How temporal and social comparisons in performance evaluation affect fairness perceptions

Chun, Jinseok S.; Brockner, Joel; Cremer, David De

doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.01.003

Cited by 27 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, negative appraisal of past selves seems to be moderated by temporal distance, as such that distant past selves are appraised more negatively than present selves (Wilson & Ross, 2001). Yet, research on temporal comparison remains scarce (Chun, Brockner, & Cremer, 2018;Schubert, Eloo, Scharfen, & Morina, 2020).…”

Section: Temporal Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparisons inform me who I am: A general comparative processing model of self-perception

Morina¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our self-concept contributes to our sense of identity over time. Yet, self-perception is motivated and serves survival and thus does not reflect stable inner states or accurate biographical accounts. Literature indicates that different types of comparison standards act as reference frames in evaluating attributes that constitute the self. However, the role of comparisons in self-perception has been underestimated, arguably due to lack of a guiding framework that takes into account relevant aspects of comparison processes and their interdependence. I propose a general comparative model of self-perception that consists of a basic comparison process involving the individual's prior mental representation of the target dimension, the construal of the comparison standard, and the comparison outcome representing the posterior representation of the target dimension. The generated dimensional construal is then appraised with respect to one's motives and controllability and goes on to shape emotional, cognitive, and behavioral responses. Contextual and personal factors influence the comparison process. This model may be informative in better understanding comparison processes in our everyday life as well as in designing interventions to assist people overcome undesirable consequences of comparative behavior. [182 words]

show abstract

Section: Temporal Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparisons inform me who I am: A general comparative processing model of self-perception

Morina¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From a theoretical perspective, investigating the influence of feedback on competition and cooperation is not only relevant for the literature on the effects of feedback (Cederblom, 1982;Chun, Brockner, & De Cremer, 2018;Herold & Greller, 1977;Hollenbeck, Ilgen, LePine, Colquitt, & Hedlund, 1998) but also allows us to advance the literature on competition and cooperation in organizations by treating feedback as a representative showcase for those situational characteristics (beyond the objective outcome structure) that can influence whether people act competitively and cooperatively.…”

Section: Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rivals without a cause? Relative performance feedback creates destructive competition despite aligned incentives

Woike

Hafenbrädl

2020

Behavioral Decision Making

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whether people compete or cooperate with each other has consequences for their own performance and that of organizations. To explain why people compete or cooperate, previous research has focused on two main factors: situational outcome structures and personality types. Here, we propose that—above and beyond these two factors—situational cues, such as the format in which people receive feedback, strongly affect whether they act competitively, cooperatively, or individualistically. Results of a laboratory experiment support our theorizing: After receiving ranking feedback, both students and experienced managers treated group situations with cooperative outcome structures as competitive and were in consequence willing to forgo guaranteed financial gains to pursue a—financially irrelevant—better rank. Conversely, in dilemma situations, feedback based on the joint group outcome led to more cooperation than ranking feedback. Our study contributes to research on competition, cooperation, interdependence theory, forced ranking, and the design of information environments.

show abstract

“…Equity theory, a classic model of fairness, suggests that people evaluate the ratio of inputs (i.e., what they invest in their work, e.g., effort and time) and outcomes (i.e., what they get back from their work, e.g., money and appreciation), against some comparison standard (e.g., their own prior input/outcome ratio, or the input/outcome ratio of colleagues; see Chun et al 2018), in order to evaluate whether rewards are fair (Adams 1963;Arvanitis and Hantzi 2016;Walster et al 1973). So, equity theory proposes that higher inputs increase the input/outcome ratio, suggesting that people should desire more compensation after experiencing their own work as effortful.…”

Section: The Feeling Of Effortmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive labor shapes the desire for social and monetary compensation

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When do people want something back for their mental labor? Based on equity theory, we propose that conscious experiences of success and effort—which emerge during cognitive work—shape people’s subsequent desire for social and monetary rewards. We examined this idea in a series of experiments, in which participants carried out a cognitive task, in which we manipulated task difficulty (easy vs. difficult) and performance feedback (high vs. low) within subjects. After each trial of this task, we probed people’s desire for compensation, in terms of social appreciation or money. Findings were in line with the entitlement hypothesis, which assumes that the experience of success can cause people to feel entitled to money. However, we found only indirect support for the effort compensation hypothesis, which assumes that the feeling of effort increases the subsequent desire for compensation, and no support for the intrinsic reward hypothesis, which assumes that people desire less social appreciation after already having experienced success. When considered together, our results suggest that labor-related feelings (of success and effort) shape people’s subsequent desire for money and social appreciation in several ways. These findings have potential implications for the effective use of performance feedback in work contexts.

show abstract

How temporal and social comparisons in performance evaluation affect fairness perceptions

Cited by 27 publications

References 43 publications

Comparisons inform me who I am: A general comparative processing model of self-perception

Comparisons inform me who I am: A general comparative processing model of self-perception

Rivals without a cause? Relative performance feedback creates destructive competition despite aligned incentives

Cognitive labor shapes the desire for social and monetary compensation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About