Anchoring effects on performance judgments

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Volumn 107, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 29-40

  Thorsteinson, Todd J ^a   Breier, Jennifer ^a   Atwell, Anna ^a   Hamilton, Catherine ^a   Privette, Monica ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO   (United States)

Author keywords

Anchoring; Performance judgments

Indexed keywords

EID: 49849092701     PISSN: 07495978     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.01.003     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Blakely G.L. The effects of performance rating discrepancies on supervisors and subordinates. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 54 (1993) 57-80
2. Bono J.E., and Colbert A.E. Understanding responses to multi-source feedback: The role of core self-evaluations. Personnel Psychology 58 (2005) 171-203
3. Brett J.F., and Atwater L.E. 360 degree feedback: Accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology 86 (2001) 930-942
4. Brewer N.T., and Chapman G.B. The fragile basic anchoring effect. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 15 (2002) 65-77
5. Chapman G.B., and Johnson E.J. The limits of anchoring. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 7 (1994) 223-242
6. Chapman G.B., and Johnson E.J. Anchoring, activation, and the construction of values. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 79 (1999) 115-153
7. Chapman G.B., and Johnson E.J. Incorporating the irrelevant: Anchors in judgments of belief and value. In: Gilovich T., Griffin D., and Kahneman D. (Eds). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (2002), Cambridge University Press, New York 120-138
8. Conway J.M., and Huffcutt A.I. Psychometric properties of multisource performance ratings: A meta-analysis of subordinate, supervisor, peer, and self-ratings. Human Performance 10 (1997) 332-360
9. Conway J.M., Lombardo K., and Sanders K.C. A meta-analysis of incremental validity and nomological networks for subordinate and peer ratings. Human Performance 14 (2001) 267-303
10. d'Apollonia S., and Abrami P.C. Navigating student ratings of instruction. American Psychologist 52 (1997) 1198-1208
11. Epley N., and Gilovich T. Putting adjustment back in the anchoring and adjustment heuristic: Differential processing of self-generated and experimenter-provided anchors. Psychological Science 12 (2001) 391-396
12. Epley N., and Gilovich T. The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic: Why the adjustments are insufficient. Psychological Science 17 (2006) 311-318
13. Ford J.K., Kraiger K., and Schechtman S.L. Study of race effects in objective indices and subjective evaluations of performance: A meta-analysis of performance criteria. Psychological Bulletin 99 (1986) 330-337
14. Foti R.J., and Hauenstein N.M.A. Processing demands and the effects of prior impressions on subsequent judgments: Clarifying the assimilation/contrast debate. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 56 (1993) 167-189
15. George J.F., Duffy K., and Ahuja M. Countering the anchoring and adjustment bias with decision support systems. Decision Support Systems 29 (2000) 195-206
16. Gilbert D.T. Inferential correction. In: Gilovich T., Griffin D., and Kahneman D. (Eds). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (2002), Cambridge University Press, New York 167-184
17. Greenwald A.G., and Gillmore G.M. Grading leniency is a removable contaminant of student ratings. American Psychologist 52 (1997) 1209-1217
18. Greguras G.J., and Robie C. A new look at within-source interrater reliability of 360-degree feedback ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology 83 (1998) 960-968
19. Harris M.M., and Schaubroeck J. A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology 41 (1988) 43-62
20. Heslin P.A., Latham G.P., and VandeWalle D. The effect of implicit person theory on performance appraisals. Journal of Applied Psychology 90 (2005) 842-856
21. Highhouse S. Judgment and decision-making research: Relevance to industrial and organizational psychology. In: Anderson N., Ones D.S., Sinangil H.K., and Viswesvaran C. (Eds). Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology vol. 2 (2002), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 314-331
22. Huber V.L. Comparison of the effects of specific and general performance standards on performance appraisal decisions. Decision Sciences 20 (1989) 545-557
23. Huber V.L., Neale M.A., and Northcraft G.B. Judgment by heuristics: Effects of ratee and rater characteristics and performance standards on performance-related judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 40 (1987) 149-169
24. Jacowitz K.E., and Kahneman D. Measures of anchoring in estimation tasks. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 21 (1995) 1161-1166
25. Jasper J.D., and Christman S.D. A neuropsychological dimension for anchoring effects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 18 (2005) 343-369
26. Klimoski R., and Inks L. Accountability forces in performance appraisal. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 45 (1990) 194-208
27. Kraiger K., and Ford J.K. A meta-analysis of ratee race effects in performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology 70 (1985) 56-65
28. Kravitz D.A., and Balzer W.K. Context effects in performance appraisal: A methodological critique and empirical study. Journal of Applied Psychology 77 (1992) 24-31
29. Lance C.E. Test of a latent structure of performance ratings derived from Wherry's (1952) theory of rating. Journal of Management 20 (1994) 757-771
30. Landy F.J., and Farr J.L. Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin 87 (1980) 72-107
31. Makiney J.D., and Levy P.E. The influence of self-ratings versus peer ratings on supervisors' performance judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 74 (1998) 212-228
32. Marsh H.W., and Roche L.A. Making students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness effective: The critical issues of validity, bias, and utility. American Psychologist 52 (1997) 1187-1197
33. Marsh H.W., and Roche L.A. Reply upon SET research. American Psychologist 54 (1999) 517-518
