Rating first, or Review first?

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

I used to decide the rating of a book the moment I finished. In fact, I could usually guess by 1/2way through, or even earlier, what the final rating would be.

But lately as I've written longer and more careful reviews, I find myself often revising that rating based on what I found myself emphasizing in my review. For example I just was disappointed by In the Stacks: Short Stories about Libraries and Librarians. I assumed I was going to rate it 2 stars because it wasn't *horrible.* But then I wrote my review. And I couldn't find one nice thing about it, so I decided to go ahead and take it all the way down to 1 star.

What do you do?

[Kimberly]

I do the rating first, then I do the review. I guess about halfway through what it's going to be like and I keep a mental list of the pros and cons of the story as I go along reading it.

[Manybooks]

I don't think it matters all that much, and personally, I consider reviews more important than ratings (for me, stats do not mean much and I really don't understand them all that much either). I sometimes rate a book before I review, and sometimes I rate a book when I review. The only problem I have had with rating a book before I review is that I have, on occasion, forgotten that I needed to still write a review. And if I leave a book too long, I feel that I need to reread the book before writing a review. And yes, I do, on occasion change my rating (most often, it's a change of one star, only very rarely have I changed a rating more than one star, although that has happened once or twice with a book I have reread and found that I did not like the book as much now, as I did then).

I do, actually, have a lot of books on my shelves that just have ratings with no reviews. Most of these were/are books that I read long before I ever joined Goodreads (and thus I would have to reread them before being able to adequately review them) and some are from the time I first joined GR, when I was still figuring out the website and had not jet dared to write reviews.

[Vicky]

When I mark a book as finished on Goodreads I always give it a star rating first. I often don't even write the review the same day.

Because of that, I also find myself revising my star rating based on what I put in my review. Especially with books that have a fast-paced story, I find that I give a higher impulse rating at the end of the story. Once I think about it for a few days and write my review, I realize that the book wasn't really as great as I thought and lower my rating.

I have raised ratings as well though. One book that comes to mind is Slaughterhouse Five. I didn't even finish the book, and gave it 1* after giving up on it. When I started writing my review I realized that while the writing was not my style and difficult for me to get into, there were some really interesting underlying themes and ideas, so I bumped it up to a 2*.

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

I can see that it would be a good idea to sit on a book for a little while before rating or reviewing, seeing as how the majority of you seem to be doing so effectively. I think I'm too hasty to judge.

Sure, it doesn't matter, really, but I think it's interesting to see who does what and why, and what effect their choice has on them.

My concern about writing my review promptly is that, as I'll be reading another book during that 'fallow' time, I'll forget too much of it. But that's back-asswards, isn't it? If the book was that forgettable, either I rushed through it too fast, or the rating of it needs to be lower. Well, that's what I think right now, anyway. :)

[Shomeret]

I never rate a book before I have a chance to review it. In fact, I leave books in currently reading to remind me that I need to rate and review them. As a result, my rating rarely changes as a result of writing my review though it actually has happened a couple of times. I believe in both cases, I revised my rating upward because I realized as a result of the review that there was more value in the book for me than I originally thought.

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

That's a neat trick, to leave them marked as currently reading until you're ready to give them a proper review.

[☕️Kimberly (Caffeinated Reviewer)]

I usually have an idea of my rating at the end of the book, although I must admit I start formulating one earlier in the book. I usually rate it first, then write my review. Only twice has my rating changed after writing the review.

[Manybooks]

Kimberly(Kimba the Caffeinated Book Reviewer) wrote: "I usually have an idea of my rating at the end of the book, although I must admit I start formulating one earlier in the book. I usually rate it first, then write my review. Only twice has my ratin..."

I do sometimes change ratings after I have finished and posted a review. This weekend I read a picture book which I originally rated with three stars, mostly because the illustrations were not all that much to my liking (but I loved the text and the author's note). But then, I read a picture book on the same topic (an Irish folktale), and while the illustrations were adequate, the text was really quite unspectacular, not bad, but also rather ho-hum. So, I changed the first picture book I read to four stars because when I review the second picture book, I plan to give it three stars (and the first is definitely better than the second one).

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

I like that reasoning, Gundula - I've done something similar myself, making ratings different just so they can be used to compare related works.

Of course, if the difference is small, you could also do the comparison in the text. That is, for the better book say "Though I've given the same number of stars to Book B, this is actually a better book than that" and in the review for Book B say "Though I've given Book A the same number of stars as this, Book A is the better book."

[Sarah]

I always rate first. Because it's easier to rate than to review, i use the little orphan ratings to motivate myself to write a review

[Danielle The Book Huntress]

I usually decide on a numerical rating first. Sometimes, the rating changes as I write the review.

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

Sarah, I hope you don't mind that I'm chuckling.

I'm gratified to learn that I'm not the only one who sometimes changes her or his opinion of a book as s/he writes the review.

[Kit★]

I always do my stars first before I write the review. No particular reason why, I just start at the top of the 'edit review' box and work my way down. :)

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

That's fair! :)

[David]

I do both at the same time. As an author I;d like both as well. Though a 5 star rating needs no review, im happy aha

[The Pirate Ghost]

Question: Rating or Review first?

Hmm....

Answer:

Yes

(I tend to go with the wind... )

This may help.

http://www.goodreads.com/story/show/2...

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

I'd say a 5 star rating definitely needs a review. I sure would like to know what was so amazing about the book! No matter how carefully ratings are derived, I won't judge a book by them. I have a book with an average GR community rating of 2 on my wishlist shelf, and there are lots of books that are trending an average above 4 that I wouldn't dream of reading. And I do think that as one writes a review, even if it's only an idiosyncratic sentence, one gets a better sense of the stars the book is worth, anyway.

(There, I wrote a longer post that Curmudgeon did. I'm so proud. ;)

[The Pirate Ghost]

Hey, does the link to my blog-writing-post count?

[Cheryl, first facilitator]

Nope. "I so decree" that it doesn't count, because I don't blog, and seldom click on links. (Though I must admit that I did do so this time.) Oh, and besides which, the blog entry was for the blog, not fresh for that comment.

Anyway, I guess we're drifting again. Sorry.