of repeated evaluation of the same person,
13. The evaluation device according to claim 12, wherein the evaluation is performed except when the same person adds or corrects the content. 16. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 15, wherein the addition / correction of the contents performed by the same person is limited to a predetermined number of times. 17. The method according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation receiving unit is configured not to post the evaluation when writing of the evaluation at a predetermined time interval with respect to the same evaluation target is equal to or more than a predetermined frequency. The described evaluation device. 18. The display according to claim 1, wherein the display of the evaluation for each evaluation object is configured to be displayed only when a predetermined number or more of the evaluation objects are collected. Evaluation device. 19. The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation receiving unit detects that a prohibited word has been input at the time of inputting the evaluation, and notifies the Web master of the input.
The evaluation device according to 1. 20. The evaluation accepting unit is configured to reject the input, notify a Web master, or warn the evaluator, when detecting that a prohibited word has been input at the time of evaluation input. The evaluation device according to claim 1, wherein: 21. The attribute evaluation unit, for each of the attributes,
The evaluation device according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation device is configured to be able to repeat the evaluation in a hierarchical manner. 22. The evaluation device according to claim 21, wherein the reliability is calculated and displayed according to the degree of product of the evaluation with respect to the evaluation. 23. The evaluation device according to claim 22, wherein the intussusception is the total number of votes that are useful. 24. When the evaluations for the evaluations are repeated in a hierarchical manner and the evaluations for a certain evaluation forming a part of a nested evaluation sequence are accumulated, the evaluation for the higher evaluation of the certain evaluation is also included in the evaluation for the certain evaluation. 22. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 21, wherein the evaluation apparatus is configured to give the same reliability as the above. 25. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 24, wherein the reliability is a title set for each step of the total number of useful votes. 26. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a vote for approval or disapproval is made for the evaluation for each attribute. 27. The evaluation device according to claim 1, wherein a past evaluation history for each evaluator is displayed. 28. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 27, wherein, among the past evaluation histories for each evaluator, the number of votes for which the evaluation is valid is displayed. 29. The method according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation is preferentially displayed in the descending order of the number of votes of "Approve" or "No" in the vote of approval / disapproval. The evaluation device according to 1. 30. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein, for a certain evaluation, an evaluator having the highest number of evaluations or an evaluator having the highest number of valid votes is displayed in an award mode. . 31. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein when the user tries to stop writing the questionnaire or the evaluation, the user is requested to continue the operation. 32. The system according to claim 1, wherein when a new evaluation is made, the fact is notified to the evaluation itself or a person belonging to the attribute of the evaluator.
The evaluation device according to 1. 33. When a new evaluation object is registered,
2. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a notification that prompts a person belonging to the same attribute as the evaluation target to evaluate the evaluation target is issued. 34. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the display of the evaluation targets is performed in the order of the smaller number of evaluations or in the order of larger number of evaluations. 35. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the display of the evaluation target is performed in the order of the average value of the step evaluations or in the order of the low average value of the step evaluations. 36. The display of the evaluation target is displayed in the order of the number of evaluations,
The evaluation device according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation is performed in an awarding manner in an order of good evaluation. 37. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein points with a reward are cumulatively given to the evaluator, and the reward is changed according to the point. 38. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a keyword search by a Web master is performed on the evaluation sentence. 39. A list of slander users is created and displayed by picking up the evaluator from the evaluation sentence detected by the keyword search and performing a registration operation by the Web master. The evaluation device according to claim 38, wherein: 40. A list of evaluation targets in question is created and displayed by picking up an evaluation sentence detected by the keyword search and performing a registration operation by a Web master. Claim 3
9. The evaluation device according to 8. 41. The number of writes according to a request of a user,
2. The evaluation device according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the grade evaluation value and the number of votes can be visually displayed. 42. The evaluation device according to claim 41, wherein the visual display is performed for each attribute. 43. The evaluation device according to claim 41, wherein the visual display is a display using a radar chart or a bar graph. 44. The method according to claim 44, wherein the visual display sets one image for each predetermined number of units, and partially displays the one image for a portion less than the predetermined number of units, so that the number of writing or the number of votes is increased. 42. The evaluation device according to claim 41, wherein 45. The evaluation device according to claim 1, wherein attribute images of the evaluation target and the evaluator are displayed. 46. The evaluation device according to claim 1, wherein a transition of the evaluation with respect to time is displayed. 47. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 46, wherein the evaluation is accumulated on a time axis graph of the evaluation. 48. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein an evaluation for each attribute can be presented. 49. The evaluation device according to claim 48, wherein the presentation of the evaluation for each attribute is performed by rearranging the evaluations based on a predetermined criterion. 50. The method according to claim 4, wherein the presentation of the evaluation for each attribute is a notification of the evaluation for the evaluation target.
