Leniency Bias Research Articles

Teacher Tenure is Not the Real Problem

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist recently vetoed legislation that would have eliminated tenure for newly hired teachers and substituted, in its stead, a merit pay system. It was the right decision, though perhaps it was for the votes and not the merits. But the perennial silver bullet for improving the public schools--abolishing teacher tenure--misses the mark, and the arguments for eliminating tenure all show a myopic lack of will at each level of the public education enterprise. First, contrary to the prevailing perception, teacher tenure doesn't guarantee lifetime employment. Legally, teacher tenure is no more than procedural due process, which means that notice and a hearing are needed to ensure fundamental fairness and that a termination must be based on generally accepted reasons, such as incompetency, insubordination, and immorality. If this level of procedural and substantive protection for an individual teacher becomes top heavy, outweighing the interests of students and the rest of the institutional enterprise, the problem isn't tenure, but the lack of will among various players in the tenure process, including those who participate in making state law and in collective bargaining. Second, the corollary concept that teacher tenure is so costly and complicated that districts can't fire bad teachers is also a self-perpetuating scapegoating process. In most jurisdictions, the scenario of mountainous documentation, multisession hearings, and unending appeals is the result of three, oddly allied tendencies: 1. Overzealous administrators who blindly follow the mantra of document, document; 2. Attorneys on each side who have their own ingrained refrain of billable hours; and 3. Teachers union officials who need to show the value of collective protection against false charges even at the expense of protecting against true ones. The third and related reason is the substitution of lore for law. The lore is that it is difficult, if not impossible, to win a performancebased termination of a tenured teacher. The reality is quite different. In a comprehensive canvass of court decisions on teacher evaluation for competency, I found that defendant districts prevailed over plaintiff teachers by better than a 3-to-1 ratio and that there was no significant difference between the outcomes for nontenured and tenured teachers. Decisions based on substantive grounds--such as whether the evidence sufficiently established incompetence or whether the district violated such federally protected rights as First Amendment expression or Title VII race or sex discrimination--were notably deferential to school districts. Even decisions based on procedural grounds--such as the state law or local policy for the frequency of teacher evaluation or records of the process--gave the benefit of the doubt to the school district, using such rationales as the harmless error doctrine. For procedures not prescribed in state law or local policy, such as a plan and period for remediation, courts typically ruled that their lack was not fatal to the district's case because judges enforce, not make, the rules. Inflated performance reviews If there is a reason why it's difficult to fire a bad teacher, it doesn't have to do with tenure or the law, but with a sort of Lake Wobegon effect on administrators when evaluating teachers. …

Blaming the Victim and Exonerating the Perpetrator in Cases of Rape and Robbery: Is There a Double Standard?

Research in legal decision making has demonstrated the tendency to blame the victim and exonerate the perpetrator of sexual assault. This study examined the hypothesis of a special leniency bias in rape cases by comparing them to cases of robbery. N = 288 participants received descriptions of rape and robbery of a female victim by a male perpetrator and made ratings of victim and perpetrator blame. Case scenarios varied with respect to the prior relationship (strangers, acquaintances, ex-partners) and coercive strategy (force vs. exploiting victim intoxication). More blame was attributed to the victim and less blame was attributed to the perpetrator for rape than for robbery. Information about a prior relationship between victim and perpetrator increased ratings of victim blame and decreased perceptions of perpetrator blame in the rape cases, but not in the robbery cases. The findings support the notion of a special leniency bias in sexual assault cases.

Assuring validity of multisource feedback in a national programme

ObjectiveTo report the evidence for and challenges to the validity of Sheffield Peer Review Assessment Tool (SPRAT) with paediatric Specialist Registrars (SpRs) across the UK as part of Royal College...

A Framework for Reconsidering the Lake Wobegon Effect

The Lake Wobegon Effect (LWE) describes the potential measurement-error bias introduced into survey-based analyses of education issues. Although this effect potentially applies to any student-report variable, the systematic overreporting of academic achievements such as grade point average is often of preeminent concern. This concern can be easily circumvented if official records data are available; however, many researchers can only access student-reported data. In this article, the authors examine whether using student-survey data in place of official records data meaningfully biases regression estimates. They motivate their contribution by noting a useful statistical feature of overreporting on bounded variables such as grade point average. Specifically, the misreports will be negatively correlated with the true grade point average, yielding a form of nonclassical measurement error that actually counteracts the bias. The authors connect this observation to reliability ratios used in labor economics, which are simple ways to adjust for attenuation bias, when needed. In two applications, we find that it is unnecessary to correct for the LWE bias because it is so small.

Deconstructing the better-than-average effect.

The tendency for people to evaluate themselves more favorably than an average-peer--the better-than-average effect (BTAE)--is among the most well-documented effects in the social-psychological literature. The BTAE has been demonstrated in many populations with various methodologies, and several explanations have been advanced for it. Two essential questions remain conspicuously unanswered in the BTAE literature. The first concerns the extent to which the BTAE can be represented as a social-comparative phenomenon, and the second concerns the role that strategic motivational processes play in self versus average-peer judgments. With regard to the first question, Study 1 provides direct experimental evidence that self versus average-peer judgments are made relationally rather than independently and, further, that self-ratings anchor these relational judgments. Moreover, Study 1 demonstrates that the consequence of this comparison is for judgments of average to be assimilated toward, not contrasted from, self-ratings. Studies 2-4 provide evidence that self-enhancement motives play a moderating role in the outcome of self versus average-peer judgments. We show that for dimensions on which the self is positively evaluated, enhancement motives restrict the extent to which average-peer assimilation occurs (Study 2). But for dimensions on which the self is negatively evaluated, enhancement motives amplify average-peer assimilation (Studies 3 and 4). Discussion focuses on the function of such differential assimilation, the relation of the current findings to extant perspectives, and directions for future research.

CEO pay and the Lake Wobegon Effect

The “Lake Wobegon Effect,” which is widely cited as a potential cause for rising CEO pay, is said to occur because no firm wants to admit to having a CEO who is below average, and so no firm allows its CEO's pay package to lag market expectations. We develop a game-theoretic model of this Effect. In our model, a CEO's wage may serve as a signal of match surplus, and therefore affect the value of the firm. We compare equilibria of our model to a full-information case and derive conditions under which equilibrium wages are distorted upward.

Leniency Bias in Evaluating Clinical Social Work Student Interns

Leniency bias, or the tendency to evaluate individuals more favorably than is warranted, can prevent accurate evaluation and constructive supervision. This study tested leniency bias among field instructors of 90 clinical social work interns by comparing face-to-face and anonymous field instructors’ ratings of students’ knowledge, values, and skills. We also compared students’ own ratings to field instructors’ assessments. Results indicated little variance and consistently high ratings when field instructors evaluated face-to-face. There was greater variance and lower mean ratings when supervisors evaluated anonymously. Students’ self-assessments were the most critical and best matched the anonymous evaluations; whereas, the anonymous and face-to-face field instructor evaluations significantly differed on most items. These findings suggest the need for evaluation training for field instructors and the use of multiple assessment methods.

Does the Better-than-Average Effect Show that People are Overconfident?: An Experiment

Does the Better-than-Average Effect Show that People are Overconfident?: An Experiment

Are cultural characteristics associated with the relationship between self and others’ ratings of leadership?

This study examined the relationship between self and subordinate ratings of leadership and the relationship between self and peer ratings of leadership for 964 managers from 21 countries. Using multilevel modeling, the authors found that cultural characteristics moderated the relationship between self and others' ratings of leadership. Specifically, the relationship between self and subordinate ratings, as well as between self and peer ratings, was more positive in countries that are characterized by high assertiveness. The relationship between self and subordinate ratings, as well as between self and peer ratings, was also more positive in countries characterized by high power distance. The authors also found a leniency bias in individualistic cultures for self, peer, and subordinate ratings. In sum, cultural characteristics should be considered in attempts to understand relationships between self and other ratings.

Asian Variability in Performance Rating Modesty and Leniency Bias

Western managers typically rate their performance higher than their bosses, peers, or subordinates do; research on Asian managers, however, has been both sparse and conflicting. In examining data from six Asian countries, Japanese managers were found to rate themselves lower than others in their organization do. This “modesty bias,” however, varies considerably among Asian countries; in other countries, including India and China, self-inflation was more comparable to typical Western findings. Findings lend initial support to the ability of national collectivism to explain differences in modesty and leniency bias when institutional collectivism is distinguished from in-group collectivism using data from the GLOBE Project (House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004). Theoretical basis for modesty bias, and implications for Asian and American expatriates are discussed.

Format and scale effects on leniency error and halo effect in 360° feedback

Format and scale effects on leniency error and halo effect in 360° feedback

Losing sight of oneself in the above-average effect: When egocentrism, focalism, and group diffuseness collide

Four experiments examined the relative influence of three causal processes in the above-average effect (AAE) and related comparative biases: (a) egocentrism, (b) focalism, and (c) referent group diffuseness. By manipulating the inclusion or exclusion of the self from the referent group (Experiments 1–3) or target group (Experiment 4), the relative contributions of each influence were assessed. In direct comparisons, single peers were systematically judged more favorably relative to groups including the self, suggesting that egocentrism plays a lesser role than focalism or group diffuseness. Thus, in response to the question such as “How friendly is Nancy compared to the rest of us?” the answer tends to be “More friendly.”

Is the Above-Average Effect Measurable at All? The Validity of the Self-Reported Happiness Minus Others' Perceived Happiness Construct

Individuals routinely rate themselves higher than their peers on a number of attributes and capabilities, including their satisfaction with life. However, the construct validity of this above-average effect requires specific psychometric properties of ratings of one's contentment and ratings of others' perceived contentment. This article tests these properties with respect to the popular Satisfaction With Life Scale through a multivariate measurement model with latent change and method effects. The model is fitted to two independent data sets (N = 597 and N = 964), and it is found twice that four items are suitable to compute a meaningful composite difference score. It is concluded that the above-average effect is a systematic multivariate phenomenon that can be assessed by the difference of two manifest, absolute evaluation scores.

A Framework for Reconsidering the Lake Wobegon Effect

The Wobegon Effect'' describes the potential bias introduced into survey-based analyses of education issues, because students systematically over-report academic achievements such as grade-point average. While the use of official-records data negates this effect, many researchers can only access student-reported data. In this paper we examine whether student-survey data in place of official-records data meaningfully biases regression estimates. We investigate this by capitalizing on a subtle but extremely useful statistical feature of over-reporting on bounded variables like grade-point average. Specifically, the misreports will be negatively correlated with the true grade-point average - a form of non-classical measurement error - which actually counteracts the bias. Around this insight we build a simple testing framework that permits a researcher with access to both data sets to assess the bias's size and significance. We demonstrate our method using two data sets, and find that the bias does not meaningfully impact the signs, significance, or magnitude of regression slope coefficients. Our results, and that the special econometric feature is likely present in all student-reported grade data, lead us to believe the Lake Wobegon Effect bias is inconsequential.

CEO Pay and the Lake Wobegon Effect

The Lake Wobegon Effect, which is widely cited as a potential cause for rising CEO pay, is said to occur because no firm wants to admit to having a CEO who is below average, and so no firm allows its CEO's pay package to lag market expectations. We develop a game-theoretic model of this Effect. In our model, a CEO's wage may serve as a signal of match surplus, and therefore affect the value of the firm. We compare equilibria of our model to a full-information case and derive conditions under which equilibrium wages are distorted upward.

Daily encounter cards facilitate competency-based feedback while leniency bias persists

We sought to determine if a novel competency-based daily encounter card (DEC) that was designed to minimize leniency bias and maximize independent competency assessments could address the limitations of existing feedback mechanisms when applied to an emergency medicine rotation. Learners in 2 tertiary academic emergency departments (EDs) presented a DEC to their teachers after each shift. DECs included dichotomous categorical rating scales (i.e., "needs attention" or "area of strength") for each of the 7 CanMEDS roles or competencies and an overall global rating scale. Teachers were instructed to choose which of the 7 competencies they wished to evaluate on each shift. Results were analyzed using both staff and resident as the units of analysis. Fifty-four learners submitted a total of 801 DECs that were then completed by 43 different teachers over 28 months. Teachers' patterns of selecting CanMEDS competencies to assess did not differ between the 2 sites. Teachers selected an average of 3 roles per DEC (range 0-7). Only 1.3% were rated as "needs further attention." The frequency with which each competency was selected ranged from 25% (Health Advocate) to 85% (Medical Expert). Teachers chose to direct feedback toward a breadth of competencies. They provided feedback on all 7 CanMEDS roles in the ED, yet demonstrated a marked leniency bias.

Subjective Performance Evaluation and Inequality Aversion

Many firms use subjective performance appraisal systems due to lack of objective performance measures. In these cases, supervisors usually have to rate the performance of their subordinates. Using such systems, it is a well established fact that many supervisors tend to assess the employees too good (leniency bias) and that the appraisals hardly vary across employees of a certain supervisor (centrality bias). We explain these two biases in a model with a supervisor, who has preferences for the utility of her inequality averse subordinates, and discuss determinants of the size of the biases. Extensions of the basic model include the role of supervisor’s favoritism of one particular agent and the endogenous effort choice of agents. Whether inequality averse agents exert higher efforts then purely self-oriented ones, depends on the size of effort costs and inequality aversion.

Why the better-than-average effect is a worse-than-average measure of self-enhancement: An investigation of conflicting findings from studies of East Asian self-evaluations

A recent meta-analysis on cross-cultural studies of self-enhancement finds that evidence for East Asian self-enhancement is consistently apparent only in studies where participants compare themselves to the average other, aka the “Better-than-Average” Effect (BAE). However, prior research has suggested that the BAE may conflate motivations to view the self in a positive light with non-motivational factors, such as a tendency to evaluate “everyone as better than average” [EBTA; Klar Y, Gilladi EE (1997) J Personal Soc Psychol 73:885–901]. In two studies, European-Canadian, Asian-Canadian, and Japanese students were asked to evaluate themselves as well as a fictitious student compared to the average. Replicating prior research, evidence for Japanese self-enhancement was found with the BAE, albeit weaker than Canadians. However, in the measures where the EBTA effect was circumvented, self-enhancement was no longer evident among Japanese. Likewise, within the BAE method, prior research has found that East Asians self-enhance more for important than unimportant traits. When the EBTA effect was circumvented this correlation was also significantly reduced. Findings from this research converge with other sources of evidence that East Asians do not appear to be motivated to self-enhance.

Rater Errors in a Clinical Skills Assessment of Medical Students

The authors used a many-faceted Rasch measurement model to analyze rating data from a clinical skills assessment of 173 fourth-year medical students to investigate four types of rater errors: leniency, inconsistency, the halo effect, and restriction of range. Students performed six clinical tasks with 6 standardized patients (SPs) selected from a pool of 17 SPs. SPs rated the performance of each student in six skills: history taking, physical examination, interpersonal skills, communication technique, counseling skills, and physical examination etiquette. SPs showed statistically significant differences in their rating severity, indicating rater leniency error. Four SPs exhibited rating inconsistency. Four SPs restricted their ratings in high categories. Only 1 SP exhibited a halo effect. Administrators of objective structured clinical examinations should be vigilant for various types of rater errors and attempt to reduce or eliminate those errors to improve the validity of inferences based on objective structured clinical examination scores.

Le P.~Castel et l'ethos du mathématicien

Abstract The celebrated inventor of the “Ocular Harpsichord” is less well known as the author of Mathématique universelle, published in 1728. In this work, the Jesuit teacher develops a cheerful method of instruction in inspired by his desire to popularize a discipline hitherto marked with the seal of austerity. In order to clear away the illusory superiority of professional geometers, Father Castel makes argumentative breaks from tradition, aiming to devalue the ethos of contemporary mathematicians. Through textual analysis of certain rhetorical professions such as candid directness (aretè), ostentatious goodwill (eunoia) and, in a more general sense, the dissociation of appearance from reality, the present study seeks to place in evidence certain ethical concerns which were shaking Jesuite learned world in its confrontation with the new epistemology of the century of the Enlightenment.