Implementasi Text Mining untuk Analisis Review pada Aplikasi Crowdfunding LX dan ST Menggunakan Metode Sentiment Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35870/ljit.v2i1.2245Keywords:
Text Mining, Crowdfunding, Aplikasi Land X, Aplikasi SantaraAbstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis implementasi text mining pada aplikasi Crowdfunding LX dan ST menggunakan metode sentiment analysis di Indonesia. Pada proses analisis digunakan bahasa pemrograman R, dengan menggunakan software R-4.2.2 yang diimplementasikan melalui RStudio versi 2022.02.3 + 492. Hasil analisis didapati review aplikasi Land X memiliki kecenderungan ke arah positif dengan nilai positif 0.036, sedangkan pada aplikasi Santara memiliki rata-rata dengan kecenderungan negatif dengan nilai negatif sebesar -0.2249.
Downloads
References
P. Delgadoa, C. Vargasb, R. Ackermanc, and L. Salmerón, “Don’t throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension,” Educ. Res. Rev., vol. 25, pp. 23–38, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2018.09.003.
F. Reichert, D. Lange, and L. Chow, “Educational beliefs matter for classroom instruction: A comparative analysis of teachers’ beliefs about the aims of civic education,” Teach. Teach. Educ., vol. 98, pp. 1–13, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2020.103248.
J. Roick and T. Ringeisen, “Students’ math performance in higher education: examining the role of self-regulated learning and self-efficacy,” Learn. Individ. Differ., vol. 65, pp. 148–158, 2018.
G. Ocak and A. Yamaç, “Examination of the relationships between fifth graders’ self-regulated learning strategies, motivational beliefs, attitudes, and achievement,” Educ. Sci. Theory Pract., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 380–387, 2013.
S. Li and J. Zheng, “The relationship between self-efficacy and self-regulated learning in one-to-one computing environment: The mediated role of task values,” Asia-Pacific Educ. Res., vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 455–463, 2018, doi: 10.1007/s40299-018-0405-2.
B. J. Zimmerman and A. R. Moylan, “Self-regulation: where metacognition and motivation intersect,” in D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, and A. C. Graesser, Eds., Handbook of Metacognition in Education, 2009, pp. 299–315.
P. R. Pintrich, D. A. F. Smith, T. Duncan, and W. Mckeachie, A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1991.
M. Pressley and C. B. McCormick, Advanced educational psychology for educators, researchers, and policymakers. New York, USA: HarperCollins College Publishers, 1995.
A. Bandura, Prentice-Hall series in social learning theory. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1985.
A. L. Dent and A. C. Koenka, “The relation between self-regulated learning and academic achievement across childhood and adolescence: a meta-analysis,” Educ. Psychol. Rev., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 425–474, 2015, doi: 10.1007/s10648-015-9320-8.
T. J. Cleary and A. Kitsantas, “Motivation and self-regulated learning influences on middle school mathematics achievement,” School Psych. Rev., vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 88–107, 2017.
P. R. Pintrich, “Chapter 14 - The Role of Goal Orientation in Self-Regulated Learning,” in in M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, M. Zeidner, Eds., Handbook of Self-Regulation, San Diego, California: Academic Press, 2000, pp. 451–502.
H. Vonkova and J. Hrabak, “The (in) comparability of ICT knowledge and skill self-assessments among upper secondary school students: The use of the anchoring vignette method,” Comput. Educ., vol. 85, pp. 191–202, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.003.
F. Baier, A.-T. Decker, T. Voss, T. Kleickmann, U. Klusmann, and M. Kunter, “What makes a good teacher? The relative importance of mathematics teachers’ cognitive ability, personality, knowledge, beliefs, and motivation for instructional quality,” Br. J. Educ. Psychol., vol. 89, no. 4, pp. 767–786, 2019, doi: 10.1111/bjep.12256.
A. M. Flanagan, D. C. Cormier, and O. Bulut, “Achievement may be rooted in teacher expectations: examining the differential influences of ethnicity, years of teaching, and classroom behaviour,” Soc. Psychol. Educ., vol. 23, pp. 1429–1448, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11218-020-09590-y.
F. M. van der Kleij, “Comparison of teacher and student perceptions of formative assessment feedback practices and association with individual student characteristics,” Teach. Teach. Educ., vol. 85, no. 1, pp. 175–189, 2019.
R. G. Brockett and R. Hiemstra, Self-direction in adult learning: Perspectives on theory, research, and practice. London and New York: Routledge, 2020.
R. Hiemstra and R. G. Brockett, “Reframing the Meaning of Self-Directed Learning: An Updated Modeltt,” in Adult Education Research Conference Proceedings, 2012, pp. 155–161.
S. Geng, K. M. Y. Law, and B. Niu, “Investigating self-directed learning and technology readiness in blending learning environment,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 16, no. 17, pp. 1–22, 2019, doi: 10.1186/s41239-019-0147-0.
J. R. Fraenkel, N. E. Wallen, and H. H. Hyun, How to design and evaluate research in education. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill, 2012.
M. Honey and D. Marshall, “The impact of on-line muti-choice questions on undergraduate student nurses’ learning,” in Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), 2003, pp. 236–243.
R. A. Krueger and M. A. Casey, Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. London: Sage Publications, Inc., 2015.
J. W. Creswell and V. L. P. Clark, “Choosing a mixed methods design,” in Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, California: Sage Publications, Inc., 2011, pp. 53–106.
E. H. Mahvelati, “Learners’ perceptions and performance under peer versus teacher corrective feedback conditions,” Stud. Educ. Eval., vol. 70, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.100995.
K. Ismayilova and R. M.Klassen, “Research and teaching self-efficacy of university faculty: Relations with job satisfaction,” Int. J. Educ. Res., vol. 98, pp. 55–66, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2019.08.012.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Satria Agung
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Copyright Retention and Open Access License
Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the journal non-exclusive right of first publication under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
This license allows unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2. Rights Granted Under CC BY 4.0
Under this license, readers are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial use
- No additional restrictions — the licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as license terms are followed
3. Attribution Requirements
All uses must include:
- Proper citation of the original work
- Link to the Creative Commons license
- Indication if changes were made to the original work
- No suggestion that the licensor endorses the user or their use
4. Additional Distribution Rights
Authors may:
- Deposit the published version in institutional repositories
- Share through academic social networks
- Include in books, monographs, or other publications
- Post on personal or institutional websites
Requirement: All additional distributions must maintain the CC BY 4.0 license and proper attribution.
5. Self-Archiving and Pre-Print Sharing
Authors are encouraged to:
- Share pre-prints and post-prints online
- Deposit in subject-specific repositories (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv)
- Engage in scholarly communication throughout the publication process
6. Open Access Commitment
This journal provides immediate open access to all content, supporting the global exchange of knowledge without financial, legal, or technical barriers.
