## 4 Findings and Discussion
### Web Graph Analysis
#### 4.1.2 Web Graph Analysis for Lower Star-Rated Hotels  
Figure 6 is a web graph analysis of online complaint attributes for lower star-rated hotels. Here, a clear difference was observed between the networks that formed. For instance, Value for Money and Safety have a strong and direct path of connection (99.08%), meaning that these two attributes have a strong relationship. Based on the connection, it could be inferred that if the hotel guests at lower star-rated hotels complain about Value for Money, they might neglect to voice concerns about Safety. This question could benefit from further research. The graph also shows medium connections between several pairs of complaint attributes, for example, Value for Money and Miscellaneous Issue (33.94%). This may indicate that hotel guests who complain about Value for Money, may also complain about Miscellaneous Issues and vice versa. Location Accessibility and Miscellaneous Issue (33.33%) and Safety and Miscellaneous Issue (33.33%) were also among the top three medium connections. Some examples of weak connections include Value for Money and Hotel Facility (14.68%) and Location Accessibility and Cleanliness (14.29%) (see Table 6). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l} \hline Strong links & Links & Web of 10 fields: Overall \% & \\ \hline ID & & Field 1 & Field 2 \\ \hline
1 & 98.73\% & Location Accessibility = “No” & F \& B Issue = “Yes” \\
2 & 98.73\% & Safety = “No” & F \& B Issue = “Yes” \\
3 & 98.59\% & Location Accessibility = “No” & Customer Service = “Yes” \\
4 & 98.36\% & Location Accessibility = “No” & Safety = “Yes” \\
5 & 98.31\% & Location Accessibility = “No” & Room Facility = “Yes” \\
6 & 98.10\% & Location Accessibility = “No” & Cleanliness = “Yes” \\
7 & 98.09\% & Location Accessibility = “No” & Hotel Facility = “Yes” \\
8 & 98.02\% & Safety = “No” & Miscellaneous Issue = “Yes” \\
9 & 97.98\% & Location Accessibility = “No” & Miscellaneous Issue = “No” \\
10 & 97.95\% & Location Accessibility = “No” & Room Space = “No” \\ \hline Medium links & \multicolumn{3}{l}{Web of 10 fields: Overall \%} \\ \hline ID & \multicolumn{3}{l}{Linked} & Field 1 & Field 2 \\ \hline
1 & 34.62\% & Location Accessibility = “Yes” & Customer Service = “Yes” \\
2 & 33.15\% & Room Space = “Yes” & Room Facility = “Yes” \\
3 & 31.21\% & Miscellaneous Issue = “Yes” & F \& B Issue = “Yes” \\
4 & 30.77\% & Location Accessibility = “Yes” & Room Space = “Yes” \\
5 & 29.51\% & Safety = “Yes” & Customer Service = “Yes” \\
6 & 28.66\% & Hotel Facility = “Yes” & Room Space = “Yes” \\
7 & 27.55\% & Value for Money = “Yes” & Miscellaneous Issue = “Yes” \\
8 & 26.11\% & Hotel Facility = “Yes” & Cleanliness = “Yes” \\
9 & 23.08\% & Location Accessibility = “Yes” & Value for Money = “Yes” \\
10 & 22.93\% & Room Space = “Yes” & F \& B Issue = “Yes” \\ \hline Low Links & \multicolumn{3}{l}{Web of 10 fields: Overall \%} \\ \hline ID & \multicolumn{3}{l}{Field 1} \\ \hline
1 & 14.75\% & Safety = “Yes” & Cleanliness = “Yes” \\
2 & 14.65\% & Hotel Facility = “Yes” & F \& B Issue = “Yes” \\
3 & 14.29\% & Value for Money = “Yes” & Cleanliness = “Yes” \\
4 & 13.11\% & Safety = “Yes” & Miscellaneous Issue = “Yes” \\
5 & 12.10\% & F \& B Issue = “Yes” & Room Facility = “Yes” \\
6 & 11.54\% & Location Accessibility = “Yes” & Hotel Facility = “Yes” \\
7 & 11.54\% & Location Accessibility = “Yes” & Room Facility = “Yes” \\
8 & 11.48\% & Safety = “Yes” & Room Space = “Yes” \\
9 & 8.20\% & Safety = “Yes” & Hotel Facility = “Yes” \\
10 & 8.20\% & Value for Money = “Yes” & Safety = “Yes” \\ \hline \end{tabular} Note: We selected only top 10 links due to the space limitation; Field: means attribute.  
\end{table} 
Table 5: Top 10 links for higher star-rated hotel.