Scholarlink

<p>This article argues for a methodological extension of digital controversy analysis to digital metrics by presenting a case study of user reviews for <i>The Last of Us Part II</i> on Metacritic. While digital controversy analysis is generally used to study public debates on science and technology, we contend that it can be naturally adapted to study controversial cases of evaluation and quantification for a more nuanced understanding of how users evaluate and quantify their judgments at the interface of digital evaluative infrastructures. To demonstrate our approach, we collected user reviews of <i>The Last of Us Part II</i> on Metacritic and analyzed them using a combination of sentiment analysis, semantic network analysis and thematic analysis. We found that most users adopted competitive and dichotomous evaluation practices, affectively polarized around issues related to politics and fandom. In this context, they frequently chose extreme scores with the intention of “balancing” the average score, a practice that we contend is deeply intertwined with Metacritic’s evaluation infrastructure and culture. In the controversy, numerical ratings not only served as one topic of the controversy but also served as the primary means through which the controversy was enacted. In this regard, our methodological approach allowed us to capture a sym-<i>metrical</i> dimension between qualitative judgements and quantitative ratings.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

When numbers clash: mapping valuation and quantification controversies with digital methods

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月24日

查看全文
  • Umut Yener Kara,
  • Burcu Şimşek

摘要

This article argues for a methodological extension of digital controversy analysis to digital metrics by presenting a case study of user reviews for The Last of Us Part II on Metacritic. While digital controversy analysis is generally used to study public debates on science and technology, we contend that it can be naturally adapted to study controversial cases of evaluation and quantification for a more nuanced understanding of how users evaluate and quantify their judgments at the interface of digital evaluative infrastructures. To demonstrate our approach, we collected user reviews of The Last of Us Part II on Metacritic and analyzed them using a combination of sentiment analysis, semantic network analysis and thematic analysis. We found that most users adopted competitive and dichotomous evaluation practices, affectively polarized around issues related to politics and fandom. In this context, they frequently chose extreme scores with the intention of “balancing” the average score, a practice that we contend is deeply intertwined with Metacritic’s evaluation infrastructure and culture. In the controversy, numerical ratings not only served as one topic of the controversy but also served as the primary means through which the controversy was enacted. In this regard, our methodological approach allowed us to capture a sym-metrical dimension between qualitative judgements and quantitative ratings.