9. The evaluation device according to 8. 51. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein, among evaluations performed on a certain evaluation target, evaluations belonging to a specific attribute are grouped and predetermined statistical processing is performed. 52. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 51, wherein the name of the grouped group is a name by which characteristics of the group can be grasped. 53. The evaluation device according to claim 51, wherein the specific attribute is a person who has made the same evaluation. 54. The evaluation device according to claim 51, wherein the specific attribute is a combination of a plurality of attributes. 55. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 51, wherein the evaluation results for each of one or a plurality of groups are collectively displayed or notified to a predetermined notification destination. 56. The evaluation device according to claim 55, wherein the notification is performed in a report format. 57. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation comment is notified to the evaluation target by e-mail, automatic telephone, or facsimile. 58. The evaluation device according to claim 57, wherein, in response to the notification to the evaluation target, a thank-mail from the evaluation target is returned to the corresponding evaluator. 59. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 57, wherein the notification to the evaluation target is made in a list for each attribute. 60. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein, when the evaluation target is a store, when the store is newly opened, the evaluation value is changed. 61. The method according to claim 61, wherein the change of the evaluation value is reset to 0 when the evaluation is bad, and is further added by a predetermined value in the plus direction when the evaluation is good. The evaluation device according to claim 60. 62. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 60, wherein the change of the evaluation value is performed by setting the evaluation value of the evaluation target itself. 63. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 60, wherein the change of the evaluation value is performed by reducing the weight of the weighted average of the evaluation values based on a predetermined criterion. 64. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein when the reputation of the evaluation target is bad, an e-mail requesting improvement is sent. 65. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 64, wherein the e-mail requesting the improvement is set so that the e-mail frequency is reduced as time elapses. 66. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first display order of the evaluation target is configured to be displayed preferentially in accordance with the advertisement fee paid by the evaluation target. 67. The evaluation device according to claim 66, wherein a predetermined mark is given to an evaluation target whose advertisement fee is equal to or more than a predetermined amount. 68. A computer system comprising:
An evaluation device that collects evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets and discloses the collected evaluations to a user. For each evaluation, asks whether the evaluation is useful to the user, If it is judged that it is not useful because the answer that it is not useful is equal to or higher than the predetermined level, it is not useful to detect the evaluation and notify the Web master thereafter, or to automatically delete the evaluation. An evaluation device comprising an evaluation processing unit. 69. The apparatus according to claim 68, wherein the predetermined level is a predetermined value set in advance or a predetermined ratio.
