Inflated Applicants: Attribution Errors in Performance Evaluation by Professionals

PLoS ONE

Volumn 8, Issue 7, 2013, Pages

  Swift, Samuel A ^a   Moore, Don A ^a   Sharek, Zachariah S ^b   Gino, Francesca ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b CivicScience   (United States)

^c HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; JOB PERFORMANCE; MALE; PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC ERROR;

EID: 84880821572     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0069258     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Koeppel D (2006) Those Low Grades in College May Haunt Your Job Search. N Y Times Web. Available: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/31/jobs/31gpa.html. Accessed 3 August 2011.
2. Schmidt FL, Hunter JE, (1998) The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research Findings. Psychol Bull 124: 262-274.
3. Attewell P (2001) The Winner-Take-All High School: Organizational Adaptations to Educational Stratification. Sociol Educ 74: 267 - 295. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2673136.
4. Bagues M, Labini MS, Zinovyeva N, (2008) Differential Grading Standards and University Funding: Evidence from Italy. CESifo Econ Stud 54: 149-176.
5. Goldman RD, Widawski MH, (1976) A Within-Subjects Technique for Comparing College Grading Standards: Implications in the Validity of the Evaluation of College Achievement. Educ Psychol Meas 36: 381-390 Available: http://epm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/36/2/381.
6. Rojstaczer S, Healy C (2010) Grading in American Colleges and Universities. Teach Coll Rec.
7. Strenta AC, Elliott R (1987) Differential Grading Standards Revisited. J Educ Meas 24: 281-291. Available: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1987.tb00280.x. Accessed 4 August 2011.
8. Fairburn JA, Malcomson JM (2001) Performance, Promotion, and the Peter Principle. Rev Econ Stud 68: 45-66. Available: http://restud.oxfordjournals.org/lookup/doi/10.1111/1467-937X.00159. Accessed 3 August 2011.
9. Kim PH, Aga A (2011) Leaps of faith: The nature of opportunistic generalizations across domains.
10. Lazear EP, (2004) The Peter Principle: A Theory of Decline. J Polit Econ 112: Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/379943.
11. Gino F, Pisano GP, (2011) Why Leaders Don't Learn from Success. Harv Bus Rev 89: 68-74.
12. Gilbert DT (1994) Attribution and interpersonal perception. In: Tesser A, editor. Advanced Social Psychology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. 99-147.
13. Jones EE (1990) Interpersonal perception. New York: W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co.
14. Ross LD, (1977) The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In: Berkowitz L, editor. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic, Vol. 10: 173-220 doi:--10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60357-3.
15. Hogarth R, Kolev GI (2010) Illusory correlation in the remuneration of chief executive officers: It pays to play golf, and well. Working Papers (Universitat Pompeu Fabra Departamento de Econom'\ia y Empresa). Available: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1374239. Accessed 3 August 2011.
16. Mitchell TR, Kalb LS (1981) Effects of outcome knowledge and outcome valence on supervisors' evaluations. J Appl Psychol 66: 604-612. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.66.5.604. Accessed 3 August 2011.
17. Mitchell TR, Wood RE (1980) Supervisor's responses to subordinate poor performance: A test of an attributional model. Organ Behav Hum Perform 25: 123-138. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(80)90029-X. Accessed 3 August 2011.
18. Fleishman EA, (1953) The measurement of leadership attitudes in industry. J Appl Psychol 37: 153-158.
19. Ghiselli EE (1971) Explorations in managerial talent. Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear Pub. Co.
20. Stogdill RM (1974) Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: Free Press.
21. Davis-Blake A, Pfeffer J, (1989) Just a Mirage: The Search for Dispositional Effects in Organizational Research. Acad Manage Rev 14: 385-400.
22. Hornaday JA, Aboud J, (1971) Characteristics of successful entrepreneurs. Pers Psychol 24: 141-153.
23. Timmons JA, (1978) Characteristics and Role Demands of Entrepreneurship. Am J Small Bus 3: 5-17.
24. Gartner WB, (1989) Who is an entrepreneur? Is the wrong question. Enrep Theory Pract 12: 11-32.
25. Shaver KG, Scott LR, (1991) Person, process, choice: The psychology of new venture creation. Enrep Theory Pract 16: 23-45.
