Since this website was established the article Assessing Book Review Ratings (one of the first to be published) has been utilised as a guide for informing readers, authors, website/blog visitors and followers, and anyone else interested, of how ratings are applied to the books reviewed in this website blog. Several years have passed since the article was first published consequently, it is considered time for the principles to be set out in a more permanent policy document. This has now been done.
The document may be accessed from here or from the above BOOKS tab (under ‘Review Policy’).
To reiterate some of the information:
Due to misunderstandings and misuse the values of review star ratings have become confused and distorted. Many have simply followed the trend however, this website is not prepared to exacerbate the situation. In this website and associated blog the following interpretations are applied:
1* – (I hate it; Did not like it; etc.): Poor content and/or quality.
2* – (I don’t like it; It was OK; etc.): Not brilliant but not totally disastrous.
3* – (It’s okay; Liked it; etc.): The majority of books realistically fall within this rating.
4* – (I like it; Really liked it; etc.): Very good but has some minor drawback.
5* – (I love it; It was amazing; etc.): Excellent, little if anything at fault.
Note: The definitions shown in parenthesis are not the writer’s but those some organisations and companies apply.
This article, in support of the new review rating policy document, has been published in hope it will assist followers, visitors, and fans and prevent any undue surprises for authors or readers.
2 thoughts on “Book Review Ratings”
My frustration is with ratings, not reviews. At least in reviews, you can get a feel for what people feel. With ratings, there is nothing to substantiate a reader’s response, which is rather unfair. I like to know what readers base their responses on, well, as all authors must like to do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Fully agree Amy. Ratings can be misleading, especially in view of the misunderstanding and misuse referred to in the previous article (mentioned at top) and this article.