The evaluation device according to 1. 70. A computer system comprising:
An evaluation device that collects evaluations made for one or more evaluation targets and discloses the collected evaluations to a user, wherein one or more priority display conditions of the user An evaluation device comprising: a priority display section for displaying a specific evaluation preferentially in accordance with a selection instruction of (1). 71. A means for counting the number of votes for which the evaluation is useful / ineffective, and means for counting the number of writings, wherein the priority display condition is such that the number of votes for which the evaluation is useful is equal to or higher than a predetermined level. That the number of votes that the evaluation is useless is equal to or higher than a predetermined level, the number of writes for the evaluation is equal to or higher than a predetermined level, or the number of writes for the evaluation is equal to or lower than a predetermined level 71. The evaluation device according to claim 70, wherein: 72. The method according to claim 70, wherein said preferentially displaying means one of a mode of displaying on an upper part which is easy to see on a screen and a mode of displaying on the same screen which can be browsed at the same time. The evaluation device according to 1. 73. A computer system comprising:
An evaluation device that collects evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets and discloses the collected evaluations to users, according to a predetermined case-related logic for ranking,
An evaluation device comprising: a ranking unit that ranks a level as an evaluator. 74. The evaluation device according to claim 73, wherein the ranking is performed based on a predetermined experience of the evaluator. 75. The evaluation device according to claim 74, wherein the experience of the evaluator is a shopping experience. 76. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 74, wherein the experience of the evaluator is a property of the evaluator. 77. The evaluation device according to claim 74, wherein the evaluator's experience is an evaluator's evaluation experience. 78. The evaluation device according to claim 73, wherein a predetermined illustration is given according to the ranking. 79. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 73, wherein, according to the ranking, the evaluation with a higher rank is displayed preferentially at a position that is easy to see. 80. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 73, wherein the number of votes is increased as the rank increases. 81. A computer system comprising:
An attribute collection unit that collects evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets and discloses the collected evaluations to a user, wherein the attribute collection unit collects user attributes; An attribute matching processing unit that determines whether or not the attributes obtained by the attribute collection unit match with each other, and performs a predetermined process for a user having the same attribute. apparatus. 82. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 81, wherein said predetermined processing is to notify each related information to a user having the same attribute. 83. The method according to claim 81, wherein the predetermined processing is to notify respective related information to a user having the same attribute when there is a request for notification.
The evaluation device according to 1. 84. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 81, wherein said predetermined processing is to notify each e-mail address to a user having the same attribute. 85. When both users of the same attribute notified of respective related information desire to contact with the other party, they present the contact information of each other.
The evaluation device according to claim 83 or 84. 86. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 81, wherein the predetermined processing is to display an evaluation of an evaluator having a matching attribute preferentially at a position that is easy to see. 87. The method according to claim 8, wherein the predetermined processing is to display only evaluations with matching attributes.
2. The evaluation device according to 1. 88. The evaluation device according to claim 81, wherein the determination as to whether or not the attributes match each other is made for one or more attributes selected by the user. 89. A computer system comprising:
An evaluation device that collects evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets and discloses the collected evaluations to users. After receiving comments on that rating accordingly,
An evaluation device, comprising: a notification processing unit that performs a predetermined process. 90. The method according to claim 89, wherein when the predetermined process receives a comment for the evaluation from the evaluation target, the comment is displayed on a dialogue bulletin board provided for each evaluation. Evaluation device. 91. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 90, wherein for each comment displayed on the interactive bulletin board, a useful / ineffective vote is accepted, and the result of the vote is displayed. 92. The dialogue bulletin board, wherein a question about the dialogue to be evaluated with the evaluator is received, an answer to the question is received, and the questionnaire is displayed on another Q & A bulletin board. 90. The evaluation device according to 90. 93. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 92, wherein a useful / ineffective vote is received for each comment displayed on the Q & A bulletin board. 94. The evaluation device according to claim 92, wherein when a comment is written on the Q & A bulletin board, a request for evaluation of the evaluation target is made. 95. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 94, wherein before requesting the evaluation, whether or not the user has experience with the evaluation target is asked, and if the user has the experience, writing of the evaluation is permitted. 96. The evaluation device according to claim 89, wherein the predetermined processing is to return to the evaluator when a comment on the evaluation from the evaluation target is received. 97. A computer system comprising:
