IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/joares/v55y2017i5p1051-1088.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Performance Effect of Feedback Frequency and Detail: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Customer Satisfaction

Author

Listed:
  • PABLO CASAS‐ARCE
  • SOFIA M. LOURENÇO
  • F. ASÍS MARTÍNEZ‐JEREZ

Abstract

This paper presents the results from a field experiment that examines the effects of nonfinancial performance feedback on the behavior of professionals working for an insurance repair company. We vary the frequency (weekly and monthly) and the level of detail of the feedback that the 800 professionals receive. Contrary to what we would expect if these professionals conformed to the model of the Bayesian decision maker, more (and more frequent) information does not always help improve performance. In fact, we find that professionals achieve the best outcomes when they receive detailed but infrequent (monthly) feedback. The treatment groups with frequent feedback, regardless of how detailed it is, perform no better than the control group (with monthly and aggregate information). The results are consistent with the information in the latest feedback report being most salient and professionals in the weekly treatments overweighting their most recent performance, hampering their ability to learn.

Suggested Citation

  • Pablo Casas‐Arce & Sofia M. Lourenço & F. Asís Martínez‐Jerez, 2017. "The Performance Effect of Feedback Frequency and Detail: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Customer Satisfaction," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(5), pages 1051-1088, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:joares:v:55:y:2017:i:5:p:1051-1088
    DOI: 10.1111/1475-679X.12184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12184
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1475-679X.12184?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonathan E. Alevy & Michael S. Haigh & John A. List, 2007. "Information Cascades: Evidence from a Field Experiment with Financial Market Professionals," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(1), pages 151-180, February.
    2. Frank Gigler & Chandra Kanodia & Haresh Sapra & Raghu Venugopalan, 2014. "How Frequent Financial Reporting Can Cause Managerial Short‐Termism: An Analysis of the Costs and Benefits of Increasing Reporting Frequency," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 357-387, May.
    3. Andrew Buskirk, 2012. "Disclosure frequency and information asymmetry," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 411-440, May.
    4. Eric Floyd & John A. List, 2016. "Using Field Experiments in Accounting and Finance," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 437-475, May.
    5. Roger E. Bohn, 1995. "Noise and Learning in Semiconductor Manufacturing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(1), pages 31-42, January.
    6. Bushee, BJ & Noe, CF, 2000. "Corporate disclosure practices, institutional investors, and stock return volatility," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38, pages 171-202.
    7. Matthew Rabin, 2002. "Inference by Believers in the Law of Small Numbers," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(3), pages 775-816.
    8. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
    9. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Merchant, Kenneth A. & Otley, David, 2020. "Beyond the systems versus package debate," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    2. Bernard Gumah & Liu Wenbin & Maxwell Akansina Aziabah, 2021. "Supervisors’ Leadership Styles’ Influence on Foreign Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in a Cross-Cultural Work Setting: A Moderated Mediation Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440219, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John List, 2022. "2021 Summary Data of Natural Field Experiments Published on Fieldexperiments.com," Natural Field Experiments 00747, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. John List, 2021. "2021 Summary Data of Artefactual Field Experiments Published on Fieldexperiments.com," Artefactual Field Experiments 00749, The Field Experiments Website.
    3. Ginny Seung Choi & Virgil Henry Storr, 2020. "Market interactions, trust and reciprocity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-32, May.
    4. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    5. Małgorzata Janicka & Aleksandra Pieloch-Babiarz & Artur Sajnóg, 2020. "Does Short-Termism Influence the Market Value of Companies? Evidence from EU Countries," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Christoph Huber & Christian König-Kersting, 2022. "Experimenting with Financial Professionals," Working Papers 2022-07, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    7. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List, 2016. "Field Experiments in Markets," Artefactual Field Experiments j0002, The Field Experiments Website.
    8. Fabio Galeotti & Valeria Maggian & Marie Claire Villeval, 2021. "Fraud Deterrence Institutions Reduce Intrinsic Honesty," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(638), pages 2508-2528.
    9. Sheng-Syan Chen & Chia-Wei Huang & Chuan-Yang Hwang & Yanzhi Wang, 2022. "Voluntary disclosure and corporate innovation," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 1081-1115, April.
    10. Ganglmair, Bernhard & Holcomb, Alex & Myung, Noah, 2016. "Cutthroats or comrades: Information sharing among competing fund managers," MPRA Paper 71506, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Eric Floyd & John A. List, 2016. "Using Field Experiments in Accounting and Finance," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 437-475, May.
    12. Valentina Lagasio & Marina Brogi, 2021. "Market reaction to banks’ interim press releases: an event study analysis," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 25(1), pages 95-119, March.
    13. Brian Albrecht & Omar Al-Ubaydli & Peter Boettke, 2022. "Testing the Hayek hypothesis: Recent theoretical and experimental evidence," Artefactual Field Experiments 00759, The Field Experiments Website.
    14. Levitt, Steven D. & List, John A., 2009. "Field experiments in economics: The past, the present, and the future," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 1-18, January.
    15. List John A., 2007. "Field Experiments: A Bridge between Lab and Naturally Occurring Data," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-47, April.
    16. Al-Ubaydli, Omar & Boettke, Peter, 2010. "Markets as economizers of information: Field experimental examination of the “Hayek Hypothesis”," MPRA Paper 27660, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Eran Rubin & Amir Rubin, 2021. "On the economic effects of the text completion interface: empirical analysis of financial markets," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(3), pages 717-735, September.
    18. Khadjavi, Menusch & Lange, Andreas, 2013. "Prisoners and their dilemma," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 163-175.
    19. Felix Bader & Bastian Baumeister & Roger Berger & Marc Keuschnigg, 2021. "On the Transportability of Laboratory Results," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 50(3), pages 1452-1481, August.
    20. Christian Leuz & Peter D. Wysocki, 2016. "The Economics of Disclosure and Financial Reporting Regulation: Evidence and Suggestions for Future Research," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 525-622, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:joares:v:55:y:2017:i:5:p:1051-1088. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-8456 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.