Inflated Applicants: Attribution Errors in Performance Evaluation by Professionals

S. A.  Swift; D.  Moore; Z.  Sharek; F.  Gino

Article | PLoS ONE | 2013

Inflated Applicants: Attribution Errors in Performance Evaluation by Professionals

by S. A. Swift, D. Moore, Z. Sharek and F. Gino

Abstract

When explaining others' behaviors, achievements, and failures, it is common for people to attribute too much influence to disposition and too little influence to structural and situational factors. We examine whether this tendency leads even experienced professionals to make systematic mistakes in their selection decisions, favoring alumni from academic institutions with high grade distributions and employees from forgiving business environments. We find that candidates benefiting from favorable situations are more likely to be admitted and promoted than their equivalently skilled peers. The results suggest that decision-makers take high nominal performance as evidence of high ability and do not discount it by the ease with which it was achieved. These results clarify our understanding of the correspondence bias using evidence from both archival studies and experiments with experienced professionals. We discuss implications for both admissions and personnel selection practices.

Keywords: evaluations; correspondence bias; selection decisions; attribution; Prejudice and Bias; Selection and Staffing; Decision Choices and Conditions; Performance Evaluation; Cognition and Thinking;

Format: Print

Read Now

Citation:

Swift, S. A., D. Moore, Z. Sharek, and F. Gino. "Inflated Applicants: Attribution Errors in Performance Evaluation by Professionals." e69258. PLoS ONE 8, no. 7 (July 2013).

Although religion is a central aspect of life for many people across the globe, there is scant research on how religion affects people’s non-religious routines. In the present research, we identify a frequent consumption activity that is influenced by religiosity: grocery shopping. Using both field and laboratory data, we find that grocery spending decreases with religiosity. Specifically, we document that people who live in more religious U.S. counties spend less money on groceries and make fewer unplanned purchases. We also demonstrate this negative relationship by measuring religiosity at the individual level and employing a religious prime. That is, the more religious people are, the less willing they are to follow through on novel purchase opportunities that arise during their grocery shopping trips. This effect is consistent with the account that many religions emphasize the value of being prudent with money. Additional analysis supports our predicted indirect effect of religiosity on spending through frugality.

Although leaders might say they value inquisitive minds, in reality most stifle curiosity, fearing it will increase risk and inefficiency. Harvard Business School’s Francesca Gino elaborates on the benefits of and common barriers to curiosity in the workplace and offers five strategies for bolstering it. Leaders should hire for curiosity, model inquisitiveness, emphasize learning goals, let workers explore and broaden their interests, and have “Why?” “What if…?” and How might we…?” days. Doing so will help their organizations adapt to uncertain market conditions and external pressures and boost the business’s success.

Faculty & Research

Inflated Applicants: Attribution Errors in Performance Evaluation by Professionals

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author