An evaluation device that collects evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets and discloses the collected evaluations to a user, wherein at least one of a predetermined weight and a function is provided for each evaluation item for each evaluation target. And an overall evaluation unit for calculating an overall evaluation value for each evaluation object. 98. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 97, wherein the weighting is a numerical value from 0 to 1.0 set for each evaluation item, and the sum is 1.0. 99. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 98, wherein said numerical value is set to a predetermined value for each level of said level evaluation value for each evaluation item. 100. The weighting is a numerical value of 0 to 1.0 set for each predetermined group of each evaluation item, the sum of each group is 1.0, and each evaluation item in the same group The evaluation apparatus according to claim 97, wherein the sum of numerical values of 0 to 1.0 set for each is 1.0. 101. The function and the weighting value are respectively displayed and disclosed, and in a bulletin board for writing a correction value or a correction expression for them, a question or rejection of the correction value or the correction expression is asked, and the total number of votes is determined by a predetermined value. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 97, wherein the evaluation is performed so as to notify the Web master when the number exceeds the limit. 102. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 97, wherein an evaluation genre is provided for each setting variation of the function and the weighting value. 103. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 97, wherein the function and the weighting value can be set for each user, and are configured to search for a desired evaluation target. 104. An evaluation device for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein the attribute collects user attributes. An evaluation apparatus, comprising: a collection unit; and a game addition unit that provides a game for writing an evaluation or filling in a questionnaire for collecting attributes of the attribute collection unit. 105. The evaluation device according to claim 104, wherein the type of the game is set to be changeable according to the number of evaluation comments. 106. The evaluation device according to claim 104, wherein the game is set so that the probability of winning can be changed according to the number of evaluation comments. 107. The mobile communication device according to claim 1, further comprising: a mobile device processing unit that specifies an evaluation target and performs at least one of an upload function and a download function of the evaluation information with the mobile communication device. Evaluation device. 108. The method according to claim 107, wherein the evaluation target is specified by a user selecting the evaluation target from a predetermined evaluation target list using a mobile communication device.
The evaluation device according to 1. 109. The specification of the evaluation target is performed by using a mobile communication device to select from the evaluation target list presented based on the genre selected by the user from the genre list to be evaluated. 108. The evaluation device according to claim 107, wherein: 110. The evaluation device according to claim 109, wherein the genre list includes a place list. 111. The evaluation device according to claim 109, wherein the genre list is an alphabetical order index list. 112. The evaluation device according to claim 107, wherein the evaluation information is at least one of a sentence in which the evaluation is described, a grade evaluation value, and the number of evaluations. 113. The method according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation information is evaluation information totalized for each attribute of the evaluator.
Evaluation apparatus according to 07. 114. The evaluation device according to claim 107, wherein the evaluation target is a store. 115. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 107, wherein the evaluation target is a product being handled. 116. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 107, wherein the evaluation target is specified by a keyword search. 117. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 107, wherein said evaluation information is configured to be transmitted and received at least one of audio and video. 118. A cashback is provided for a user who inputs the evaluation information.
Evaluation apparatus according to 07. 119. An evaluation apparatus according to claim 107, wherein a discount service is provided to a user who has input said evaluation information at the next use. 120. An evaluation device for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein the attribute for collecting user attributes is provided. A collection unit, an evaluation reception unit started when the user inputs an evaluation to a certain evaluation target, and a user attribute is classified based on data collected by the attribute collection unit, and the user is classified according to the attribute. Attribute evaluation unit that accepts evaluations that have been received and displays these evaluations in accordance with the user's instructions. For each evaluation, asks if the evaluation is useful to the user. If it is determined that the evaluation is not useful, the evaluation is detected, and thereafter, the Web master is notified or the processing of automatically deleting the evaluation is not useful. An evaluation processing unit, a priority display unit that preferentially displays a specific evaluation in accordance with a user's selection instruction from one or a plurality of priority display conditions for the evaluation, and a predetermined classification logic related to ranking. ,
A ranking unit that ranks the level as an evaluator, and, for a plurality of users who read the evaluation, determine whether or not the attributes obtained by the attribute collection unit match each other. An attribute matching processing unit that performs a predetermined process, and notifies the evaluation target to which the evaluation has been input of the evaluation and, if necessary, receives a comment on the evaluation.
