Information Integration in Social Judgment: Interaction of Judge and Informational Components

Kaplan, Martin F.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-397250-7.50012-x

Cited by 33 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings are supportive of previous research in suggesting that the degree of emergence of response bias effects is inversely related to the informativeness of the materials upon which judgments are based (Kaplan, 1975) and that increasing degrees of training are not always associated with comparable increases in clinical judgment ability (Wiggins, 1973). Furthermore, clinicians would be expected, more than caseworkers, to perceive themselves as "experts" and to resist vigorously attempts to place their judgments within the boundaries of externally imposed guidelines.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…An example of one such hypothesized variable is the generalized tendency of the decision-maker to attribute positive vs. negative traits t o inmates in areas such as truthfulness, motivation to change, etc. ; this phenomenon would be most likely to exist when decision-makers are required to make judgments of Ss who exhibit a mixture of positive and negative characteristics or who are otherwise difficult to discriminate (Kaplan, 1975). I n addition to attributing negative traits t o inmates, punitive decision-makers also would be expected to be more authoritarian (Crockett & Meidinger, 1956), maladjusted (Matcom, 1963), and unempathic than their lenient colleagues and to perceive inmates, in this latter respect, as having needs and motives with which they cannot identify.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Utilization of offender case information by “lenient” vs. “punitive” clinicians

Holland¹,

Holt²

1978

J. Clin. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Presentence evaluations conducted by psychologists and psychiatrists (clinicians) and correctional counselors (caseworkers) were subjected to multiple regression analyses in order to specify the relative contribution of inmate characteristics (offense severity and recidivism probability) and decision-maker response biases to sentencing recommendations. Although both groups of decision-makers showed a response bias effect for cases that were difficult to discriminate, the effect was generally larger for clinicians than for caseworkers. Response bias (lenient vs. punitive) was not associated with type of clinical judgment model (linear vs. configural) or predictability of recommendation, although it was associated with the degree of relative weighting of the two independent variables and, in the case of extremely punitive decision-makers, with the tendency to utilize only one evaluative dimension (offense severity) to the exclusion of the other. Furthermore, it was found that inmates who committed the most serious offenses were exposed selectively to those decision-makers most likely both to place exclusive emphasis on offense severity and to recommend relatively punitive case dispositions. The need for an accountability system designed to minimize the effects of the response biases of correctional decision-makers was discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilization of offender case information by “lenient” vs. “punitive” clinicians

Holland¹,

Holt²

1978

J. Clin. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The two components, disposition and information value, are combined in a weighted average, so that the contribution of dispositions is constant across stimulus value, but varies inversely with the amount and effective importance of stimulus information. Since redundancy, inconsistency discounting, and confidence are plausible determinants of information weighting, reported findings agree with the theory (see Kaplan, 1975, for further theoretical discussion).…”

Section: Theoretical Implicationssupporting

confidence: 86%

Measurement and generality of response dispositions in person perception1

Kaplan

1976

J Personality

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Scholars have suggested that actors invoke initial impressions when information processing is constrained (Kaplan, 1975(Kaplan, , 1976, particularly when the information is considered "unreliable or potentially invalid" (Kaplan, Wanshula, & Zanna, 1993: 260), which is likely to be the case when a firm reneges on its initial commitment. Accordingly, consumers are likely to invoke initial impressions of a firm in the event of a breach of promise or loss of legitimacy.…”

Section: Moderating Effect Of Csr Reputationmentioning

confidence: 98%

Multinationals and corporate social responsibility in host countries: Does distance matter?

Campbell

Eden²,

Miller³

2011

J Int Bus Stud

416

190

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior studies have found that foreign affiliates of multinational enterprises (MNEs) suffer from liability of foreignness (LOF). Foreign affiliates may be able to improve their social legitimacy and overcome LOF by demonstrating social commitment to host-country constituents through corporate social responsibility (CSR). If LOF is positively related to the distance between the home and host countries, and CSR activities confer social legitimacy benefits on foreign affiliates, we should expect CSR activities and distance to be positively related. However, we argue that, despite this potential motivation, foreign affiliates from more distant home countries are in fact less likely to engage in host-country CSR. Our argument focuses on the ways in which distance affects the MNE's willingness and ability to engage in CSR abroad. We also predict that hostcountry CSR reputation negatively moderates this relationship. Using Community Reinvestment Act data for foreign bank affiliates from 32 countries in the United States over 1990-2007, we find strong support for our hypotheses. The paper enriches our understanding of CSR practices in MNEs, and of when and how MNEs try to overcome legitimacy issues in host countries.

show abstract

Information Integration in Social Judgment: Interaction of Judge and Informational Components

Cited by 33 publications

References 87 publications

Utilization of offender case information by “lenient” vs. “punitive” clinicians

Utilization of offender case information by “lenient” vs. “punitive” clinicians

Measurement and generality of response dispositions in person perception1

Multinationals and corporate social responsibility in host countries: Does distance matter?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About