IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v147y2018icp26-47.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A ratings pattern heuristic in judgments of expertise: When being right Looks wrong

Author

Listed:
  • Spassova, Gerri
  • Palmeira, Mauricio
  • Andrade, Eduardo B.

Abstract

We propose a “ratings pattern heuristic” in judgments of expertise—that is, people’s tendency to undervalue critics who assign the same rating to multiple options, overlooking diagnostic information which would clearly justify the uniform ratings. The heuristic is driven by a strong association between discrimination and expertise and a focus on summary ratings. People “punish” uniform (vs. varied) raters even when (a) uniform ratings are acknowledgedly more likely (studies 1a and 1b), (b) the uniform rater’s past performance is superior (studies 2 and 3), and (c) the uniform rater also reports varied sub-ratings (study 4a), unless participants are prompted to assess the sub-ratings prior to choosing a critic (studies 4b and 5). Study 6 reveals that critics are less aware than judges of the impact of the pattern of their ratings on others’ perceptions.

Suggested Citation

  • Spassova, Gerri & Palmeira, Mauricio & Andrade, Eduardo B., 2018. "A ratings pattern heuristic in judgments of expertise: When being right Looks wrong," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 26-47.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:147:y:2018:i:c:p:26-47
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.05.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597817302509
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.05.003?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shanteau, James & Weiss, David J. & Thomas, Rickey P. & Pounds, Julia C., 2002. "Performance-based assessment of expertise: How to decide if someone is an expert or not," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(2), pages 253-263, January.
    2. Bart de Langhe & Philip M. Fernbach & Donald R. Lichtenstein, 2016. "Navigating by the Stars: Investigating the Actual and Perceived Validity of Online User Ratings," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(6), pages 817-833.
    3. Sniezek, Janet A. & Van Swol, Lyn M., 2001. "Trust, Confidence, and Expertise in a Judge-Advisor System," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 288-307, March.
    4. Catherine W. M. Yeung & Dilip Soman, 2007. "The Duration Heuristic," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(3), pages 315-326, July.
    5. Andersson, Patric & Edman, Jan & Ekman, Mattias, 2005. "Predicting the World Cup 2002 in soccer: Performance and confidence of experts and non-experts," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 565-576.
    6. Gershoff, Andrew D & Broniarczyk, Susan M & West, Patricia M, 2001. "Recommendation or Evaluation? Task Sensitivity in Information," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(3), pages 418-438, December.
    7. Floyd, Kristopher & Freling, Ryan & Alhoqail, Saad & Cho, Hyun Young & Freling, Traci, 2014. "How Online Product Reviews Affect Retail Sales: A Meta-analysis," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 217-232.
    8. Alba, Joseph W & Hutchinson, J Wesley, 1987. "Dimensions of Consumer Expertise," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 13(4), pages 411-454, March.
    9. Brown, Jacqueline Johnson & Reingen, Peter H, 1987. "Social Ties and Word-of-Mouth Referral Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 14(3), pages 350-362, December.
    10. West, Patricia M & Broniarczyk, Susan M, 1998. "Integrating Multiple Opinions: The Role of Aspiration Level on Consumer Response to Critic Consensus," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(1), pages 38-51, June.
    11. West, Patricia M, 1996. "Predicting Preferences: An Examination of Agent Learning," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 23(1), pages 68-80, June.
    12. Ofir, Chezy, 1988. "Pseudodiagnosticity in judgment under uncertainty," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 343-363, December.
    13. Harvey, Nigel & Fischer, Ilan, 1997. "Taking Advice: Accepting Help, Improving Judgment, and Sharing Responsibility," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 117-133, May.
    14. Yates, J. Frank & McDaniel, Linda S. & Brown, Eric S., 1991. "Probabilistic forecasts of stock prices and earnings: The hazards of nascent expertise," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 60-79, June.
    15. Kostyra, Daniel S. & Reiner, Jochen & Natter, Martin & Klapper, Daniel, 2016. "Decomposing the effects of online customer reviews on brand, price, and product attributes," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 11-26.
    16. Pei-Yu Chen & Yili Hong & Ying Liu, 2018. "The Value of Multidimensional Rating Systems: Evidence from a Natural Experiment and Randomized Experiments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(10), pages 4629-4647, October.
    17. Yaniv, Ilan & Milyavsky, Maxim, 2007. "Using advice from multiple sources to revise and improve judgments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 104-120, May.
    18. Chinander, Karen R. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2003. "The input bias: The misuse of input information in judgments of outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 243-253, July.
    19. Tsay, Chia-Jung, 2014. "The vision heuristic: Judging music ensembles by sight alone," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 24-33.
    20. Bonaccio, Silvia & Dalal, Reeshad S., 2006. "Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 127-151, November.
    21. Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Shyam Gopinath & Sriram Venkataraman, 2010. "The Effects of Online User Reviews on Movie Box Office Performance: Accounting for Sequential Rollout and Aggregation Across Local Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 944-957, 09-10.
    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. Palmeira, Mauricio, 2020. "Advice in the presence of external cues: The impact of conflicting judgments on perceptions of expertise," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 82-96.
    2. Mauricio Palmeira & Kunter Gunasti, 2023. "The Conflict Between Partnership and Fairness in the Decision of Whom to Help," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(4), pages 1173-1188, April.

