Give me an honest answer, would you visit a restaurant that has an average of 3.2/5 rating on Google Maps? The answer is likely “no”, right? That’s because there is a silent coconscious around the world that a “good” rating is somewhere around 4.0.
But Google seems to disagree. According to Google’s updated descriptive scale, that 3.2 rated restaurant has a high enough rating to be called “good”.
Around the middle of this year, Google updated the descriptive labels of the star ratings on Maps.
Previously, the definitions were:
5 stars: Loved it
4 stars: Liked it
3 stars: It was okay
2 stars: Disliked it
1 star: Hated it
For me, these older labels were simple and easy to interpret, or both my own experiences and those of fellow Local Guides. It was a balanced system offering distinct positive, neutral, and negative options. @TravellerG provided a detailed breakdown of what these ratings stood for in a great post back in 2018 (be sure to check it out!).
The updated definitions of the ratings are:
5 stars: Exceptional
4 stars: Great
3 stars: Good
2 stars: Not great
1 star: Far from great
At first glance, it feels like the rating system has been redefined to skew toward the positive side, regardless of actual experience. There is no longer room for neutral or mediocre rating, “It was okay” certainly doesn’t mean it was “Good”. Meanwhile, the negative ratings have been changed with polite alternatives, whereas the older labels were straightforward, “in your face” type.
If you think about it further, you realize that due to this change, assuming local guides accept the new definitions and start rating places accordingly, the average ratings for businesses and places could actually begin to decline. While the older rating systems had two postive tiers (“Liked it” and “Loved it”), the updated rating system features three positive labels (“Good”, “Great” and “Exceptional”).
This means earning a 5-star rating will become even harder for businesses if Local Guides write honest reviews, as we now have to distinguish whether an experience was merely “Good,” “Great,” or truly “Exceptional.” You might love a meal or service, but very few experiences truly stand out as exceptional. As a result, 3-star and 4-star ratings should logically become much more common, with far fewer honest reviews reaching the 5-star mark.
Of course, Google may have its reasons. As ratings for most active businesses and points of interest (POIs) are squeezed between 4.0 and 5.0, it becomes hard for users to distinguish between them. Google might be trying to address this rating compression by giving more room to positive ratings by expanding the positive tier upto 3-star, even if it comes at the expense of removing the neutral option.
Personally, I don’t welcome this change. I really disagree with removing the neutral/average tier from star ratings. There are many places where you might not particularly “like” the experience, but you understand that the service is essential or that market constraints prevent them from offering more. A true neutral rating comes in very handy in those scenarios.
There is also the reality that no matter how much you change the labels; the mental model embedded in our minds won’t easily shift. Most people still view the scale as:
5 stars: Better/Best
4 stars: Good
3 stars: Average
2 stars: Bad
1 star: Worse/Worst
But who am I to comment on consumer behavior? I am neither a market expert nor do I have access to big data, whereas Google has both.
So how do you interpret this change in rating definitions? Do you agree with the new labels, or do you prefer the old scale? I think this is an important discussion for us to have here on the Connect forum right now.
no pun intended.
But I think this would not be welcomed by most folks.
other wise one star less .