XKCD explains Star Ratings

Originally Posted by booklover6

I feel there is nothing wrong with giving a 3 star review. 3 stars means the book was good. 4 is better than good. 5 is fantastic. Yet some authors seem to feel that anything less than 5 stars is an insult. They have unrealistic feelings about their work, I suppose.

While I agree with you in principle, the authors have to consider the marketability of their book. Since so many people give average books four or five stars, the consumer is unlikely to consider a book that has a three star rating. That's true even if the three star ratings are honest while the five star ratings are inflated.

[booklover6]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

While I agree with you in principle, the authors have to consider the marketability of their book. Since so many people give average books four or five stars, the consumer is unlikely to consider a book that has a three star rating. That's true even if the three star ratings are honest while the five star ratings are inflated.

Maybe I am in the minority, but I will definitely buy a book that has a solid core of 3 star (out of 5) ratings.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by booklover6

Maybe I am in the minority, but I will definitely buy a book that has a solid core of 3 star (out of 5) ratings.

Same here. I've found that a high volume of 3 and 4 star reviews (not the average rating, mind you, but the count) is highly indicative of a book that doesn't completely suck. For what that's worth.

[RainingLemur]

Originally Posted by booklover6

I feel there is nothing wrong with giving a 3 star review. 3 stars means the book was good. 4 is better than good. 5 is fantastic.

I agree with this. A whole lot. I read a lot of reviews and such for video games and movies and such...and when they have an out-of-10 scale, anything less than a 7 becomes some kind of insult. And, it always confuses me. I always thought that a 5 (out of 10) would be average. But, expectations have been blown out of proportion when it comes to those things.

[JoHunt]

It's sad that 3.5 out of 5 is considered crap I always thought that 1 out of 5 meant crap.

[MovieBird]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Same here. I've found that a high volume of 3 and 4 star reviews (not the average rating, mind you, but the count) is highly indicative of a book that doesn't completely suck. For what that's worth.

I tend to discount 5 star ratings, myself. I'll look over the 1 star ratings first to see if there are any persistent issues with the product. Then, 2 stars. 5 star ratings usually consist of:

Product arrived on time and does what I expect. Awesome!

The average rating means nothing to me unless it's under 3.

[speakingtohe]

I will only take ratings into account if there are a afair number of raters. I have bought good books with bad ratings, bad books with good ratings. Eaten bad food in 5 star restaurants and good food in 1 star restaurants.

Lots of reviewers have never tried/eaten/read the product. They review it based on a bad experience with a salesclerk or vender or because they are related to the seller.

A 1 star rating with 30 raters is probably pretty bad and a 5 start rating with 30 raters is probably pretty good, but a 5 star rating or a 1 star rating with only one rater? who knows.


Helen

[Kumabjorn]

Originally Posted by RainingLemur

I agree with this. A whole lot. I read a lot of reviews and such for video games and movies and such...and when they have an out-of-10 scale, anything less than a 7 becomes some kind of insult. And, it always confuses me. I always thought that a 5 (out of 10) would be average. But, expectations have been blown out of proportion when it comes to those things.

The result of handing out Participation Trophies?

[soulfuldog]

Originally Posted by booklover6

I feel there is nothing wrong with giving a 3 star review. 3 stars means the book was good. 4 is better than good. 5 is fantastic.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Same here. I've found that a high volume of 3 and 4 star reviews is highly indicative of a book that doesn't completely suck.

Originally Posted by booklover6

Maybe I am in the minority, but I will definitely buy a book that has a solid core of 3 star (out of 5) ratings.

Hurrah, I'm not the only sensible person in the world after all!

[Andrew H.]

I never really go by the star ratings; I go by the contents of the actual review itself.

[Barty]

Originally Posted by booklover6

Maybe I am in the minority, but I will definitely buy a book that has a solid core of 3 star (out of 5) ratings.

I would if I knew people rate books the way I do. But depending on the book, the star ratings tend to be a bit inflated. It's like kindergarten sometimes out there.

For example, YA book raters are often over enthusiastic. Like, omg, this is the best book I've ever read. It probably is Which means it's probably oretty decent.

[Matth79]

Even simple like/dislike TU/TD ratings can be abused, or for instance on giveawayoftheday, things can get a like or dislike storm in a matter of moments, but in practice, it often ends up as a want/don't want rating, rather than a good/bad rating

[Namekuseijin]

I usually read a few 5* reviews and a few 1* reviews. When most of the 1* reviews are all about ranting about details outside of the scope of the book ("it came out late", "the summary sucks") I know the book is awesome.