IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ucy/cypeua/06-2024.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reciprocity in Peer Assessments

Author

Listed:
  • Lunzheng Li
  • Philippos Louis
  • Zacharias Maniadis
  • Dimitrios Xefteris

Abstract

Peer assessment’s reliability can be undermined when participants behave strategically. Using a formal model we show how reciprocity can lead to reviewers inflating their rating of each others’ work, which is exacerbated when review takes place sequentially. We conduct a pre-registered online experiment and we find that reviewers engaged in mutual-review relationships inflate their reports more, compared to when reviews are one-sided. For sequential reviews, a non-trivial fraction of first movers maximally over-report. In accordance to our theoretical model, we also find that second movers are responsive to the review they received, but only when reviews are mutual. This reveals the potential for a quid-pro-quo element in mutual reviews. Our results highlight the importance of appropriately structuring peer assessment to take strategic reciprocity motives into account and ensure the system’s reliability.

Suggested Citation

  • Lunzheng Li & Philippos Louis & Zacharias Maniadis & Dimitrios Xefteris, 2024. "Reciprocity in Peer Assessments," University of Cyprus Working Papers in Economics 06-2024, University of Cyprus Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucy:cypeua:06-2024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.econ.ucy.ac.cy/RePEc/papers/06-2024.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anders Frederiksen & Lisa B. Kahn & Fabian Lange, 2020. "Supervisors and Performance Management Systems," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(6), pages 2123-2187.
    2. Urs Fischbacher & Franziska Föllmi-Heusi, 2013. "Lies In Disguise—An Experimental Study On Cheating," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 525-547, June.
    3. Despoina Alempaki & Gönül Doğan & Silvia Saccardo, 2019. "Deception and reciprocity," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(4), pages 980-1001, December.
    4. David K. Levine, 1998. "Modeling Altruism and Spitefulness in Experiment," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 1(3), pages 593-622, July.
    5. Jeffrey Carpenter & Peter Hans Matthews & John Schirm, 2010. "Tournaments and Office Politics: Evidence from a Real Effort Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 504-517, March.
    6. Uri Gneezy, 2005. "Deception: The Role of Consequences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 384-394, March.
    7. Carole J. Lee & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin, 2013. "Bias in peer review," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(1), pages 2-17, January.
    8. Dato, Simon & Feess, Eberhard & Nieken, Petra, 2019. "Lying and reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 193-218.
    9. Moers, Frank, 2005. "Discretion and bias in performance evaluation: the impact of diversity and subjectivity," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 67-80, January.
    10. Reshmaan Hussam & Natalia Rigol & Benjamin N. Roth, 2022. "Targeting High Ability Entrepreneurs Using Community Information: Mechanism Design in the Field," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(3), pages 861-898, March.
    11. Colzani, Paola & Michailidou, Georgia & Santos-Pinto, Luis, 2023. "Experimental evidence on the transmission of honesty and dishonesty: A stairway to heaven and a highway to hell," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    12. Christoph Riedl & Tom Grad & Christopher Lettl, 2024. "Competition and Collaboration in Crowdsourcing Communities: What happens when peers evaluate each other?," Papers 2404.14141, arXiv.org.
    13. Joeri Sol, 2016. "Peer Evaluation: Incentives and Coworker Relations," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 56-76, March.
    14. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2003. "The nature of human altruism," Nature, Nature, vol. 425(6960), pages 785-791, October.
    15. Prendergast, Canice & Topel, Robert, 1993. "Discretion and bias in performance evaluation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(2-3), pages 355-365, April.
    16. Carole J. Lee & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin, 2013. "Bias in peer review," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(1), pages 2-17, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Dato, Simon & Feess, Eberhard & Nieken, Petra, 2019. "Lying and reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 193-218.
    2. Dato, Simon & Feess, Eberhard & Nieken, Petra, 2024. "Lying in competitive environments: Identifying behavioral impacts," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    3. Rosaz, Julie & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2012. "Lies and biased evaluation: A real-effort experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 537-549.
    4. Corgnet, Brice & Martin, Ludivine & Ndodjang, Peguy & Sutan, Angela, 2019. "On the merit of equal pay: Performance manipulation and incentive setting," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 23-45.
    5. Nick Feltovich, 2019. "The interaction between competition and unethical behaviour," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 101-130, March.
    6. Gill, David & Prowse, Victoria & Vlassopoulos, Michael, 2013. "Cheating in the workplace: An experimental study of the impact of bonuses and productivity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 120-134.
    7. Belot, Michèle & Schröder, Marina, 2013. "Sloppy work, lies and theft: A novel experimental design to study counterproductive behaviour," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 233-238.
    8. Marco Kleine & Sebastian Kube, 2015. "Communication and Trust in Principal-Team Relationships: Experimental Evidence," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2015_06, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    9. Valeria Maggian & Marie Claire Villeval, 2016. "Social preferences and lying aversion in children," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(3), pages 663-685, September.
    10. Francesca Gino & Erin L. Krupka & Roberto A. Weber, 2013. "License to Cheat: Voluntary Regulation and Ethical Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(10), pages 2187-2203, October.
    11. Cao, Qian & Li, Jianbiao & Niu, Xiaofei, 2022. "White lies in tournaments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    12. Bernd Irlenbusch & Janna Ter Meer, 2015. "Lying in public good games with and without punishment," Cologne Graduate School Working Paper Series 06-02, Cologne Graduate School in Management, Economics and Social Sciences.
    13. Blazquiz-Pulido, Juan Francisco & Polonio, Luca & Bilancini, Ennio, 2024. "Who's the deceiver? Identifying deceptive intentions in communication," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 451-466.
    14. Benistant, Julien & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2019. "Unethical behavior and group identity in contests," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 128-155.
    15. Gerald Eisenkopf & Ruslan Gurtoviy & Verena Utikal, 2011. "Size matters - when it comes to lies," IAAEG Discussion Papers until 2011 20110517, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).
    16. Nadine Chlaß & Gerhard Riener, 2015. "Lying, Spying, Sabotaging: Procedures and Consequences," Jena Economics Research Papers 2015-016, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    17. Despoina Alempaki & Valeria Burdea & Daniel Read, 2021. "Deceptive Communication: Direct Lies vs. Ignorance, Partial-Truth and Silence," CESifo Working Paper Series 9286, CESifo.
    18. Bartuli, Jenny & Djawadi, Behnud Mir & Fahr, René, 2016. "Business Ethics in Organizations: An Experimental Examination of Whistleblowing and Personality," IZA Discussion Papers 10190, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Axel Ockenfels & Dirk Sliwka & Peter Werner, 2024. "Multi-rater Performance Evaluations and Incentives," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 307, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    20. Faravelli, Marco & Friesen, Lana & Gangadharan, Lata, 2015. "Selection, tournaments, and dishonesty," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 160-175.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Reciprocity; Lying; Peer Assessment; Experiment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D9 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • M5 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ucy:cypeua:06-2024. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.ucy.ac.cy/econ/?lang=en .

    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.