G'day, thanks for your interest in how we calculate an experience's ranking score. It's at the core of Rankers so I'm pleased you're curious.
The ranking score percentage is used to compare and sort experiences in ranking tables. It is not necessarily a direct measurement of the quality of a particular experience as rated by its customers. I've found it a useful tool to allow me to find the best experiences with confidence. But I've also found it important to read the customer reviews before making any final judgements!
We calculate an experience's ranking score using a multi-factor data model instead of a raw data average (mean). This model takes into account several important questions. For instance - is there a trusted body of reviews? What is the age of a review and is the review from a credible source?
Below you'll find details around some of the important factors that went into calculating the ranking score for Donegal House Irish Hotel.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at info@rankers.co.nz. We don't believe this is perfect or complete so we're always interested in ways we might make improvements.
72 Valid Reviews
The Donegal House Irish Hotel experience has a total of 75 reviews. There are 72 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 3 invalid reviews that are excluded from the calculation. Reviews can be excluded only when a reviewer is not verified or after an investigation by our team determines the reviewer is not genuine.
Within these 72 valid reviews, the experience has 1 face-to-face review collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 72 valid reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 29 |
|
40% |
9/10 | 23 |
|
32% |
8/10 | 10 |
|
14% |
7/10 | 4 |
|
6% |
6/10 | 4 |
|
6% |
5/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
88.75% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Donegal House Irish Hotel valid reviews is 88.75% and is based on 72 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
90.46%
Rankers calculates a weighted mean as a base average on which we can improve. Individual review's ratings are given a weight based on several factors. The weight of a review determines the overall impact it'll have on the final weighted average.
Recent reviews have more weight as they are more relevant and reflect the experience as it currently operates. Over time reviews become less relevant and loose their impact on the ranking score.
Low rating reviews carry slightly less weight. This dampens the effect of very low ratings for every experience across the board. This is especially important when the experience has few reviews overall and a single negative rating can grossly mischaracterise an experience. Consistent poor reviews will still result in the experience receiving a comparitively low ranking score.
Credible sources provide reviews that can be trusted. If we have verified a reviewer is genuine via a face-to-face meeting then the review carries additional weight.
Reviewer | Rating | Age | Relative Weight |
---|---|---|---|
EI | 9/10 | 90 days | 100% |
Jonathan | 9/10 | 90 days | 100% |
Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 274 days | 96% |
Stephanie G | 10/10 | 701 days | 73% |
Stef | 9/10 | 1431 days | 13% |
Christine | 9/10 | 1459 days | 11% |
Aisling | 10/10 | 1551 days | 8% |
Rebecca | 9/10 | 1612 days | 6% |
Conor | 10/10 | 1796 days | 4% |
Joe | 7/10 | 1796 days | 3% |
Antoine | 5/10 | 1796 days | 2% |
Erica | 9/10 | 1825 days | 4% |
Olly | 9/10 | 1825 days | 4% |
Dik Troost | 9/10 | 1825 days | 4% |
Charlie B | 7/10 | 1825 days | 3% |
Caleb | 8/10 | 1856 days | 3% |
Rosie | 9/10 | 1856 days | 4% |
Sabine | 6/10 | 1856 days | 3% |
3s Belgium | 8/10 | 1856 days | 3% |
Richard & Chris, UK | 9/10 | 1856 days | 4% |
Katie | 8/10 | 1887 days | 3% |
Carina | 7/10 | 1887 days | 3% |
Oliver | 8/10 | 1887 days | 3% |
Mirco | 9/10 | 1917 days | 3% |
Susanne | 9/10 | 1917 days | 3% |
