Attention systems divide between subjective rating and algorithmic ranking.

Evidence

In the academic, artistic and financial worlds, a RATINGS logic still seems to dominate, which is to say, the positioning ‘along a scale according to a system of subjective assessments, based on recognition, trust and support by persons with whom a complex network of relations has been established’. PageRank, on the other hand, is illustrative of a RANKING logic, which is to say, the positioning ‘in a certain range according to an objective procedure, a method, an algorithm (as happens in the evaluation of academic journals, in the results of the Google search engine or in the calculation of the number of followers on Facebook and Twitter)’. — Yves Citton, The Ecology of Attention, 230

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the core distinction between ratings (subjective, relational) and rankings (objective, algorithmic) that structures the chapter.
• SHARE: For someone studying how academic citation metrics changed peer evaluation — this rating/ranking split is the load-bearing distinction.
• XREF: connects to: Attention also varies in quality and mode, not just quantity — Yves Citton, The Ecology of Attention, 123