Abstract:Problem definition: Platforms critically rely on rating systems to learn the quality of market participants. In practice, however, ratings are often highly inflated and therefore, not very informative. In this paper, we first investigate whether the platform can obtain less inflated, more informative ratings by altering the meaning and relative importance of the levels in the rating system. Second, we seek a principled approach for the platform to make these choices in the design of the rating system. Academic/practical relevance: Platforms critically rely on rating systems to learn the quality of market participants, and so, ensuring these ratings are informative is of first-order importance. Methodology: We analyze the results of a randomized, controlled trial on an online labor market in which an additional question was added to the feedback form. Between treatment conditions, we vary the question phrasing and answer choices; in particular, the treatment conditions include several positive-skewed verbal rating scales with descriptive phrases or adjectives providing specific interpretation for each rating level. We then develop a model-based framework to compare and select among rating system designs and apply this framework to the data obtained from the online labor market test. Results: Our test reveals that current inflationary norms can be countered by reanchoring the meaning of the levels of the rating system. In particular, positive-skewed verbal rating scales yield substantially deflated rating distributions that are much more informative about seller quality. Further, we demonstrate that our model-based framework for scale design and optimization can identify the most informative rating system and substantially improve the quality of information obtained over baseline designs. Managerial implications: Our study illustrates that practical, informative rating systems can be designed and demonstrates how to compare and design them in a principled manner.

Optimal Rating Design under Moral Hazard

Incentivizing Agents through Ratings

RewardRating: A Mechanism Design Approach to Improve Rating Systems

Flexible Moral Hazard Problems

Bribery in Rating Systems: A Game-Theoretic Perspective

Designing Informative Rating Systems: Evidence from an Online Labor Market

Moral Hazard with Heterogeneous Beliefs

Moral hazard, optimal unemployment insurance, and experience rating

Optimal Insurance with Rank-Dependent Utility and Increasing Indemnities

Dynamic Contract Design in the Presence Of Double Moral Hazard

Optimal Pricing Schemes in the Presence of Social Learning and Costly Reporting

Capital Budgeting and Compensation with Asymmetric Information and Moral Hazard

Optimal design for network mutual aid

Moral Hazard, Dynamic Incentives, and Ambiguous Perceptions

Designing Socially-Optimal Rating Protocols for Crowdsourcing Contest Dilemma

Ex-post moral hazard and manipulation-proof contracts

Incentive Design in Peer Review: Rating and Repeated Endogenous Matching

Optimal Mechanism Design for Single-Minded Agents

Optimal Pricing of Information

Government Procurement Contract Design with Unobservable Productivity and Moral Hazard

Mitigating Moral Hazard in Cyber Insurance Using Risk Preference Design