All reviews are manually examined by our team of experts in an effort to ensure published reviews are from verified sources and provide helpful content. All reviews are treated equally during the verification process, regardless of rating or vendor. During this process, the team verifies the reviewer’s identity, checks for conflicts of interest, and evaluates the review against our site guidelines. For a more in-depth overview, please see our Quality Assurance guidelines.
Simply put, yes. We treat one-star reviews no differently from five-star reviews. Like all online reviews platforms, our sites are intended to provide a forum for honest discussion between vendors and software users. By remaining neutral, they can host a wide array of opinions that help software shoppers make informed decisions. For this reason, and also to ensure compliance with applicable laws, we do not modify content or remove an opinion or statement from a valid review. For a detailed overview of our Quality Assurance process, click here.
The reviews program is continuously evolving. As we improve our methods, we periodically audit previously published reviews as they are flagged by our system. If a past review does not meet our current standards or our current guidelines, it may be removed by our team.
If a review is found to be fraudulent by our team, it will be removed from our site. In addition, the reviewer may be subject to removal from any outreach campaigns, and/or banned from leaving future reviews from our site. If a software vendor is found to have participated in fraudulent activity, their account may be subject to future penalties such as a publicly visible warning about suspicious activity.
GetApp is committed to providing our visitors an unbiased reviews catalogue with content from other community members. Though every reviewer is entitled to—and encouraged to share—their own opinion, GetApp is vigilant against attempts to deceive others through their review’s content. Any reviews found to be fraudulent will be removed, and the submitter of the review will be subject to penalties.
Fraudulent activity may include, but is not limited to, the following:
Attempts by a vendor to influence the reputation of themselves, or another vendor, by:
Fraudulent activity may also include attempts by a reviewer to damage the reputation of a vendor, or obtain incentives, through false pretences such as:
A reviewer should not review a product for which they have a conflict of interest or a financial stake in its success.
We believe it is important not to focus on the star rating alone. Our research has shown that people actually find reviews of products more believable if they have a variety of star ratings. In addition, a detailed review, even if a “lower” score, provides a much clearer picture of an experience than a five-star review with few details.
We encourage our vendors to respond to all customer reviews, regardless of rating given. We believe (and research shows) that a vendor’s willingness to address critical reviews builds credibility, shows responsiveness, and generally creates a more favourable opinion of the vendor and product.
No. When our Quality Assurance (“QA”) team verifies each reviewer’s identity, we take steps to ensure that they are a real person, not a scammer, and (among other items) do not have any conflict of interest (financial or competitive) with the vendor they are reviewing. Please see an overview of our Quality Assurance guidelines for more details.
If a review was submitted for a version of the product which was active and being supported at the time the review was submitted, the review will remain published. It is an accurate reflection of what the user’s experience was at that point in time.
As a product evolves, it is typical to see a shift in the nature of the reviews listed, and we believe this helps increase the value to software shoppers visiting our site. Older reviews can help a software shopper see how things have changed over the long term and help them gain confidence that issues are being addressed and updates being made over time.
We take several steps to safeguard against fraudulent reviews. We have technology in place, as well as a team dedicated to moderating reviews. But no system is perfect, and occasionally an inappropriate review may slip through the cracks. In these rare instances, you may flag a review by emailing us at [email protected], providing as much information as possible about the review, and the reasons you believe it should be investigated.
Vendors may log in to their vendor portals for instructions as to how to flag a review. For more details about our process, please refer to our Reviews Investigation Guidelines. What evidence do you consider while evaluating a review flagged for fraud?
While our internal investigative processes are confidential and all decisions are subject to our discretion, we have outlined some key factors that we consider during our reviews investigation process. Click here for an overview of our investigation process.
We’ll request proof of use from users when investigating reviews, but it’s not required. Our experience has shown that “proof of use” is a valuable piece of the puzzle, but not a reliable source of proof on its own. It’s just one aspect among an array of considerations we use when evaluating a review. Faking proof of use through doctored screenshots or images taken from web searches is a method favoured by those looking to scam our system. Moreover, with tens of thousands of products listed in our catalogue, it is simply not feasible for our QA team to become experts in verifying proof of use across all products. In our ongoing efforts to treat all vendors equally, we consider “proof of use” as one aspect among the many that make up our investigation.
We have technology in place, as well as a team dedicated to moderating reviews, to safeguard against fraudulent reviews. Every review is manually verified with care and consideration to ensure a high quality of content is published across our site. No system is perfect, however, and with tens of thousands of reviews submitted monthly, occasionally an inappropriate review may slip through the cracks. In these cases, we rely on our vendors and our reviewer community to alert us of potential fraud by “flagging” a review for further review “flagging” a review for further review.
