Lie hard: The effect of self-assessments on academic promotion decisions
Five experiments investigated whether including self-assessments in applications for a promotion might affect their evaluation, and how this effect was influenced by measures taken to reduce or eliminate it. Self-assessments influenced judgment when the applications were judged by novices and experts, and regardless of whether the participants were warned about the unreliability of self-assessments. The effect was reduced but not eliminated if a second set of assessments was available. A similar influence was found when an arbitrary set of ratings was substituted for the self-assessments, and consider-the-opposite arguments to counter the self-assessments functioned in a similar way to that found in previous studies of anchoring. Overall, the effect of self-assessments seems similar to that of anchoring, when information that is known to be unreliable or unrelated to a target variable still affects estimates of the target variable. Practically, including self-assessments as a component of performance appraisal is likely to bias the results.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Chapman, Gretchen B. & Johnson, Eric J., 1999. "Anchoring, Activation, and the Construction of Values, , , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 115-153, August.
- Makiney, Jeanne D. & Levy, Paul E., 1998. "The Influence of Self-Ratings versus Peer Ratings on Supervisors' Performance Judgments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 212-228, June.
- Northcraft, Gregory B. & Neale, Margaret A., 1987. "Experts, amateurs, and real estate: An anchoring-and-adjustment perspective on property pricing decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 84-97, February.
- Thorsteinson, Todd J. & Breier, Jennifer & Atwell, Anna & Hamilton, Catherine & Privette, Monica, 2008. "Anchoring effects on performance judgments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(1), pages 29-40, September.
- Kemp, Simon, 2003. "The effect of providing misleading cost information on the perceived value of government services," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 117-128, February.
- Klimoski, Richard & Inks, Lawrence, 1990. "Accountability forces in performance appraisal," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 194-208, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:33:y:2012:i:3:p:578-589. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.