A ratings pattern heuristic in judgments of expertise: when being right Looks wrong

Gerri Spassova, Mauricio Palmeira, Eduardo B. Andrade

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

We propose a “ratings pattern heuristic” in judgments of expertise—that is, people's tendency to undervalue critics who assign the same rating to multiple options, overlooking diagnostic information which would clearly justify the uniform ratings. The heuristic is driven by a strong association between discrimination and expertise and a focus on summary ratings. People “punish” uniform (vs. varied) raters even when (a) uniform ratings are acknowledgedly more likely (studies 1a and 1b), (b) the uniform rater's past performance is superior (studies 2 and 3), and (c) the uniform rater also reports varied sub-ratings (study 4a), unless participants are prompted to assess the sub-ratings prior to choosing a critic (studies 4b and 5). Study 6 reveals that critics are less aware than judges of the impact of the pattern of their ratings on others’ perceptions.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)26-47
Number of pages22
JournalOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
Volume147
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2018

Keywords

  • Expertise judgments
  • Rating variance
  • Ratings pattern
  • Uniformity

Cite this

@article{050f6942dad04583a5cbf0611f41e556,
title = "A ratings pattern heuristic in judgments of expertise: when being right Looks wrong",
abstract = "We propose a “ratings pattern heuristic” in judgments of expertise—that is, people's tendency to undervalue critics who assign the same rating to multiple options, overlooking diagnostic information which would clearly justify the uniform ratings. The heuristic is driven by a strong association between discrimination and expertise and a focus on summary ratings. People “punish” uniform (vs. varied) raters even when (a) uniform ratings are acknowledgedly more likely (studies 1a and 1b), (b) the uniform rater's past performance is superior (studies 2 and 3), and (c) the uniform rater also reports varied sub-ratings (study 4a), unless participants are prompted to assess the sub-ratings prior to choosing a critic (studies 4b and 5). Study 6 reveals that critics are less aware than judges of the impact of the pattern of their ratings on others’ perceptions.",
keywords = "Expertise judgments, Rating variance, Ratings pattern, Uniformity",
author = "Gerri Spassova and Mauricio Palmeira and Andrade, {Eduardo B.}",
year = "2018",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.05.003",
language = "English",
volume = "147",
pages = "26--47",
journal = "Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes",
issn = "0749-5978",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

A ratings pattern heuristic in judgments of expertise : when being right Looks wrong. / Spassova, Gerri; Palmeira, Mauricio; Andrade, Eduardo B.

In: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 147, 01.07.2018, p. 26-47.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - A ratings pattern heuristic in judgments of expertise

T2 - when being right Looks wrong

AU - Spassova, Gerri

AU - Palmeira, Mauricio

AU - Andrade, Eduardo B.

PY - 2018/7/1

Y1 - 2018/7/1

N2 - We propose a “ratings pattern heuristic” in judgments of expertise—that is, people's tendency to undervalue critics who assign the same rating to multiple options, overlooking diagnostic information which would clearly justify the uniform ratings. The heuristic is driven by a strong association between discrimination and expertise and a focus on summary ratings. People “punish” uniform (vs. varied) raters even when (a) uniform ratings are acknowledgedly more likely (studies 1a and 1b), (b) the uniform rater's past performance is superior (studies 2 and 3), and (c) the uniform rater also reports varied sub-ratings (study 4a), unless participants are prompted to assess the sub-ratings prior to choosing a critic (studies 4b and 5). Study 6 reveals that critics are less aware than judges of the impact of the pattern of their ratings on others’ perceptions.

AB - We propose a “ratings pattern heuristic” in judgments of expertise—that is, people's tendency to undervalue critics who assign the same rating to multiple options, overlooking diagnostic information which would clearly justify the uniform ratings. The heuristic is driven by a strong association between discrimination and expertise and a focus on summary ratings. People “punish” uniform (vs. varied) raters even when (a) uniform ratings are acknowledgedly more likely (studies 1a and 1b), (b) the uniform rater's past performance is superior (studies 2 and 3), and (c) the uniform rater also reports varied sub-ratings (study 4a), unless participants are prompted to assess the sub-ratings prior to choosing a critic (studies 4b and 5). Study 6 reveals that critics are less aware than judges of the impact of the pattern of their ratings on others’ perceptions.

KW - Expertise judgments

KW - Rating variance

KW - Ratings pattern

KW - Uniformity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047073675&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.05.003

DO - 10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.05.003

M3 - Article

VL - 147

SP - 26

EP - 47

JO - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

JF - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

SN - 0749-5978

ER -