A notification processing unit that performs predetermined processing; a total evaluation unit that sets at least one of a predetermined weight and a function for each evaluation item for each evaluation target to calculate a total evaluation value for each evaluation target; A game addition unit that provides a game for filling out a questionnaire for collecting attributes of the attribute collection unit, and at least a function of uploading or downloading the evaluation information by specifying an evaluation target between the mobile communication device and the game addition unit. An evaluation device comprising: a mobile device processing unit that performs one of the operations. 121. An evaluation method for collecting evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein the attribute collecting user attributes is provided. A collecting step, an evaluation receiving step started when the user inputs an evaluation for a certain evaluation target, and classifying the user attributes based on the data collected by the attribute collecting step, and according to the attribute. Received the evaluation,
An attribute evaluation step of displaying these evaluations in accordance with a user's instruction. 122. An evaluation method for collecting evaluations performed on one or a plurality of evaluation targets through a computer network and releasing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein the evaluation is used for each evaluation. If it is not useful because the answer to the question is that it is not useful because the answer is no more than a predetermined level, then the evaluation is detected, and then the Web master is notified or the evaluation is automatically performed. An evaluation method characterized by having a useless evaluation processing step of performing a deletion process. 123. An evaluation method for collecting evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein one or more of the evaluations is provided. A priority display step of displaying a specific evaluation preferentially in accordance with a user's selection instruction among the priority display conditions. 124. An evaluation method for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and releasing the collected evaluations to a user, comprising a predetermined case-related logic for ranking. According to
An evaluation method, comprising a ranking step for ranking a level as an evaluator. 125. An evaluation method for collecting evaluations performed on one or a plurality of evaluation targets through a computer network, and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein an attribute for collecting user attributes is provided. A collecting step, an attribute matching processing step of determining, for a plurality of users who read the evaluation, whether or not the attributes obtained by the attribute collecting step match each other, and performing a predetermined process for users having the same attribute An evaluation method comprising: 126. An evaluation method for collecting evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and disclosing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein the evaluation targets for which the evaluations are input are provided. , We will notify you of the rating and, if necessary, accept comments on that rating,
An evaluation method comprising a notification processing step of performing a predetermined process. 127. An evaluation method for collecting evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets through a computer network and disclosing the collected evaluations to a user, the evaluation method comprising: And at least one of a predetermined weight and a function, and calculating an overall evaluation value for each evaluation object. 128. An evaluation method for collecting evaluations performed on one or a plurality of evaluation targets through a computer network, and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein an attribute for collecting user attributes is provided. An evaluation method, comprising: a collecting step; and a game adding step of providing a game for evaluation writing or a questionnaire entry for collecting attributes in the attribute collecting step. 129. A mobile device processing step for specifying an evaluation target and performing at least one of an upload function and a download function of the evaluation information with a mobile communication device.
Evaluation method described in. 130. An evaluation method for collecting evaluations performed on one or a plurality of evaluation targets through a computer network and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, wherein the attribute for collecting user attributes is provided. A collecting step, an evaluation receiving step started when the user inputs an evaluation for a certain evaluation target, and classifying the user attributes based on the data collected by the attribute collecting step, and according to the attribute. Received the evaluation,
An attribute evaluation step for displaying these evaluations in accordance with the user's instructions; for each evaluation, asking whether or not the evaluation is useful to the user; In this case, the useless evaluation processing step of detecting the evaluation and notifying the Web master thereafter, or automatically deleting the evaluation, and one or more priority display conditions of the evaluation. According to a user's selection instruction, a priority display step of displaying a specific evaluation preferentially, and a predetermined classification logic regarding ranking,
A ranking step of ranking the level as an evaluator, and for a plurality of users who read the evaluation, determine whether or not the attributes obtained by the attribute collection step match each other. An attribute matching processing step for performing a predetermined process, and after notifying the evaluation target to which the evaluation has been input of the evaluation, and accepting a comment on the evaluation as necessary,
A notification processing step of performing a predetermined process; a comprehensive evaluation step of setting at least one of a predetermined weight and a function for each evaluation item for each evaluation object to calculate a comprehensive evaluation value for each evaluation object; A game addition unit that provides a game for filling in a questionnaire for collecting attributes in the attribute collection step, and at least a function of uploading or downloading the evaluation information by specifying an evaluation target between the mobile communication device and the game addition unit. A mobile device processing step that performs one of the steps. 131. A recording medium recording evaluation software for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets using a computer, and releasing the collected evaluations to a user, The software causes the computer to collect the attributes of the user, and when the user tries to input an evaluation for a certain evaluation target, the software accepts the evaluation and uses the software based on the data on the collected attributes. A recording medium on which evaluation software is characterized in that the attributes of the user are classified, evaluations corresponding to the attributes are received, and these evaluations are displayed according to a user's instruction. 132. A recording medium recording evaluation software for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets using a computer and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, The software causes the computer to ask, for each of the evaluations, whether the evaluation is useful to the user.
