Aug 29, 2012, 22:57
I thought this article was great - why 5 star ratings are usually mostly useless. I tend to agree - although there are two places where star ratings usually feature:
The first is used by "professional" review sites. If you look at sites like Dpreview their previous system before the current one used to equate to something like:
Excellent = Mindblowingly Exceptional
Highly Recommended = Good
Recommended = Bad
I find these tend to give star ratings towards the upper tier - never will you see average or below average ratings.
Secondly, there are sites where users post their reviews and the sites aggregate their reviews. These can be harder to interpret because users are usually fickle - 1 feature not working to their liking is enough to warrant a 1 star review. I find truly exceptional products have almost all 5 or 4 star reviews and very little 1-3s, while products to avoid are more evenly distributed throughout the 1-5 range (although they still do get 5 star reviews).
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/28/why-...ar-online/
Anyway, food for thought.
The first is used by "professional" review sites. If you look at sites like Dpreview their previous system before the current one used to equate to something like:
Excellent = Mindblowingly Exceptional
Highly Recommended = Good
Recommended = Bad
I find these tend to give star ratings towards the upper tier - never will you see average or below average ratings.
Secondly, there are sites where users post their reviews and the sites aggregate their reviews. These can be harder to interpret because users are usually fickle - 1 feature not working to their liking is enough to warrant a 1 star review. I find truly exceptional products have almost all 5 or 4 star reviews and very little 1-3s, while products to avoid are more evenly distributed throughout the 1-5 range (although they still do get 5 star reviews).
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/28/why-...ar-online/
Anyway, food for thought.