The usual question is when do you listen to beta-readers and when do you not. The reasoning put forward for the latter action is usually that, beta-readers are human and sometimes they are wrong. And the advice on how to know? See if more than one beta-reader said the same thing.
That may be reasonable advice, but I would contend that a ‘majority’ can also be wrong, especially if they all share a different worldview from you. Conversely, one beta-reader may be right, even if they are the lone voice on a specific issue, if they have a unique perspective or reason for insight (for any number of reasons but a common one is based on their membership of a marginalized group).
The reality is, that I never ignore beta-readers. But there is a big difference between listening to what someone has to say and acting on it. Oftentimes, in fact, it is the comments that beta-readers make that I don’t act on that I actually spend the most time thinking about. I want to be sure it is not my limited worldview or my ego that is blocking me from seeing it their way.
If a beta-reader’s comment makes sense to me I will work to fix where my writing has failed. However, lots of things can prevent me from acting on it: I don’t understand the feedback, I don’t agree with the feedback, the beta-reader has not shared my vision for the piece, their life experience is so radically different from mine we see the world differently, etc
One of the biggest gifts beta-readers offer you is allowing you to see your story with fresh eyes. And that brings us to the other problem with taking a group vote on any controversial comment, and that is that doing so requires you to use multiple beta-readers at each read. That can mean burning through your available beta readers.
Why is that bad? Well, you may make major revisions and you (and your beta-readers) can only see a story for the first time once. Fresh eyes are truly one of your most valuable resources. You are too close, and you cannot see the flaws, even the obvious ones. So protecting that resource and not using large voting groups of readers is important. For that reason, I prefer to have multiple rounds and use only one or two readers at each.
So what should you do if you are not using a group of beta-readers and taking the ‘majority vote’ approach to knowing whether to adjust a story or not? Have a dialogue with your beta readers. Make sure you understand where they are coming from, and why they think what they commented on. And at the end of the day, don’t just go off a count of hands, as long as you understand why your positions differ, go with your own gut. It’s your story you are telling! (with the one caveat, that if it is a sensitivity reader you disagree with, think really long and hard about their input. After all, they are usually asked due to ‘blindness’ we know we have).
How do you use beta-readers? How do you decide whether to act on a comment if you are unsure about it? Do you use multiple at each stage? Let me know in the comments below!
Gideon P. Smith 
I always take story feedback with a grain of salt. Almost always, critiques of my stories are coming from other writers. I’ve been in LOTS of writing groups, good and bad. If their feedback is helping me tell the story I want to tell, I’ll consider it. If, however, their feedback is along the lines of, “Well this is how I would have written it,” I usually ignore it. The best critiquers are the ones who help you tell the story you want to tell, not the ones telling you how they would’ve done it.
LikeLike