Abstract
The use of heuristic judgments is prevalent in organizations and negatively impacts accurate employee assessments. To minimize the negative impact of heuristic judgments (i.e., anchoring and adjustment), we aim to improve rating accuracy by restructuring frame-of-reference (FOR) training. We conducted five studies (N = 1,143) using different samples (three including participants with hiring experience), training environments (onsite and online), and rating contexts (evaluations of sales representatives, teachers, contract negotiation specialists, and retail store managers). Across the five studies, the average improvement in rating accuracy was at least twice as large for restructured FOR (vs. control) training as it was for typical FOR (vs. control) training; the difference in rating accuracy between restructured and typical FOR training was statistically significant. Furthermore, minimizing the anchoring effect rather than increasing opportunities for rating adjustments improved rating accuracy (Study 4). Finally, restructured FOR training achieved higher criterion validity (i.e., a higher strength of the association between ratings regarding a target and the target's objective performance) than did typical FOR training (Studies 3 and 5). We discuss implications for improving the effectiveness of diverse training programs and the accuracy of judgments in organizations.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Journal of Organizational Behavior |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 10 Apr 2019 |
Fingerprint
Cite this
}
Restructured frame-of-reference training improves rating accuracy. / Tsai, Ming Hong; Wee, Serena; Koh, Brandon.
In: Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10.04.2019.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Restructured frame-of-reference training improves rating accuracy
AU - Tsai, Ming Hong
AU - Wee, Serena
AU - Koh, Brandon
PY - 2019/4/10
Y1 - 2019/4/10
N2 - The use of heuristic judgments is prevalent in organizations and negatively impacts accurate employee assessments. To minimize the negative impact of heuristic judgments (i.e., anchoring and adjustment), we aim to improve rating accuracy by restructuring frame-of-reference (FOR) training. We conducted five studies (N = 1,143) using different samples (three including participants with hiring experience), training environments (onsite and online), and rating contexts (evaluations of sales representatives, teachers, contract negotiation specialists, and retail store managers). Across the five studies, the average improvement in rating accuracy was at least twice as large for restructured FOR (vs. control) training as it was for typical FOR (vs. control) training; the difference in rating accuracy between restructured and typical FOR training was statistically significant. Furthermore, minimizing the anchoring effect rather than increasing opportunities for rating adjustments improved rating accuracy (Study 4). Finally, restructured FOR training achieved higher criterion validity (i.e., a higher strength of the association between ratings regarding a target and the target's objective performance) than did typical FOR training (Studies 3 and 5). We discuss implications for improving the effectiveness of diverse training programs and the accuracy of judgments in organizations.
AB - The use of heuristic judgments is prevalent in organizations and negatively impacts accurate employee assessments. To minimize the negative impact of heuristic judgments (i.e., anchoring and adjustment), we aim to improve rating accuracy by restructuring frame-of-reference (FOR) training. We conducted five studies (N = 1,143) using different samples (three including participants with hiring experience), training environments (onsite and online), and rating contexts (evaluations of sales representatives, teachers, contract negotiation specialists, and retail store managers). Across the five studies, the average improvement in rating accuracy was at least twice as large for restructured FOR (vs. control) training as it was for typical FOR (vs. control) training; the difference in rating accuracy between restructured and typical FOR training was statistically significant. Furthermore, minimizing the anchoring effect rather than increasing opportunities for rating adjustments improved rating accuracy (Study 4). Finally, restructured FOR training achieved higher criterion validity (i.e., a higher strength of the association between ratings regarding a target and the target's objective performance) than did typical FOR training (Studies 3 and 5). We discuss implications for improving the effectiveness of diverse training programs and the accuracy of judgments in organizations.
KW - anchoring and adjustment heuristic
KW - frame-of-reference
KW - judgment
KW - rating accuracy
KW - subjective evaluation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065159732&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/job.2368
DO - 10.1002/job.2368
M3 - Article
JO - Journal of Organizational Behavior
JF - Journal of Organizational Behavior
SN - 0894-3796
ER -