Marion | 8/10 | 1917 days | 3% |
Julie | 10/10 | 1948 days | 3% |
Libby | 7/10 | 1948 days | 3% |
Eve | 10/10 | 1978 days | 3% |
Georgie | 10/10 | 1978 days | 3% |
Alice | 10/10 | 2009 days | 3% |
Xiang Long Ng | 10/10 | 2070 days | 3% |
ScoutnIndi | 9/10 | 2070 days | 3% |
Tim L | 10/10 | 2131 days | 3% |
Margaret | 10/10 | 2131 days | 3% |
Vincent | 8/10 | 2162 days | 3% |
Stefan Miedzinski | 10/10 | 2162 days | 3% |
Aisling | 9/10 | 2190 days | 3% |
Katie | 6/10 | 2221 days | 2% |
Marilli | 10/10 | 2252 days | 3% |
Ben | 10/10 | 2252 days | 3% |
Dan | 8/10 | 2252 days | 3% |
Mike Fricker | 10/10 | 2313 days | 3% |
helen reeve | 9/10 | 2313 days | 3% |
Claudia | 9/10 | 2343 days | 3% |
Cassie | 10/10 | 2343 days | 3% |
Peter Edmead | 10/10 | 2527 days | 2% |
Jay kerley | 5/10 | 2527 days | 1% |
Wina | 10/10 | 2527 days | 2% |
Christian Oerlemans | 8/10 | 2532 days | 2% |
Fei Fei Lei | 10/10 | 2576 days | 1% |
Nadene Wheatley | 8/10 | 2643 days | 2% |
Jean Simonet | 6/10 | 2659 days | 1% |
Michiel de Weerd | 10/10 | 2869 days | 2% |
Andrew Shortle | 9/10 | 3049 days | 1% |
Jack Frazier | 10/10 | 3132 days | 1% |
Syed Mohd Muhafiz Syed Mohd Bakar | 9/10 | 3195 days | 1% |
Janneke Thuijils | 9/10 | 3283 days | 1% |
Tomas Talpa | 9/10 | 3298 days | 1% |
James Whitehead | 6/10 | 3319 days | 0% |
Ellen Schmitz | 10/10 | 3322 days | 1% |
Rhiannan Edwards | 10/10 | 3332 days | 1% |
Helen B | 10/10 | 3340 days | 1% |
Florian Werner-Zilch | 10/10 | 3345 days | 1% |
Singapore Sling | 9/10 | 3347 days | 1% |
Ahmed Mohsen Aly | 10/10 | 3377 days | 1% |
Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3438 days | 0% |
Lorina Spring | 10/10 | 3442 days | 0% |
Harriet Bramley | 9/10 | 3458 days | 0% |
Alva Feldmeier | 10/10 | 3548 days | 0% |
Yann Le Gac | 10/10 | 3561 days | 0% |
Sarrob Sarrob | 8/10 | 3622 days | 0% |
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
No Adjustment
A reasonable number of reviews are necessary in order for the average to be credible and for an experience to take a prime position within the ranking tables. As such, experiences with only a few reviews have a moderated score. This does not mean that the experience or the reviews can't be trusted. The Donegal House Irish Hotel experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
-1.32% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 49 days. However the Donegal House Irish Hotel experience does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
In addition, an experience's ranking score may be adjusted for each day there is no new ranking. After 1 day the adjustment comes into effect. The maximum number of days that can be adjusted for is 200 days. Due to the seasonal nature of many businesses, this adjustment is applied dynamically throughout the year.
The Donegal House Irish Hotel experience has been adjusted for 64 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
Days | Adjustment |
---|---|
… | … |
61 | -1.26% |
62 | -1.28% |
63 | -1.30% |
64 | -1.32% |
65 | -1.34% |
66 | -1.37% |
67 | -1.39% |
… | … |
1.12% Adjustment
Every experience's review score is adjusted to balance out the disproportional number of negative reviews that are contributed.
You won't be surprised to learn that disgruntled customers are more likely to leave a review than happy ones. They are motivated to share their experience and warn others. We consider this a good thing and it's why reading the reviews is important. However we've learned it can misrepresent the experience in a more overall sense.
We apply a balancing adjustment to counteract this effect and ensure the ranking score is a more fair representation of the experience. This adjustment is applied equally to all experiences.
90%
The final ranking score once any adjustments, ratings, and rounding has been applied. This value is recalculated each day and a short rolling average is applied. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.