Nowadays, we are used to opening an app to skim public review s for reference before going to a restaurant. If it has a score of 4. 8 or above on a 5-point scale, the restaurant (guarantee) to be a good choice; but if it is a 4 or even less, it almost always means the restaurant is so terrible that you are likely to suffer.
In the past months, topics such as " Restaurants with low ratings may taste better" (top) the list of search terms. But is essential for everyone is the authenticity of the evaluation. We need to analyze the reasons that lead to the present situation reflect on measures to improve credibility and consumer experiences.
For one thing, quite a few business runners rely so (primary) on good scores to attract consumers that they manipulate (操纵) ratings by buying positive review s to increase traffic. For another, some consumers may go their original intention and give high scores because they receive free dishes or discounts when (ask) to submit comments.
(concern) these phenomena, platforms must develop richer ways for quality players who need more (expose) to display themselves and earn what they deserve. Meanwhile, the rating mechanism should include regular monitoring, strict examination and punitive (惩罚性的) measures to create a health y competitive atmosphere. , users will eventually abandon platforms, leaving those tricky players to their marketing game.
