Legend: Proposed versions of 5★ Scores
Average Rating - Flat average of both ratings (ticks) and reviews.
Review Average - Flat average of reviews only.
Thanks for being patient with this topic everyone. We’ve taken everyone’s feedback onboard and have aimed to come up with a way forward that addressed not only the areas of concern, but also opportunities that we could look into. Our main goals when approaching this were to:
Retain the Overall Score and Style Score.
These remain as they are, there are NO changes being made to the algorithm here.
Surface our users 5★ ratings (Currently known as Ticks).
The ratings will now be visible by the public.†
Phase out the use of the word ‘tick’.
Our users should be able to easily give our beers a 5★ rating and thus be able to reference it as such.
Appreciate the score weighting but simplify the visual application.
It’s clear that there isn’t a definitive consensus on what the current 5★ rating is showing or should be showing. We felt the best way forward is to RETAIN all attributes but show one by DEFAULT. Our preference is to show the ‘Average Rating’ as it is easier to understand, matches new user expectations and highlights all contributions.
Phase out the conception of ‘private reviews’.
This was an incorrect use of the term ‘private’. The mechanics behind this ARE NOT changing, but the way in which we talk about it should. We should now say something more along the lines of ‘Your description/review of this beer will only be visible once you have written 75 or more characters’.
Here are some proposed examples on how these changes will take effect.
On the Beer Search Result screen, users will see:
Overall Score and Style Score. And now the ‘Average Rating and the total ratings given’ vs ‘Weighted Average and total reviews given’.
On the Beer Profile Screen, we have exploded the scoring module to now show more detail. Users will now see:
Overall Score and Style Score. And now the ‘Average Rating and both the total ratings/reviews given’ vs ‘Weighted Average and total reviews given’.
Improving the way we read the scores beers are given.
Previously the intended way to read the scores was:
AleSmith Speedway Stout has an Overall Score: 100, Style Score: 99 and a Weighted Average of 4.29 based on 3,177 reviews.
A lot of new users were unfortunately reading it incorrectly as:
AleSmith Speedway Stout has an Overall Score: 100, Style Score: 99 and an Average Rating of 4.29 based on 3,177 ratings.
Now we’ve hopefully simplified this and enabled it to be read in this way.
AleSmith Speedway Stout has an Overall Score: 100, Style Score: 99 and an Average Rating of 4.32 based on 3,972 ratings. Out of those 3,972 ratings, 3,177 people have also written a review.
Ensuring we retain existing scores and wrapping some informative content around it.
You will see in the design that the users now also have 2x new call to actions in the scoring module.
They can read our ‘What do these scores mean’ FAQ.
They can pull up more in-depth statistics (where the Review Average is now stored along with Weighted Average).
How ratings and reviews are shown.
By default we will only continue to show reviews. Ratings without any descriptions will ONLY be surfaced to a user once they decisively toggle it on through a filter. It is important to note that we are relying on our filters to gradually improve over time to give our users individual and customised control over how they wish to visualise and consume the content that is most important/relevant to them. This is different for everyone and the flexibility of filters enable us to provide a better experience.
† To finish off, we wanted to re-iterate that an ‘incomplete’ rating/review will have its’ description hidden if it does not have 75 or more characters. This is the current behavior and is NOT changing.