26. Burt RS (1992) Structural holes: the social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27. Gladwell M (2008) Outliers: The Story of Success. New York: Little, Brown and Company.
28. Granovetter MS (1995) Getting a job: a study of contacts and careers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29. Lewin K, (1931) The conflict between Aristotelian and Galileian modes of thought in contemporary psychology. J Gen Psychol 5: 141-177.
30. Jones EE, Harris VA, (1967) The attribution of attitudes. J Exp Soc Psychol 3: 1-24.
31. Martin SL, Klimoski RJ (1990) Use of verbal protocols to trace cognitions associated with self- and supervisor evaluations of performance. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 46: 135-154. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(90)90026-6. Accessed 3 August 2011.
32. Ross LD, Amabile TM, Steinmetz JL, (1977) Social roles, social control, and biases in social-perception processes. J Pers Soc Psychol 35: 485-494.
33. Gilbert DT, Malone PS, (1995) The Correspondence Bias. Psychol Bull 117: 21-38.
34. Jennings KE (2010) Determining the Internal Consistency of Attitude Attributions. In: Catrambone R, Ohlsson S, editors. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, Texas: Cognitive Science Society. 978-984.
35. Moore DA, Swift SA, Sharek ZS, Gino F, (2010) Correspondence Bias in Performance Evaluation: Why Grade Inflation Works. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 36: 843-852 doi:10.1177/0146167210371316.
36. Heath C, Larrick RP, Klayman J, (1998) Cognitive Repairs: How Organizational Practices Can Compensate for Individual Shortcomings. In: Staw BM, Cummings LL, editors. Research in Organizational Behavior. Greenwich, CT: Jai Press, Inc, Vol. 20: 1-37.
37. Gourman J (1989) The Gourman report: a rating of undergraduate programs in American & international universities. 7th ed. Los Angeles, CA: National Eduction Standards.
38. McGrath A, editor (2004) U.S. News Ultimate College Guide 2005. Sourcebooks.
39. Edwards JR, (2001) Ten Difference Score Myths. Organ Res Methods 4: 265-287 Available: http://orm.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/109442810143005.
40. Peter J, Churchhill GAJ, Brown TJ (1993) Caution in the use of difference scores in consumer research. J Consum Res 19: 655-662. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2489447. Accessed 4 August 2011.
41. Wolfers J (2002) Are Voters Rational? Evidence from Gubernatorial Elections. Available: http://ssrn.com/abstract=305740 or doi:10.2139/ssrn.305740.
42. Bertrand M, Mullainathan S (2001) Are CEOS Rewarded for Luck? The Ones without Principals Are. Q J Econ 116: 901-932. Available: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/00335530152466269. Accessed 19 January 2011.
43. Pfeffer J, Davis-Blake A (1986) Administrative Succession and Organizational Performance: How Administrator Experience Mediates the Succession Effect. Acad Manage J 29: 72-83. Available: http://www.jstor.org/pss/255860. Accessed 4 August 2011.
44. Gilbert DT, Pelham BW, Krull DS (1988) On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived. J Pers Soc Psychol 54: 733-740. Available: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm? doi = 10.1037/0022-3514.54.5.733.
45. D'Agostino PR, Fincher-Kiefer R, (1992) Need for Cognition and the Correspondence Bias. Soc Cogn 10: 151-163 Available: http://guilfordjournals.com/doi/abs/10.1521/soco.1992.10.2.151.
46. Tetlock PE, (1985) Accountability: A Social Check on the Fundamental Attribution Error. Soc Psychol Q 48: 227-236 Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3033683?origin=crossref.
47. Forgas JP, (1998) On being happy and mistaken: mood effects on the fundamental attribution error. J Pers Soc Psychol 75: 318-331 Available: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9731311.
48. Miyamoto Y, Kitayama S, (2002) Cultural variation in correspondence bias: The critical role of attitude diagnosticity of socially constrained behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol 83: 1239-1248.
49. Morris MW, Peng K, (1994) Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events. J Pers Soc Psychol 67: 949-971 Available: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.949.
50. Scott WR (1998) Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
51. Staw BM, Epstein LD (2000) What Bandwagons Bring: Effects of Popular Management Techniques on Corporate Performance, Reputation, and CEO Pay. Adm Sci Q 45: 523-556. Available: http://www.jstor.org/pss/2667108. Accessed 4 August 2011.
52. Lewis MM (2004) Moneyball: the art of winning an unfair game. W.W. Norton.
