Social influence bias in ratings: A field experiment in the hospitality sector

We investigate the empirical phenomenon of rating bubbles, that is, the presence of a disproportionate number of extremely positive ratings in user-generated content websites. We test whether customers are influenced by prior ratings when evaluating their stay at a hotel through a field experiment that exogenously manipulates information disclosure. Results show the presence of (asymmetric) social influence bias (SIB): access to information on prior ratings that are above the average positively influences the consumers’ rating of the hotel. In contrast, information on ratings that are below the average does not affect reviewers. Furthermore, customers who have never been to the hotel before the intervention are more susceptible to prior ratings than customers who have repeatedly been to the hotel before. Finally, customers who are not used to writing online reviews are more prone to SIB than customers who frequently write online reviews. Our findings suggest that online rating systems should be adjusted to mitigate this bias, especially as these platforms become more relevant and widespread in the hospitality sector.

The objectivity illusion and voter polarization in the 2016 presidential election

Two studies conducted during the 2016 presidential campaign examined the dynamics of the objectivity illusion, the belief that the views of “my side” are objective while the views of the opposing side are the product of bias. In the first, a three-stage longitudinal study spanning the presidential debates, supporters of the two candidates exhibited a large and generally symmetrical tendency to rate supporters of the candidate they personally favored as more influenced by appropriate (i.e., “normative”) considerations, and less influenced by various sources of bias than supporters of the opposing candidate. This study broke new ground by demonstrating that the degree to which partisans displayed the objectivity illusion predicted subsequent bias in their perception of debate performance and polarization in their political attitudes over time, as well as closed-mindedness and antipathy toward political adversaries. These associations, furthermore, remained significant even after controlling for baseline levels of partisanship. A second study conducted 2 d before the election showed similar perceptions of objectivity versus bias in ratings of blog authors favoring the candidate participants personally supported or opposed. These ratings were again associated with polarization and, additionally, with the willingness to characterize supporters of the opposing candidate as evil and likely to commit acts of terrorism. At a time of particular political division and distrust in America, these findings point to the exacerbating role played by the illusion of objectivity.

An inch away from being mentally tough: Performance bias in ratings of mental toughness

Are assessments of an athlete’s mental toughness influenced by how that athlete performs in a single moment in a game? We conducted three experimental studies to address this question and conclude that the answer is yes. In each study, sports fans (total N = 1,097) read vignettes that depicted a mentally tough basketball player, either by describing the player as having many mentally tough attributes (Study 1), or by stating that the player had been identified as being mentally tough by an expert sport psychologist (Studies 2 and 3). Participants then read that the player was about to take a championship-winning shot and were randomly assigned to learn that the shot had been either successful or unsuccessful. Moreover, in Studies 1 and 2 participants learned that the outcome had been either decisive (i.e., a “perfect swish” or an “air ball”) or indecisive (i.e., the ball hitting the backboard, then the rim and, eventually, either going or not going into the basket). In each study, despite learning that the athlete was very mentally tough, participants’ mental toughness ratings depended on whether or not the shot was successful. Ratings were also sensitive to the way in which an outcome was attained: ratings decreased in a linear pattern with the highest ratings after a decisive success, followed by an indecisive success, an indecisive failure, and the lowest ratings after a decisive failure. This research supports the criticism that evaluations of mental toughness are distorted by how an athlete performs in a single moment.

Unseen and Stressed? Gender Differences in Parent and Teacher Ratings of ADHD Symptoms and Associations With Perceived Stress in Children With ADHD

Objective: In this study, we investigate the differences between parent and teacher ADHD ratings, and how these ratings relate to perceived stress in children with ADHD. Method: Ratings by parents and teachers with the Swanson, Nolan and Pelham ADHD symptom rating scale (SNAP-IV) were collected from children with a clinical diagnosis of ADHD ( n = 137). Also, information on medication was collected. Children (≥11 years of age; n = 64) were invited to complete the Pressure-Activation-Stress scale. Results: Among girls, but not boys, teacher ratings were significantly lower than parental ratings on all symptom scales. Lower teacher ratings on hyperactivity symptoms were associated with higher levels of perceived stress. Conclusion: The findings suggest a potential gender bias in ratings among teachers. Underrated, and hence underidentified, ADHD problems in the school setting seem to increase the perception of stress in the sense of pressure for both girls and boys.

Incentivizing High-Quality Reviews in Peer-to-Peer Settings

Peer reviewing has been touted as a popular instrument to identify good contributions in communities. A problem of peer reviewing is that reviewers have little incentive to make significant effort. To address this problem, the authors introduce a new variant of peer reviewing. It differs from conventional peer reviewing in two ways: First, peers who have made a contribution must also review the contributions made by others. Second, each contributor issues ratings regarding the reviews he has received. To incentivize reviewing, they design an assessment scheme which does not only assess the quality of the contribution made by a peer, but also the quality of the reviews he has submitted. The scheme ranks peers by overall performance, and the ranks determine their payoff. Such a setting gives way to competition among peers. A core challenge however is to elicit objective reviews and ratings. The authors consider two issues which are in the way of this objectiveness: First, they expect preference bias in ratings, i.e., peers tend to prefer reviews with high scores, but dislike reviews with low scores. Second, strategic peers might defame others in their reviews or ratings. This is because they perceive others as competitors. In this paper, they propose a heuristic to address these issues. Further, they carry out a user study in a lecture scenario to evaluate their scheme. It shows that students are incentivized to submit high-quality reviews and that their scheme is effective to evaluate the performance of students.

Does Gender Impact Business Students Perceptions Of Teaching Effectiveness?

While there are certainly differences ofopinion regarding teaching effectiveness, the goal of this study is toinvestigate whether there is consistency or differences in opinion based on thegender of the student doing the evaluation of the instructor or the gender ofthe instructor being evaluated. Thispaper summarizes the gender-based findings from a survey administered tostudents in fall 2011 at a mid-sized Association to Advance Collegiate Schoolsof Business International (AACSB International) accredited Midwesternuniversity business school. Thirty-fivetraits were presented for evaluation. Thefindings of this study suggest that there are differences between female andmale student ratings of teacher effectiveness.Females in general tend to rate teachers higher overall in terms ofteaching effectiveness. Furthermore,there are specific traits that appear to be more important to females, andother specific traits which appear to be more important to males. This study provides strong evidence thatthere are systematic differences between male and female students in terms of theirperceptions of the teaching traits they find important and how they rateinstructors of each gender. It isimportant that faculty members and especially administrators are aware of thepotential for gender bias in ratings of teacher effectiveness. Men and women have different perceptions. Male and female students are different, andthey perceive differences between male and female faculty members.