We have implemented an “i” icon on our site, which will indicate the reviewer was offered an incentive to leave their review. The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” (an American agency)) Endorsement Guidelines require online companies to provide clear notice when a review has been submitted in exchange for a nominal incentive (whether invited by the website or by the software vendor). See here for more information. Our policies require that any such incentive must be made available to all reviewers who submit honest reviews, regardless of the rating they ultimately give the product they are reviewing.
Our team has analysed hundreds of thousands of reviews across the tens of thousands of products listed in our catalogue. It would not be feasible for our QA team to become experts equally across all products or to spend an equal amount of time verifying the details of each review. In our effort to treat all vendors equally, we must not fact check the opinions submitted by our reviewers. Instead, our Quality Assurance team focuses on verifying the identity of the reviewers and ensuring that reviews posted meet our site guidelines. Please find more details about our QA process, and our Reviews Guidelines.
At this time, we do not accept reviews submitted in languages other than English. Any review submitted in another language would need to be translated into English and re-submitted to our site by the reviewer. We will only accept a translation from the reviewer themselves, as we need to ensure the review is authentic.
We allow, and encourage, all vendors to respond in a constructive and respectful manner to reviews left on their profile pages. For guidance in this process, vendors may access their vendor portal to find more details on leaving a response via our platform.
We understand a negative review can be upsetting. As a reviews platform, we provide an opportunity for vendors to address misunderstandings or issues. A vendor’s response to a negative user review has the potential to result in a positive experience for both vendor and reviewer, as well as demonstrate to other software shoppers a great customer service experience. Please see our guide to addressing negative reviews as well as this blog post about the positive outcomes of negative reviews.
When submitting a response to a review through your vendor portal, there will be an option to select “Send response to reviewer.” You may send the response to the reviewer regardless of whether the reviewer decided to publicly display their information.
No, vendors are sent a notice only after a review has been published by our team. To avoid confusion from spam or reviews that do not pass our QA process, no notifications are sent upon a review submission.
Visitors to our sites are free to submit reviews to our QA process on whichever software they choose. As an unbiased, user-driven reviews platform, we do not ask for consent from the vendor before a review is published. All vendors are treated equally in this respect and cannot opt out of receiving reviews. In this way, our reviewers generate valuable content that help our other community of software shoppers make informed decisions.
Like all online reviews platforms, we endeavour to provide our users with software product directories that are as comprehensive as possible. As such, our policy is not to remove product listings from our sites unless: (i) the product listing does not fit within one of the existing software categories (or “directories”); (ii) the vendor can provide evidence that product is no longer actively being marketed and/or sold to the public; or (iii) the listing or profile fails to comply with our guidelines.
In our ongoing efforts to improve our service, we periodically audit our reviews database. And, as our ability to vet these reviews improves, we may find past reviews that still contain entirely valid content that we can now publish. These reviews will display in the order of their submission date. Because there is currently no time stamp on verified reviews, we treat these past reviews the same as all other verified reviews submissions. We publish them exactly as they were originally submitted.
If a review was not removed following your investigation request, this means that during the course of our investigation our team found the flagged review to be in compliance with our site guidelines. While we cannot provide further details about the investigatory process, we can confirm that the reviews team devotes significant time and effort to investigating every escalated review and evaluating the review against our site guidelines.
A review cannot be removed simply because it is referencing features that are no longer actively supported. If the review was valid at the time of submission, it is reflective of the user’s experience with that software at that point in time. While recent reviews are more likely to reflect a product’s most current set of capabilities and most relevant experiences, it is important for our shoppers to consider how reviews about a vendor have progressed over time as the software as developed.
Our site does not share the personal contact information provided by the reviewer along with a submission to any vendor, though certain non-private information such as name and company may be publicly displayed alongside a review to provide important context to our site users, except in cases where reviewers have opted to submit an “anonymous” review.
Yes, we consider all information when investigating a flagged review. However, we are unable to act as an intermediary between vendors and reviewers. As an unbiased reviews platform, we cannot make decisions based on interactions that took place between a vendor and a reviewer outside of our site. Because we are not able to validate private communications, such as email exchanges or phone conversations that happen outside of our site, these can be unreliable. Therefore, we consider outside communications as one aspect among the many that make up our investigation. More details about our investigation process can be found here.
While we understand that many vendors pride themselves on knowing their user base, there are many valid cases where a vendor might not know a legitimate reviewer, based on the information provided along with a review. These cases include but are not limited to the following:
As a neutral content platform, we rely on our reviewers to provide accurate and honest descriptions of their software experiences. In keeping with our efforts to provide the broadest possible picture of the software industry, we try not to limit the types of software experiences that are shared on our site. Because any software user has a valid experience to share, a reviewer is not required to be the account owner or to have been in direct contact with the vendor.
Yes, there are no restrictions as to how many reviewers from the same company may review a given product. As co-workers often use the same product in different ways, we feel that providing these multiple viewpoints is a valuable service to our community. However, any one reviewer is prohibited from writing more than one review of a product within a short time period.
