Bias in Performance Ratings: Clarifying the Role of Positive Versus Negative Escalation
This study replicated and refined research on the effects of escalation of commitment in performance ratings. We utilized experimental manipulations in a laboratory setting to determine whether positive escalation or negative escalation (or both) could be responsible for the effect. In one session,...
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | text |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2008
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/1005 https://doi.org/10.1080/08959280802347213 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Singapore Management University |
Language: | English |
id |
sg-smu-ink.lkcsb_research-2004 |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
sg-smu-ink.lkcsb_research-20042010-09-23T06:24:04Z Bias in Performance Ratings: Clarifying the Role of Positive Versus Negative Escalation Slaughter, Jerel E. GREGURAS, G. J. This study replicated and refined research on the effects of escalation of commitment in performance ratings. We utilized experimental manipulations in a laboratory setting to determine whether positive escalation or negative escalation (or both) could be responsible for the effect. In one session, participants (N = 210) were assigned to the perspective of the potential employee's supervisor and chose 1 of 2 candidates for a sales position. In a second session, participants rated the performance of (a) the individual they selected; (b) the individual they rejected; or (c) a third individual, whose preselection information they never viewed. Results replicated previous findings, such that ratings were biased upward when participants rated the performance of the salesperson they had originally selected. Results were not biased downward when individuals rated the performance of the salesperson they had rejected, however. Thus, our results suggest that positive escalation, and not negative escalation, was the cause of the bias. 2008-01-01T08:00:00Z text https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/1005 info:doi/10.1080/08959280802347213 https://doi.org/10.1080/08959280802347213 Research Collection Lee Kong Chian School Of Business eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Business Administration, Management, and Operations Human Resources Management Organizational Behavior and Theory |
institution |
Singapore Management University |
building |
SMU Libraries |
continent |
Asia |
country |
Singapore Singapore |
content_provider |
SMU Libraries |
collection |
InK@SMU |
language |
English |
topic |
Business Administration, Management, and Operations Human Resources Management Organizational Behavior and Theory |
spellingShingle |
Business Administration, Management, and Operations Human Resources Management Organizational Behavior and Theory Slaughter, Jerel E. GREGURAS, G. J. Bias in Performance Ratings: Clarifying the Role of Positive Versus Negative Escalation |
description |
This study replicated and refined research on the effects of escalation of commitment in performance ratings. We utilized experimental manipulations in a laboratory setting to determine whether positive escalation or negative escalation (or both) could be responsible for the effect. In one session, participants (N = 210) were assigned to the perspective of the potential employee's supervisor and chose 1 of 2 candidates for a sales position. In a second session, participants rated the performance of (a) the individual they selected; (b) the individual they rejected; or (c) a third individual, whose preselection information they never viewed. Results replicated previous findings, such that ratings were biased upward when participants rated the performance of the salesperson they had originally selected. Results were not biased downward when individuals rated the performance of the salesperson they had rejected, however. Thus, our results suggest that positive escalation, and not negative escalation, was the cause of the bias. |
format |
text |
author |
Slaughter, Jerel E. GREGURAS, G. J. |
author_facet |
Slaughter, Jerel E. GREGURAS, G. J. |
author_sort |
Slaughter, Jerel E. |
title |
Bias in Performance Ratings: Clarifying the Role of Positive Versus Negative Escalation |
title_short |
Bias in Performance Ratings: Clarifying the Role of Positive Versus Negative Escalation |
title_full |
Bias in Performance Ratings: Clarifying the Role of Positive Versus Negative Escalation |
title_fullStr |
Bias in Performance Ratings: Clarifying the Role of Positive Versus Negative Escalation |
title_full_unstemmed |
Bias in Performance Ratings: Clarifying the Role of Positive Versus Negative Escalation |
title_sort |
bias in performance ratings: clarifying the role of positive versus negative escalation |
publisher |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University |
publishDate |
2008 |
url |
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/1005 https://doi.org/10.1080/08959280802347213 |
_version_ |
1770569764088840192 |