34. Marsh H.W., and Roche L.A. Effects of grading leniency and low workload on students' evaluations of teaching: Popular myth, bias, validity, or innocent bystanders?. Journal of Educational Psychology 92 (2000) 202-228
35. McEvoy G.M., and Cascio W.F. Cumulative evidence of the relationship between employee age and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 74 (1989) 11-17
36. McKeachie W.J. Student ratings: The validity of use. American Psychologist 52 (1997) 1218-1225
37. Murphy K.R., Balzer W.K., Lockhart M.C., and Eisenman E.J. Effects of previous performance on evaluations of present performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 70 (1985) 72-84
38. Murphy K.R., and Cleveland J.N. Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives (1995), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
39. Mussweiler T. The durability of anchoring effects. European Journal of Social Psychology 31 (2001) 431-442
40. Mussweiler T., and Englich B. Subliminal anchoring: Judgmental consequences and underlying mechanisms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 98 (2005) 133-143
41. Mussweiler T., and Strack F. Hypothesis-consistent testing and semantic priming in the anchoring paradigm: A selective accessibility model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 35 (1999) 136-164
42. Mussweiler T., and Strack F. Numeric judgments under uncertainty: The role of knowledge in anchoring. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 36 (2000) 495-518
43. Mussweiler T., and Strack F. The semantics of anchoring. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 86 (2001) 234-255
44. Northcraft G.B., and Neale M.A. Experts, amateurs, and real estate: An anchoring-and-adjustment perspective on property pricing decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 39 (1987) 84-97
45. Nunes J.C., and Boatwright P. Incidental prices and their effect on willingness to pay. Journal of Marketing Research 41 (2004) 457-466
46. Pulakos E.D., White L.A., Oppler S.H., and Borman W.C. Examination of race and sex effects on performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology 74 (1989) 770-780
47. Raymark P.H., Balzer W.K., and DeLaTorre F. A preliminary investigation of the sources of information used by raters when appraising performance. Journal of Business and Psychology 14 (1999) 319-339
48. Reitsma-van Rooijen M., and Daamen D.D.L. Subliminal anchoring: The effects of subliminally presented numbers on probability estimates. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 42 (2006) 380-387
49. Rosen B., and Jerdee T.H. The influence of age stereotypes on managerial decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology 61 (1976) 428-432
50. Salvemini N.J., Reilly R.R., and Smither J.W. The influence of rater motivation on assimilation effects and accuracy in performance ratings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 55 (1993) 41-60
51. Schmitt N., and Lappin M. Race and sex as determinants of the mean and variance of performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology 65 (1980) 428-435
52. Scullen S.E., Mount M.K., and Goff M. Understanding the latent structure of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology 85 (2000) 956-970
53. Shore T.H., Adams J.S., and Tashchian A. Effects of self-appraisal information, appraisal purpose, and feedback target on performance appraisal ratings. Journal of Business and Psychology 12 (1998) 283-298
54. Shore T.H., and Tashchian A. Accountability forces in performance appraisal: Effects of self-appraisal information, normative information, and task performance. Journal of Business and Psychology 17 (2002) 261-274
55. Smither J.W., London M., and Reilly R.R. Does performance improve following multisource feedback? A theoretical model, meta-analysis, and review of empirical findings. Personnel Psychology 58 (2005) 33-66
56. Smither J.W., Reilly R.R., and Buda R. Effect of prior performance information on ratings of present performance: Contrast versus assimilation revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology 73 (1988) 487-496
57. Stauffer J.M., and Buckley M.R. The existence and nature of racial bias in supervisory ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology 90 (2005) 586-591
58. Strack F., and Mussweiler T. Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect: Mechanisms of selective accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 73 (1997) 437-446
59. Sumer H.C., and Knight P.A. Assimilation and contrast effects in performance ratings: Effects of rating the previous performance on rating subsequent performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 81 (1996) 436-442
60. Thorsteinson T.J., and Balzer W.K. Effects of coworker information on perceptions and ratings of performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior 20 (1999) 1157-1173
61. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185 (1974) 1124-1131
62. Uggerslev K.L., and Sulsky L.M. Presentation modality and indirect performance information: Effects on ratings, reactions, and memory. Journal of Applied Psychology 87 (2002) 940-950
63. Wegener D.T., Petty R.E., Detweiler-Bedell B.T., and Jarvis W.B.G. Implications of attitude change theories for numerical anchoring: Anchor plausibility and the limits of anchor effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 37 (2001) 62-69
64. Whyte G., and Sebenius J.K. The effect of multiple anchors on anchoring in individual and group judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 69 (1997) 75-85
65. Wilson T.D., Houston C.E., Etling K.M., and Brekke N. A new look at anchoring effects: Basic anchoring and its antecedents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 125 (1996) 387-402
66. Wong K.F.E., and Kwong J.Y.Y. Is 7300 m equal to 7.3 km? Same semantics but different anchoring effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 82 (2000) 314-333
67. Wong K.F.E., and Kwong J.Y.Y. Between-individual comparisons in performance evaluation: A perspective from prospect theory. Journal of Applied Psychology 90 (2005) 284-294