Ratings are way too arbitrary. I only give perfect scores in very rare situations. 5 stars to me means I can literally not think of anything that could be improved. I can always come up with a way something isn't perfect.
Do you want to revise your judging criteria, now that you have this new information that your giving drivers a non-5 score contributes to them losing one of their means of earning an income?
(not a rhetorical hit at you, just curious to know your thoughts)
I pretty much only give 5 stars even though I don't feel like that's what I should be giving. I was just stating if I was honest with my rating it would only hurt drivers. That's what I've always assumed and it turns out I was right.
I think it's absurd that they try to dictate user behavior based on broad averages, as opposed to normalizing each individual's ratings to fit a standard distribution, then averaging those normalized ratings.
That seems to have become the norm. To me that's just people misunderstanding how to use a gradual scale.
I recently got a phone call from my apartment management after I left a bunch of 3s and 4s on their annual review, they seemed distraught they got such bad scores. From my point of view they were doing just fine. The fact that they're not excellent in every regard shouldn't be surprising when I'm not paying through my nose to live there, I'm perfectly happy with 3.5/5 since that's what I'm paying for.
It's an ordinal scale with arbitrary meaning. 4 doesn't mean its twice as good as a 2 star rating (there is no interval or ratio). It basically means 5 = all okay! 4 and below there were issues of varying subjective degrees.
Ratings tend to be skewed in various ways everywhere. But it's particularly extreme when people know the norm is to give a perfect score for any transaction that didn't have serious flaws--especially when you know lower scores have material negative real-world implications for individuals trying to earn a living.