A recording medium on which evaluation software is recorded, wherein the evaluation is detected, and then the Web master is notified or the evaluation is automatically deleted. 133. A recording medium recording evaluation software for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets using a computer and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, The software records evaluation software that causes the computer to preferentially display a particular evaluation in accordance with a user's selection instruction from one or more priority display conditions for the evaluation. recoding media. 134. A recording medium recording evaluation software for collecting evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets using a computer and releasing the collected evaluations to a user, The software instructs the computer, according to the predetermined case logic for ranking,
A recording medium storing evaluation software characterized by ranking the level as an evaluator. 135. A recording medium recording evaluation software for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets using a computer and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, The software causes the computer to collect user attributes, determine whether a plurality of users reading the evaluation match each other's attributes, and perform predetermined processing for users having the same attribute. A recording medium on which evaluation software is recorded. 136. A recording medium recording evaluation software for collecting evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets using a computer and releasing the collected evaluations to a user, The software causes the computer to notify the evaluation target to which the evaluation has been input of the evaluation,
A recording medium on which evaluation software is recorded, wherein a predetermined process is performed after a comment on the evaluation is received as necessary. 137. A recording medium which records evaluation software for collecting evaluations performed on one or more evaluation targets using a computer, and for releasing the collected evaluations to a user, The software records an evaluation software that causes the computer to set at least one of a predetermined weight and a function for each evaluation item for each evaluation object, and to calculate an overall evaluation value for each evaluation object. recoding media. 138. A recording medium recording evaluation software for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets using a computer and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, The recording medium recording the evaluation software, wherein the software causes the computer to collect user attributes and provide a game for writing an evaluation or filling in a questionnaire for collecting attributes. 139. The evaluation software according to claim 131, wherein an evaluation target is specified between the mobile terminal and the mobile communication device to perform at least one of an upload function and a download function of the evaluation information. The recording medium on which it was recorded. 140. A recording medium recording evaluation software for collecting evaluations made on one or more evaluation targets using a computer and publishing the collected evaluations to a user, The software causes the computer to collect the attributes of the user, and when the user tries to input an evaluation for a certain evaluation target, the software accepts the evaluation and uses the software based on the data on the collected attributes. The user's attributes, accept the evaluations according to the attributes, display these evaluations according to the user's instructions, ask each evaluation whether the evaluation is useful to the user, If the answer is not useful because the answer is higher than a predetermined level, the evaluation is detected, and then the Web master is notified. The rating is automatically deleted, a specific rating is displayed preferentially according to a user's selection instruction from one or more priority display conditions for the rating, and according to a predetermined classification logic regarding ranking. ,
The level as an evaluator is ranked, a plurality of users who read the evaluation are determined whether or not their attributes match each other, a predetermined process is performed for users having the same attribute, and the input of the evaluation is performed. Inform the evaluation target that has been made of the evaluation,
After accepting a comment on the evaluation as necessary, a predetermined process is performed, at least one of a predetermined weight and a function is set for each evaluation item for each evaluation target, and a comprehensive evaluation value is calculated for each evaluation target. Calculate, write a rating or provide a game for filling in a questionnaire for collecting attributes, specify the evaluation target with the mobile communication device, and perform at least one of the upload function and the download function of the evaluation information. A recording medium on which evaluation software is recorded.