Overcoming the Outcome Bias: Making Intentions Matter

Ovul  Sezer; Ting  Zhang; Francesca  Gino; Max   Bazerman

Article | Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Overcoming the Outcome Bias: Making Intentions Matter

by Ovul Sezer, Ting Zhang, Francesca Gino and Max Bazerman

Abstract

People often make the well-documented mistake of paying too much attention to the outcomes of others’ actions while neglecting information about the original intentions leading to those outcomes. In five experiments, we examine interventions aimed at reducing this outcome bias in situations where intentions and outcomes are misaligned. Participants evaluated an individual with fair intentions leading to unfavorable outcomes, an individual with selfish intentions leading to favorable outcomes, or both individuals jointly. Contrary to our initial predictions, participants weighed others’ outcomes more—not less—when these individuals were evaluated jointly rather than separately (Experiment 1). Consequently, separate evaluators were more intention-oriented than joint evaluators when rewarding and punishing others (Experiment 2a) and assessing the value of repeated interactions with these individuals in the future (Experiment 2b). Third-party recommenders were less outcome-biased in allocating funds to investment managers when making separate evaluations relative to joint evaluations (Experiment 3). Finally, raising the salience of intentions prior to discovering outcomes helped joint evaluators overcome the outcome bias, suggesting that joint evaluation made attending to information about intentions more difficult (Experiment 4). Our findings bridge decision-making research on the outcome bias and management research on organizational justice by investigating the role of intentions in evaluations.

Keywords: outcome bias; intentions; joint evaluation; judgment; separate evaluation; Goals and Objectives; Prejudice and Bias; Judgments; Performance Evaluation; Outcome or Result;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard

Citation:

Sezer, Ovul, Ting Zhang, Francesca Gino, and Max Bazerman. "Overcoming the Outcome Bias: Making Intentions Matter." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 137 (November 2016): 13–26.

We examine “conversational receptiveness”—the use of language to communicate one’s willingness to thoughtfully engage with opposing views. We develop an interpretable machine-learning algorithm to identify the linguistic profile of receptiveness (Studies 1A-B). We then show that in contentious policy discussions, government executives who were rated as more receptive—according to our algorithm and their partners but not their own self-evaluations—were considered better teammates, advisors, and workplace representatives (Study 2). Furthermore, using field data from a setting where conflict management is endemic to productivity, we show that conversational receptiveness at the beginning of a conversation forestalls conflict escalation at the end. Specifically, Wikipedia editors who write more receptive posts are less prone to receiving personal attacks from disagreeing editors (Study 3). We develop a “receptiveness recipe” intervention based on our algorithm. We find that writers who follow the recipe are seen as more desirable partners for future collaboration and their messages are seen as more persuasive (Study 4). Overall, we find that conversational receptiveness is reliably measurable, has meaningful relational consequences, and can be substantially improved using our intervention.

Steve Kerr, coach of the 3-time NBA champion Golden State Warriors, reflects on his values-driven leadership style in the wake of a challenging season.

Article | Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | July 2020

Tell It Like It Is: When Politically Incorrect Language Promotes Authenticity

J. Schroeder, M. Rosenblum and F. Gino

When a person’s language appears political—such as being politically correct or incorrect—it can influence fundamental impressions of him or her. Political correctness is “using language or behavior to seem sensitive to others’ feelings, especially those others who seem socially disadvantaged.” One pilot study, six experiments, and three supplemental experiments (N = 4,956) demonstrate that being politically incorrect makes communicators appear more authentic—specifically, less susceptible to external influence—albeit also less warm. These effects, however, are moderated by perceivers’ political ideology and how sympathetic perceivers feel toward the target group being labeled politically correctly. In Experiments 1, 2, and 3 using politically incorrect language (e.g., calling undocumented immigrants “illegals”) made a communicator appear particularly authentic among conservative perceivers but particularly cold among liberal perceivers. However, in Experiment 4 these effects reversed when conservatives felt sympathetic toward the group that was being labeled politically correctly or incorrectly (e.g., calling poor whites “white trash”). Experiment 5 tests why political incorrectness can boost authenticity, demonstrating that it makes communicators seem less strategic. Finally, Experiment 6 tests our hypothesis in an externally valid field context: exploring the impact of politically incorrect language on perceived persuasion in real political debates. Debaters instructed to be politically incorrect (vs. politically correct) were judged by their uninstructed conversation partners to be less easily persuaded during the conversation, although they actually reported being similarly persuaded. Together, these findings demonstrate when and how using politically incorrect language can enhance a person’s authenticity.

Keywords: language; Interpersonal Communication; Perception;

Citation:

Schroeder, J., M. Rosenblum, and F. Gino. "Tell It Like It Is: When Politically Incorrect Language Promotes Authenticity." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 119, no. 1 (July 2020): 75–103. View Details

Cite View Details Find at Harvard

Faculty & Research

Overcoming the Outcome Bias: Making Intentions Matter

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors