Leniency Bias in Evaluating Clinical Social Work Student Interns

Abstract

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.

Leniency and halo bias in industry-based assessments of student competencies: a critical, sector-based analysis

“…Supervisor bias and assessment leniency have been well documented in learning and teaching literature. However, despite the recognition that supervisors across disciplines are inclined to rate a disproportionate amount of students highly, the vast majority of empirical research has been conducted within the context of clinical placements (Bandiera & Lendrum, 2008;Dohrenbusch & Lipka, 2006;Dudek, Marks, & Regehr, 2005;Karasik, 2009), psychology (Gonsalvez & Freestone, 2007;Hedge & Kavanagh, 1988;Robiner & Hoberman, 1997), and social work (Bogo, Regehr, Roxanne, & Regehr, 2007;Kadushin & Harkness, 2002;Lazar & Mosek, 1993;Pease, 1988;Vinton & Wilke, 2011). Arguably, this research focus may not be a major surprise, considering the seriouspotentially life threatening -consequences of allowing insufficiently trained graduates to practice in their chosen, health related field.…”

Brief Online Training with Standardised Vignettes Reduces Inflated Supervisor Ratings of Trainee Practitioner Competencies

“…Clinical supervisors from a number of professions (e.g., psychology, social work, medicine) have reported that their role as gatekeeper and evaluator is a source of concern, particularly when this conflicts with their goal to maintain a positive and supportive relationship with the trainee (Vinton & Wilke, 2011). Prior research has found that almost half of supervisors are concerned about the effects of feedback on trainees’ self‐esteem.…”

“…Indeed, completing trainee assessments can be difficult and stressful (Bogo et al, 2007; Pease, 1988). These factors have been cited as possible drivers of rater bias (Gonsalvez et al, 2016; Vinton & Wilke, 2011; Wolf, 2015). While we do not claim that vignettes presented in a brief training directly reduce leniency or halo biases, we do suggest that the objective anchor points attenuate the effects of bias on trainee ratings.…”

“…This may be motivated by a desire to avoid conflict and to be viewed favourably by the trainee (Gonsalvez, Wahnon, & Deane, 2016). It may also be influenced by the extent to which a supervisor defines their role as supportive or evaluative (Vinton & Wilke, 2011). Mediating factors might also include the supervisor's concerns about the consequences low ratings have for the credentialing of the trainee and a desire to be perceived positively by the relevant stakeholders at the trainee's institution.…”

Market-Scanning Capability - A Scale to Measure Firms’ Ability to Sense or Respond to the Changes in the Marketplace

“…When respondents let their personal feelings and knowledge influence their rating of a particular item or person, the resulting bias has been defined as leniency bias (Guilford 1954;Schriesheim et al 1979;Farh and Dobbins 1989;Vinton and Wilke 2011). When raters are familiar with the ratee or the researchers who are conducting the survey, the familiarity might influence the responses.…”