53. Woo E (1997) Boalt Hall Law School Kills Its Grade-Weighting Policy. Los Angeles Times. Available: http://articles.latimes.com/1997/nov/27/news/mn-58146. Accessed 4 August 2011.
54. Siggelkow N, Rivkin JW (2009) Hiding the evidence of valid theories: how coupled search processes obscure performance differences among organizations. Adm Sci Q 54: 602. Available: http://asq.sagepub.com/content/54/4/602.short. Accessed 4 August 2011.
55. Fleischer A (2009) Ambiguity and the Equity of Rating Systems: United States Brokerage Firms, 1995-2000. Adm Sci Q 54: 555-574. Available: http://www.atypon-link.com/JGSCU/doi/abs/10.2189/asqu.2009.54.4.555. Accessed 3 August 2011.
56. Marklein MB (2003) More public high schools dropping class ranking. USA Today. Available: http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2003-01-27-class-ranks_x.htm# Accessed 3 August 2011.
57. Scott SG, Lane VR (2000) A Stakeholder Approach to Organizational Identity. Acad Manage Rev 25: 43 - 62. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/259262.
58. Ashforth BE, Mael F, (1989) Social identity theory and the organization. Acad Manage Rev 14: 20-39.
59. Fombrun C, Shanley M, (1990) What's in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Acad Manage J 33: 233-258.
60. Elsbach KD, Sutton RI, (1992) Acquiring organizational legitimacy through illegitimate actions: A marriage of institutional and impression management theories. Acad Manage J 35: 699-738.
61. Schlenker BR (1985) Identity and self-identification. In: Schlenker BR, editor. The self and social life. New York: McGraw-Hill. 65-99.
62. Gotsi M, Wilson AM, (2001) Corporate reputation: seeking a definition. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 6: 24-30 Available: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/13563280110381189.
63. Rampell C (2010) In Law Schools, Grades Go Up, Just Like That. N Y Times Web: A1. Available: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/business/22law.html?sq=grade inflation&st = cse&scp = 1&pagewanted = print.
64. Rosenzweig P (2007) The Halo Effect: and the Eight Other Business Delusions That Deceive Managers. New York: Free Press.
65. Windschitl PD, Kruger J, Simms EN (2003) The influence of egocentrism and focalism on people's optimism in competitions: when what affects us equally affects me more. J Pers Soc Psychol 85: 389-408. Available: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14498778. Accessed 4 August 2011.
66. Camerer CF, Lovallo D, (1999) Overconfidence and excess entry: An experimental approach. Am Econ Rev 89: 306-318 Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/116990.
67. Moore DA, Cain DM (2007) Overconfidence and underconfidence: When and why people underestimate (and overestimate) the competition. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 103: 197-213. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597806000896. Accessed 4 August 2011.
68. Moore DA, Kim TG, (2003) Myopic Social Prediction and the Solo Comparison Effect. J Pers Soc Psychol 85: 1121-1135 Available: http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/85/6/1121.
69. Moore DA (2007) Not so above average after all: When people believe they are worse than average and its implications for theories of bias in social comparison. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 102: 42-58. Available: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749597806000926. Accessed 3 August 2011.
70. Klar Y, Giladi EE, (1997) No one in my group can be below the group's average: A robust positivity bias in favor of anonymous peers. J Pers Soc Psychol 73: 885-901 doi:-10.1037/0022-3514.73.5.885.
71. Shanteau J (1988) Psychological characteristics and strategies of expert decision makers. Acta Psychol (Amst) 68: 203-215. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(88)90056-X. Accessed 3 August 2011.
72. Cable DM, Judge TA, (1997) Interviewers' perceptions of persons-organization fit and organizational selection decisions. J Appl Psychol 82: 546-561 Available: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9378683.
73. Gilmore DC, Ferris GR (1989) The Effects of Applicant Impression Management Tactics on Interviewer Judgments. J Manage 15: 557-564. Available: http://jom.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/4/557. Accessed 3 August 2011.
74. Dunn WS, Mount MK, Barrick MR, Ones DS, (1995) Relative importance of personality and general mental ability in managers' judgments of applicant qualifications. J Appl Psychol 80: 500-509 doi:-10.1037/0021-9010.80.4.500.
75. Hunter JE, Hunter RF, (1984) Validity and utility of alternative predictors of job performance. Psychol Bull 96: 72-98 Available: http://content.apa.org/journals/bul/96/1/72.