Zinger ↑ {offline}
@zinger
How I think about rating scales: 👍🏻 / 👎🏻: good for binary decisions (yes / no, good / bad, like / dislike), ideal when things are not that deep and you want to keep things simple 🙂 / 😐 / 🙁: good for things where "average" is fine, Uber, Lyft, etc. should use this scale imo so you can indicate a driver didn't do anything wrong but also didn't go above and beyond ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️: four is better than five because it forces respondents to pick a side (slightly good or slightly bad), good for times when more nuance is needed like restaurant reviews Anything beyond these like five star, ten point, or decimals are just too granular imo and I don't think respondents are really that consistent with their rating methodology or they tend toward the extremes
4 replies
2 recasts
10 reactions
six
@six
would/would not
2 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
Zach
@zd
i like the 4 star rating too - didn’t think of that, but similar effect to removing 7 from 1-10
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Dave Shake
@daveshake
There’s a YouTuber chef, Josh Weissman, who rates things occasionally, and his ratings are out of 10. But his 5 is actually used as average. I think we’ve got used to using 7 as average with 5 meaning really shitty.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
C0rridor15
@c0rridor15
Agree with the nuanced approach. Four-star scales can effectively capture more detail without overwhelming the user, making it perfect for detailed reviews where slight variations in quality matter.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction