> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://learn.social.plus/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# User Insights

> Identify and understand your most valuable community members through automated scoring of contribution level and content quality

<Info>
  Discover who's truly driving value in your community with intelligent scoring that goes beyond activity metrics. This feature automatically evaluates user impact based on contribution frequency and content quality, helping you identify top performers, rising stars, and users who need support.
</Info>

<CardGroup cols={3}>
  <Card title="Identify" icon="star">
    Surface top contributors instantly
  </Card>

  <Card title="Evaluate" icon="chart-line">
    Measure quality, not just quantity
  </Card>

  <Card title="Filter" icon="filter">
    Find specific user segments fast
  </Card>

  <Card title="Sort" icon="arrow-down-wide-short">
    Prioritize by performance level
  </Card>

  <Card title="Reward" icon="award">
    Recognize valuable members
  </Card>

  <Card title="Support" icon="hand-holding-heart">
    Guide low performers to improve
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

## Overview

Community managers face a fundamental challenge: identifying who truly adds value versus who just adds noise. High activity doesn't always mean high impact. A user rapidly posting low-quality content creates volume without value, while thoughtful contributors creating insightful posts may stay hidden in the metrics.

This feature solves that problem with two intelligent scoring systems:

* **Contribution Level**: Transparent points-based scoring that rewards meaningful actions (posts, comments, reactions)
* **Content Quality Level**: Average quality score of all user-generated posts

Together, these scores provide a complete picture of each user's impact, helping you make data-driven decisions about recognition, moderation, and community growth.

## Key Benefits

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Data-Driven Decisions" icon="chart-bar">
    Move beyond gut instinct with objective, automated scoring that scales with your community
  </Card>

  <Card title="Quick Identification" icon="bolt">
    Instantly surface top performers or users needing attention with smart filters and sorting
  </Card>

  <Card title="Strategic Insights" icon="lightbulb">
    Understand who drives real value, reward excellence, and build stronger communities
  </Card>

  <Card title="Transparent Scoring" icon="eye">
    Clear, explainable metrics with tooltips showing exactly how scores are calculated
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

## Accessing User Insights

<Steps>
  <Step title="Navigate to Manage Users">
    Sidebar → Users → Manage Users
  </Step>

  <Step title="View Score Labels">
    Each user displays their Contribution Level and Content Quality Level as clear, color-coded labels
  </Step>

  <Step title="Apply Filters">
    Use the filter dropdowns to focus on specific contribution or quality levels, or filter by [tags](/analytics-and-moderation/console/user-and-content-management/tag-management) to narrow down specific user segments
  </Step>

  <Step title="Sort for Priority">
    Click column headers to sort by contribution or quality, finding top or low performers instantly
  </Step>

  <Step title="Investigate Details">
    Click any user to open their User History panel and see detailed activity supporting the scores
  </Step>
</Steps>

## Understanding Contribution Levels

Contribution Level measures **how actively** a user participates in your community through posts, comments, and reactions. It's calculated using a transparent points-based system over the last 30 days.

### Scoring System

<AccordionGroup>
  <Accordion title="Points Breakdown">
    Each action earns points based on effort and impact:

    * **Create a post**: 10 points
    * **Write a comment**: 5 points
    * **Add a reaction**: 1 point

    <Note>
      Deleted posts and comments are automatically excluded from scoring to ensure accuracy.
    </Note>
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Contribution Level Labels">
    Points accumulate to determine your contribution level:

    | Label         | Points Range   | Meaning                                          |
    | ------------- | -------------- | ------------------------------------------------ |
    | **Very High** | 501+ points    | Power contributor driving significant engagement |
    | **High**      | 201-500 points | Active contributor with consistent participation |
    | **Medium**    | 51-200 points  | Regular contributor with steady activity         |
    | **Low**       | 1-50 points    | Emerging contributor, just getting started       |
    | **None**      | 0 points       | No contribution activity in the last 30 days     |

    <Tip>
      **Pro Tip**: The 30-day rolling window means contribution levels naturally reflect current engagement, not historical activity.
    </Tip>
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Customizable Weights (API)">
    Enterprise customers can adjust point weights via API to match your community's unique dynamics:

    * Emphasize posts if you value original content creation
    * Increase comment weights to reward discussion participation
    * Adjust reaction values if engagement style differs

    <Info>
      Contact your account manager to configure custom weighting for your application.
    </Info>
  </Accordion>
</AccordionGroup>

## Understanding Content Quality Levels

Content Quality Level measures **how well** a user creates content, based on the average quality score of their posts. This helps identify users who consistently produce valuable, well-structured content versus those posting spam or low-effort material.

### Quality Assessment

<AccordionGroup>
  <Accordion title="How Quality is Calculated">
    Content Quality is determined by:

    1. **Individual Post Scores**: Each post receives a quality score (based on AI content moderation and community signals)
    2. **User Average**: The user's Content Quality Level is the average of all their post scores
    3. **Active Posts Only**: Deleted posts are excluded from the calculation

    <Note>
      Only posts are evaluated for quality—comments and reactions don't factor into this score. This focuses the metric on substantive content creation.
    </Note>
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Content Quality Level Labels">
    Quality scores map to clear, intuitive labels:

    | Label         | Description                  | Typical Characteristics                     |
    | ------------- | ---------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- |
    | **Excellent** | Highest quality content      | Insightful, well-structured, valuable posts |
    | **Good**      | Above-average quality        | Solid content with clear value              |
    | **Fair**      | Acceptable quality           | Adequate posts, room for improvement        |
    | **Weak**      | Below-average quality        | Low-effort or problematic content           |
    | **Broken**    | Violates community standards | Spam, inappropriate, or harmful content     |
    | **No Posts**  | User hasn't created posts    | New users or comment-only participants      |
  </Accordion>
</AccordionGroup>

## Using Insights in Manage Users

### Display and Tooltips

Both Contribution Level and Content Quality Level are displayed prominently on:

* **Manage Users Page**: See labels for all users at a glance
* **User History Panel**: View scores when investigating individual users

**Hover for Details**: Hovering over any label shows a tooltip explaining:

* How the score is calculated in general
* The specific threshold or range for that label
* What the label means for user behavior

### Sorting Capabilities

Click column headers to sort the user list and quickly identify specific segments:

<AccordionGroup>
  <Accordion title="Sort by Contribution Level">
    **Two sorting options**:

    * **Highest First**: Very High → High → Medium → Low → None (identify top contributors)
    * **Lowest First**: None → Low → Medium → High → Very High (find inactive or low-engagement users)

    <Tip>
      Use "Lowest First" to identify users who may be disengaging or need onboarding support.
    </Tip>
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Sort by Content Quality Level">
    **Two sorting options**:

    * **Highest First**: Excellent → Good → Fair → Weak → Broken → No Posts (surface quality creators)
    * **Lowest First**: Broken → Weak → Fair → Good → Excellent → No Posts (flag problem content)

    <Warning>
      "Lowest First" quality sorting is critical for moderation—it surfaces users creating problematic content.
    </Warning>
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Secondary Sorting">
    When multiple users have the same score, they're sorted by **Last Created Date** (most recent first) for consistent, predictable ordering
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Pagination Handling">
    Sorting applies to the **full result set**, not just the current page. This ensures accurate top/bottom rankings across your entire user base.
  </Accordion>
</AccordionGroup>

### Advanced Filtering

Focus on specific user segments by filtering on Contribution Level or Content Quality Level—or both together:

<AccordionGroup>
  <Accordion title="Contribution Level Filter">
    Select a single contribution level to view only users at that engagement tier:

    * **Very High** (🔥): Your power users
    * **High** (💪): Strong contributors
    * **Medium** (⚡): Regular participants
    * **Low** (🌱): Emerging members
    * **None** (👻): Inactive users

    **Example Use Cases**:

    * Filter for "Very High" to identify users for a rewards program
    * Filter for "None" to find disengaged users for re-engagement campaigns
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Content Quality Level Filter">
    Select a single quality level to view only users creating content at that standard:

    * **Excellent** (✅): Top-quality creators
    * **Good** (👍): Above-average contributors
    * **Fair** (😐): Acceptable content
    * **Weak** (👎): Below-average quality
    * **Broken** (🚫): Policy violations
    * **No Posts** (📝): Non-posting users

    **Example Use Cases**:

    * Filter for "Excellent" to identify content for featured sections
    * Filter for "Broken" to review users for potential bans
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Combined Filters (AND Logic)">
    Apply both filters simultaneously to find precise user segments:

    * **High Contribution + Excellent Quality**: Your most valuable members
    * **Very High Contribution + Weak Quality**: High-volume, low-value posters (potential spam)
    * **Low Contribution + Good Quality**: Rising stars with potential
    * **None Contribution + No Posts**: Completely inactive users

    <Info>
      Filters work together using AND logic: results must match BOTH the selected contribution level AND content quality level.
    </Info>
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Filter Limitations">
    <Warning>
      **Important**: Contribution and Quality filters cannot be combined with:

      * User status filters (Flagged / Non-Flagged)
      * Search by user ID or name

      If you need to search for a specific user, apply the search first, then use insights on the User History panel.
    </Warning>
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Empty States">
    If no users match your selected filters, you'll see a clear empty state message guiding you to adjust your criteria.
  </Accordion>
</AccordionGroup>

## Strategic Use Cases

<Tabs>
  <Tab title="Recognition Programs">
    **Goal**: Reward top contributors

    **Workflow**:

    1. Sort by Contribution Level (Highest First)
    2. Filter for Content Quality = "Excellent" or "Good"
    3. Review top 10-50 users
    4. Award badges, privileges, or recognition

    **Impact**: Reinforce positive behavior, increase retention of valuable members
  </Tab>

  <Tab title="Moderation Priority">
    **Goal**: Identify problematic users

    **Workflow**:

    1. Sort by Content Quality (Lowest First)
    2. Filter for Content Quality = "Broken" or "Weak"
    3. Review flagged content in User History
    4. Take moderation action (warn, ban, remove content)

    **Impact**: Proactively address policy violations, maintain community health
  </Tab>

  <Tab title="Rising Star Detection">
    **Goal**: Find emerging contributors to nurture

    **Workflow**:

    1. Filter for Contribution Level = "Medium" or "Low"
    2. Filter for Content Quality = "Excellent" or "Good"
    3. Engage these users (invite to programs, feature content)
    4. Track progression over time

    **Impact**: Develop future power users, increase engagement
  </Tab>

  <Tab title="Re-engagement Campaign">
    **Goal**: Bring back inactive valuable users

    **Workflow**:

    1. Filter for Contribution Level = "None"
    2. Cross-reference historical data (if available) for formerly active users
    3. Targeted outreach or incentives

    **Impact**: Reduce churn, revive dormant community members
  </Tab>

  <Tab title="Spam Detection">
    **Goal**: Identify high-volume, low-quality posters

    **Workflow**:

    1. Filter for Contribution Level = "Very High" or "High"
    2. Filter for Content Quality = "Weak" or "Broken"
    3. Review post patterns for spam
    4. Take enforcement action

    **Impact**: Reduce noise, maintain content standards
  </Tab>
</Tabs>

## Best Practices

<AccordionGroup>
  <Accordion title="Regular Review Cadence">
    Establish a consistent schedule for reviewing user insights:

    * **Weekly**: Check for new "Broken" quality users requiring immediate action
    * **Bi-weekly**: Identify top contributors for recognition
    * **Monthly**: Analyze trends (are quality scores improving? Is contribution concentrated?)
    * **Quarterly**: Review overall community health and adjust strategies

    <Tip>
      Set calendar reminders for these reviews to maintain consistency and catch issues early.
    </Tip>
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Combine with Other Data">
    User insights are most powerful when combined with:

    * **User History**: See the specific content behind the scores
    * **Analytics Dashboard**: Track trends over time
    * **Moderation Feed**: Cross-reference with flagged content
    * **Community Engagement Metrics**: Understand context of scores

    Don't rely on scores alone—investigate the underlying behavior.
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Act on Insights">
    Insights only create value when they drive action:

    * **Reward**: Create recognition programs for top performers
    * **Moderate**: Address low-quality content creators promptly
    * **Engage**: Reach out to promising mid-tier contributors
    * **Support**: Provide resources to help users improve
    * **Adjust**: If scores don't match expectations, review community guidelines or score weights
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Consider Context">
    Scores provide objective data, but context matters:

    * New communities may have many "Low" contributors still finding their voice
    * Niche communities may naturally have lower overall activity
    * Seasonal trends may affect contribution levels
    * Content quality standards vary by community type

    Use scores as a starting point, not the final word.
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Transparency with Users">
    Consider sharing how contribution and quality are measured:

    * Include scoring criteria in community guidelines
    * Explain what behaviors earn points
    * Set clear content quality standards
    * Show users their own scores (if your app supports it)

    Transparency helps users understand how to contribute meaningfully.
  </Accordion>
</AccordionGroup>

## Metrics to Monitor

Track these key indicators to understand and optimize your community health:

| Metric                                  | What It Tells You               | Action Trigger                                    |
| --------------------------------------- | ------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------- |
| **Distribution of Contribution Levels** | Engagement health across tiers  | High concentration in "None" → improve onboarding |
| **% Users with "Excellent" Quality**    | Content quality baseline        | Low % → review guidelines, improve education      |
| **Very High + Broken Users**            | Potential spam or abuse         | Any occurrence → immediate investigation          |
| **Low/None + Excellent Users**          | Untapped potential              | Rising count → nurture these emerging stars       |
| **Trend: Contribution Levels**          | Growing or shrinking engagement | Declining high levels → investigate causes        |
| **Trend: Quality Levels**               | Improving or degrading content  | Degrading quality → strengthen moderation         |
| **Top 10% Contributor Concentration**   | Community dependence risk       | Too concentrated → diversify engagement           |
| **Broken Quality Rate**                 | Moderation effectiveness        | Rising rate → review moderation processes         |

<Info>
  **Benchmarking**: Compare your metrics month-over-month and against similar communities to identify trends and set realistic goals.
</Info>

## Troubleshooting

<AccordionGroup>
  <Accordion title="Scores seem inaccurate">
    **Symptoms**: User score doesn't match expected behavior

    **Possible Causes**:

    * Score reflects last 30 days only (not historical activity)
    * Deleted content excluded from calculation
    * Recent activity hasn't updated yet (allow time for sync)

    **Resolution**:

    1. Open User History to verify specific posts/comments
    2. Check date range of activity
    3. Confirm no recent bulk deletions
    4. Allow 5-10 minutes for score recalculation after new activity
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Label not displaying">
    **Symptoms**: Missing contribution or quality label, or error message shown

    **Possible Causes**:

    * Score calculation error (backend issue)
    * User data incomplete or corrupted
    * Permission issue

    **Resolution**:

    1. Refresh the page
    2. Check console for error details (if technical admin)
    3. Verify user account status (active, not deleted)
    4. Contact support if error persists across multiple users
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Tooltip not appearing">
    **Symptoms**: Hovering over label doesn't show explanation

    **Possible Causes**:

    * Browser caching issue
    * Tooltip data not loaded

    **Resolution**:

    1. Refresh page (clear cache if needed)
    2. Try different browser
    3. Verify internet connection
    4. If persistent, report as UI bug
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Filters not working">
    **Symptoms**: Filter selection doesn't update user list, or shows unexpected results

    **Possible Causes**:

    * Conflict with search or status filters
    * No users match criteria (empty state)
    * Filter sync delay

    **Resolution**:

    1. Clear any search queries or status filters first
    2. Verify filter selection is correct (check dropdown)
    3. Try single filter before combining
    4. Refresh page if results seem stale
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Sorting not functioning">
    **Symptoms**: Clicking sort doesn't reorder list, or order seems wrong

    **Possible Causes**:

    * Active filters limiting result set
    * Secondary sort (by date) creating confusion
    * Cached sort state

    **Resolution**:

    1. Note that users with same score sort by date
    2. Clear filters and try sorting again
    3. Refresh page to reset sort state
    4. Verify pagination—sorting applies across all pages
  </Accordion>

  <Accordion title="Can't combine filters as expected">
    **Symptoms**: Want to use contribution + quality + flagged status together

    **Explanation**: This is a current limitation—insights filters work independently from search and status filters.

    **Workaround**:

    1. Apply contribution + quality filters to narrow list
    2. Manually scan for flagged users (flagged indicator still visible)
    3. OR: Filter for flagged users first, then check scores in User History individually

    <Info>
      This limitation ensures filter logic remains clear and predictable. Future releases may expand filter combinations.
    </Info>
  </Accordion>
</AccordionGroup>

## Integration with Other Features

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Tag Management" icon="tags" href="/analytics-and-moderation/console/user-and-content-management/tag-management">
    Combine insight scores with custom tags for powerful user segmentation — tag high performers, rising stars, or users needing support
  </Card>

  <Card title="User Social History" icon="user" href="/analytics-and-moderation/console/user-and-content-management/user-social-history">
    See detailed activity supporting contribution and quality scores
  </Card>

  <Card title="Moderation Feed" icon="flag" href="/analytics-and-moderation/console/user-and-content-management/mod-feed">
    Review flagged content from low-quality users
  </Card>

  <Card title="Posts Management" icon="file-text" href="/analytics-and-moderation/console/social-management/social-management/posts">
    View content in full community context
  </Card>

  <Card title="Analytics Dashboard" icon="chart-line" href="/analytics-and-moderation/console/analytics/overview">
    Track contribution and quality trends over time
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

## Key Takeaways

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Beyond Activity" icon="eye">
    Contribution + Quality scoring reveals true user value, not just volume of activity
  </Card>

  <Card title="Actionable Data" icon="bolt">
    Clear labels, sorting, and filtering make it easy to find and act on user segments
  </Card>

  <Card title="Strategic Tool" icon="compass">
    Use insights to reward excellence, support growth, moderate effectively, and build healthier communities
  </Card>

  <Card title="Transparent System" icon="book-open">
    Explainable scoring with tooltips helps you understand and trust the data
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

***

<Note>
  **Need Help?** If you have questions about interpreting scores or optimizing your community strategy based on user insights, contact your Customer Success Manager or visit our [support](mailto:support@social.plus).
</Note>