I also do these sorts of things, for the exact reasons you describe.
Another thing that I like to do, when I’m new to a particular taxon, even if it’s one I know well in-person, but I’m new to identifying it on iNaturalist, I like to start by going through research-grade identifications, looking closely at them, and agreeing (or rarely, disagreeing) with them.
Looking only at research grade ones really reduces the amount of low-quality observations, i.e. ones that are already identified by 2 or more users, usually have more evidence, like clearer photography and/or multiple photos, often a pin on the map that gives relevant clues to habitat, etc.
Once I’ve gotten comfortable with the process for that species on iNat, and what the pictures tend to look like on iNat, then I go into the more general, trickier ones.
Also, sometimes I’m surprised to find mis-ID’s in research grade. It happens most frequently when there are only 2 ID’s and they’re both made by inexperienced users. But it happens often enough that it’s really important for users to look through the research grade observations too. So, not only will you be familiarizing yourself with the process and honing your own ID skills, but you are doing the very important work of catching errors in observations that may be used for scientific research.