Vendors are permitted to ask their customers for reviews and offer nominal incentives for doing so. GetApp also sends out periodic email campaigns asking for a software review in exchange for an incentive amount.
We encourage interchanges between vendors and reviewers via our review response mechanism. Vendors should not contact a reviewer, either directly or indirectly, with the goal of getting a review removed or edited. GetApp does NOT condone, and has a zero tolerance policy for, any threats or bullying of our reviewers. If we receive a report that a vendor has reached out to a reviewer to request a review to be removed/edited, or harasses that reviewer in any manner, we encourage the reviewer to contact our site immediately by emailing [email protected]. Based on the results of our investigation, vendors that violate our guidelines repeatedly or otherwise attempt to abuse our Program will be issued notice of our concerns. If the vendor continues to violate our Guidelines following receipt of such notice, we reserve the right to impose penalties at our discretion, including without limitation the right to modify or discontinue (temporarily or permanently) vendors access to our Site and Services.
Though no fraud may have been intended, when a third party submits a review on a reviewer’s behalf, we have no way to determine whether the content was submitted with the reviewer’s consent or if the original content has been modified in any manner. When we identify a customer review submitted by a vendor, we will disable the review. The original reviewer is encouraged, following such disablement, to submit a review in their own right directly to our site.
All reviews for all vendors across all directories are subject to the same Quality Assurance process, regardless of whether or not they are a paying client. We make every effort to ensure that our reviews team is completely unbiased and unmotivated by revenue. This is one of the primary reasons the reviews team is separate from the sales and marketing teams.
We believe that providing a full catalogue of software across a variety of categories is more important to our users than removing a listing altogether. Instead, we look to penalise vendors for fraudulent activity in other ways, such as flagging their profile for fraud as a warning to software buyers. In this way, we provide valuable information to software shoppers that would not be evident were we to simply remove the profile from our catalogue.
In the event that your software page displays a penalty and you’re unsure why, reach out to the reviews team through your vendor portal for a brief synopsis of the activity that led to the penalties, along with additional details about the penalty.
We do not facilitate arbitration. We are not mediators and cannot intervene in disputes between our reviewers and vendors. If you feel you are being harassed or threatened, we suggest you contact applicable law enforcement.
If a negative review does not meet our guidelines, please flag the review for investigation through the vendor portal. Our team will investigate accordingly as per our standard investigation procedures.
Users who submit a review on our site may receive future communications from us about the submitted review. Any user who does not wish to receive these marketing notices may choose to opt-out of our email program by clicking on the “unsubscribe” link provided in these emails. Please review our site terms for further details.
For those reviewers who submitted a review as part of an incentive program, please keep a few key points in mind:
A note on fraud. Gift card codes are unique and may only be used by those who have access to the email the cards were originally sent to. Please know that we are able to track gift card balance and identify whether a gift card has been redeemed and used. Illegitimate requests for an incentive, as well as any fraudulent activity related to leaving reviews in exchange for an incentive, may result in removal from our reviews incentive program.
To protect the integrity of our reviews program, reviews may be disabled if we do not feel confident we have verified the identity of the reviewer, or if we feel the content submitted does not adhere to our guidelines. In some cases, we will reach out to reviewers requesting additional information to help us determine whether we can publish the review. Following your review submission, please keep an eye out for an email from us requesting additional details that may be required to publish your review!
If it’s only been a short while since you submitted your review, please be aware that it may take up to a week before a submitted review has time to be properly vetted. On average, a review takes up to 72 hours to be verified and published.
As per our reviewer policies, so long as a review meets our guidelines, we will never edit it in any way that would change the original intent. However, we may make simple edits to correct typos or remove non-standard characters. The reviewer will not be notified about these edits, which are made at the discretion of GetApp.
Only the original reviewer is entitled to direct us to edit their content or request that we remove their review.
If a review does not pass our QA process or is identified by our team as not meeting our Community Guidelines, the review will not be published. Reviews that are not published do not qualify for an incentive, even when submitted in response to an incentive offer. Users may submit another review that meets our guidelines.
While a reviewer may update their own review at any time, only a single review per product is allowed within a six-month period. If a second review is submitted by the same reviewer within this timeframe, the older review will be disabled and the newer review will remain published as the most recent experience.
In short, possibly. As a condition of submitting a review, you tick a box stating that you acknowledge and agree to our site guidelines, which among other things state that all content submitted meets our guidelines. Our site has the right to seek legal action against any reviewer who submits a review containing fraudulent, or misleading, information. In addition, many jurisdictions in and outside of the United States take reviews content very seriously and have prosecuted reviewers over posting fraudulent content. Countries outside of the US, such as the UK, France, Italy, and Germany, have especially strict laws posted about reviews fraud, as dictated by the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive.