Jens Asbjørn Bøgen
According to the study, a Goodread rating of three stars can easily hide a literary masterpiece.
Many readers scroll past books that hover around three stars on Goodreads, assuming the numbers signal mediocrity.
However, a new study suggests that assumption may be misleading.
Researchers argue that books with average ratings can still hold substantial literary value, even when reader scores seem unremarkable at first glance.
The findings come from a large-scale analysis of reader data and literary history, questioning how much a single average rating can really tell.
Numbers and nuance
Goodreads is a global platform where readers rate books on a one-to-five-star scale. Those averages are widely used by readers and the publishing industry as shorthand for quality.
But researchers from the Center for Humanities Computing (CHC) and the Center for Contemporary Cultures of Text (TEXT) in Denmark say mid-range scores often conceal very different reading experiences.
The team examined roughly 9,000 American novels published between 1880 and 2000, with particular attention to just over 2,000 books clustered around the middle of the rating scale.
What the data shows
According to the study, about 30 percent of these “mediocre” titles are regarded as literarily important by other standards, such as inclusion in curricula, classic status, or lasting cultural influence.
The researchers found that low enthusiasm was not the main reason for the ratings. Instead, many books divided opinion.
“Some give top marks, others are critical—and it is precisely this spread that characterizes books that engage,” says PhD student Pascale Feldkamp, who conducted the study together with colleagues from the Center for Humanities Computing and TEXT in a press release.
For books viewed as less important, this pattern does not appear. In those cases, additional ratings do not increase disagreement, suggesting indifference rather than engagement.
The researchers argue that growing disagreement is a signal of impact, not failure.
Beyond the average
“The study therefore challenges the idea that a book’s value can be read directly from its average star rating,” Feldkamp said. “A middling rating can cover very different situations.”
Books that provoke strong reactions may end up with neutral-looking averages because praise and criticism cancel each other out.
Examples include James Joyce’s Ulysses, Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita, William Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury, and Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead.
Highly rated books with a polarizing character
Highly regarded, acclaimed books can receive a middling rating because they provoke strong, opposing reactions among readers — whether due to style, theme, or perspective. Some examples include:
- James Joyce: Ulysses (stylistically experimental)
- Vladimir Nabokov: Lolita (provocative theme)
- William Faulkner: The Sound and the Fury (fragmented narrative voice)
- Malcolm Lowry: Under the Volcano (complex style)
- Ayn Rand: The Fountainhead (politically controversial)
- Tim LaHaye & Jerry B. Jenkins: Left Behind (ideologically polarizing)
The average rating can thus conceal both fascination and frustration.
Rethinking reader data
The researchers conclude that Goodreads data can still be useful, but only if interpreted carefully. Looking at how many people rate a book and how divided they are may reveal more than the average alone.
A three-star score, they argue, may point not to insignificance, but to controversy or lasting importance.
Sources: Center for Humanities Computing (CHC), Center for Contemporary Cultures of Text (TEXT), University of Aarhus: Arts
