Racist ratings linger in five-star systems — a thumbs up could fix that
Feb 19, 2025
auto_awesome
Lauren Rivera, a Kellogg School of Management researcher, dives into how a simple switch from five-star ratings to a thumbs up/thumbs down system can eliminate racial bias in job evaluations on online platforms. She discusses a study of nearly 70,000 ratings, revealing how complex systems can perpetuate discrimination. Rivera also emphasizes the broader implications for equity in hiring practices, while the podcast touches on quirky topics like cockatoos’ gourmet tastes and historical climate research from Transylvania.
Switching from a five-star rating to a thumbs up/thumbs down system can significantly reduce racial discrimination in online evaluations.
The implementation of simplified ratings raises concerns about worker motivation and potential impacts on engagement that require further research.
Deep dives
Impact of Rating System Changes on Racial Discrimination
Changing the rating system from a five-star scale to a thumbs up/thumbs down approach can effectively reduce racial discrimination in online performance evaluations. A study revealed that under the five-star system, workers classified as non-white received lower average ratings compared to their white counterparts, leading to discrepancies in pay. However, when the rating system was simplified to binary ratings, these disparities disappeared, resulting in equal average feedback regardless of race. This indicates that the nature of the rating system significantly influences users' biases and perceptions during the evaluation process.
Simplicity in Implementation and Its Broader Implications
The transition to a thumbs up or down evaluation system is an easy and cost-effective strategy for companies to implement, promoting fairness without extensive training or policy changes. This method leverages the simplicity of binary choices to minimize biases that might emerge from more complex rating systems. It's suggested that companies could test this new system with a small group of users before a wider rollout, making it an attractive option for various organizations. Despite its simplicity, this approach still calls for deeper investigation into the initial hiring processes and the potential biases affecting that stage.
Potential Consequences of Simplified Ratings
Concerns were raised about whether a simplified thumbs up or thumbs down evaluation might negatively affect workers' motivation. Some speculate that this system might lead workers to adopt an 'on/off' mentality, potentially resulting in minimal effort to achieve a positive rating. However, evidence suggests that the potential for receiving a downvote could motivate efforts to avoid poor performance. Further research is necessary to assess the actual effects on worker engagement and productivity in various fields.
Need for Comprehensive Solutions Beyond Rating Adjustments
While the change in rating systems offers a way to mitigate immediate discrimination, it does not address the root causes of systemic racism. Future studies are necessary to explore how hiring practices may contribute to biases and inequalities even before performance evaluations take place. Understanding how racial perception affects initial job selections is crucial for developing comprehensive solutions to ensure equity in the workplace. The findings from the rating system experiments serve as a step towards improvement but highlight the need for ongoing efforts to tackle broader societal issues.
A study of almost 70,000 ratings showed that racial discrimination could be eliminated from an online platform by switching from a five-star rating system to a thumbs up or down. The platform connected customers to workers who performed home repair jobs, and prior to the shift people categorised by the study authors as ‘non-white’ had lower ratings and got paid less than their white counterparts. Through follow up studies the authors also showed that the five-star system allowed people to impart their personal opinions, whereas a thumbs up or down just focused them on whether a job was good or bad. The team hopes this could be an easy-to-implement shift to tackle racial discrimination.
A Nature investigation has revealed where the most retractions come from, with hospitals in China and institutions in India and Pakistan topping the list. Retractions are a normal part of science and may be a sign of necessary scrutiny, but they can also signal misconduct and use of paper mills. Features Editor Richard Van Noorden joins us to discuss what this means for science and tackling sloppy research.
Layoffs in the US’s Environmental Protection Agency, reactions to the DEI purge at NASA, and what RFK Jr.’s role as secretary of Health and Human Services could mean for health research.