    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. Palmeira, Mauricio, 2020. "Advice in the presence of external cues: The impact of conflicting judgments on perceptions of expertise," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 82-96.
    2. Sungsik Park & Woochoel Shin & Jinhong Xie, 2021. "The Fateful First Consumer Review," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 481-507, May.
    3. Robert M. Gillenkirch & Julia Ortner & Sebastian Robert & Louis Velthuis, 2023. "Designing incentives and performance measurement for advisors: How to make decision-makers listen to advice," Working Papers 2304, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    4. Ana Babić Rosario & Kristine Valck & Francesca Sotgiu, 2020. "Conceptualizing the electronic word-of-mouth process: What we know and need to know about eWOM creation, exposure, and evaluation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 422-448, May.
    5. Jaeseob Lim & Sang-Hun Lee, 2020. "Utility and use of accuracy cues in social learning of crowd preferences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-25, October.
    6. De Baets, Shari & Harvey, Nigel, 2020. "Using judgment to select and adjust forecasts from statistical models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(3), pages 882-895.
    7. Albert E. Mannes, 2009. "Are We Wise About the Wisdom of Crowds? The Use of Group Judgments in Belief Revision," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(8), pages 1267-1279, August.
    8. Winkler, Jens & Moser, Roger, 2016. "Biases in future-oriented Delphi studies: A cognitive perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 63-76.
    9. Philipp Ecken & Richard Pibernik, 2016. "Hit or Miss: What Leads Experts to Take Advice for Long-Term Judgments?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(7), pages 2002-2021, July.
    10. Minnema, Alec & Bijmolt, Tammo H.A. & Gensler, Sonja & Wiesel, Thorsten, 2016. "To Keep or Not to Keep: Effects of Online Customer Reviews on Product Returns," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 253-267.
    11. Gino, Francesca, 2008. "Do we listen to advice just because we paid for it? The impact of advice cost on its use," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 234-245, November.
    12. Alison Wood Brooks & Francesca Gino & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2015. "Smart People Ask for (My) Advice: Seeking Advice Boosts Perceptions of Competence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1421-1435, June.
    13. Chakravarty, Anindita & Liu, Yong & Mazumdar, Tridib, 2010. "The Differential Effects of Online Word-of-Mouth and Critics' Reviews on Pre-release Movie Evaluation," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 185-197.
    14. Agnieszka Zablocki & Bodo Schlegelmilch & Michael J. Houston, 2019. "How valence, volume and variance of online reviews influence brand attitudes," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 9(1), pages 61-77, June.
    15. Ilan Yaniv & Shoham Choshen-Hillel, 2012. "When guessing what another person would say is better than giving your own opinion: Using perspective-taking to improve advice-taking," Discussion Paper Series dp622, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    16. Jodlbauer, Barbara & Jonas, Eva, 2011. "Forecasting clients' reactions: How does the perception of strategic behavior influence the acceptance of advice?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 121-133, January.
    17. Van Swol, Lyn M., 2011. "Forecasting another’s enjoyment versus giving the right answer: Trust, shared values, task effects, and confidence in improving the acceptance of advice," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 103-120.
    18. Keding, Christoph & Meissner, Philip, 2021. "Managerial overreliance on AI-augmented decision-making processes: How the use of AI-based advisory systems shapes choice behavior in R&D investment decisions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    19. Kausel, Edgar E. & Culbertson, Satoris S. & Leiva, Pedro I. & Slaughter, Jerel E. & Jackson, Alexander T., 2015. "Too arrogant for their own good? Why and when narcissists dismiss advice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 33-50.
    20. Förster, Bernadette & von der Gracht, Heiko, 2014. "Assessing Delphi panel composition for strategic foresight — A comparison of panels based on company-internal and external participants," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 215-229.

    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:eee:jobhdp:v:147:y:2018:i:c:p:26-47. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    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.