Assimilation and contrast effects in sequential judgments [Elektronische Ressource] / vorgelegt von Thomas Haar

Thomas Haar

Sujets

• Psychologie

Informations

• Publié par: ruprecht-karls-universitat_heidelberg
• Publié le: 01 janvier 2005
• Nombre de lectures: 26
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Sequential Judgments



Dissertation im Fach Psychologie zur Promotion
in der Fakultät für Verhaltens- und Empirische Kulturwissenschaften
der Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg









vorgelegt von

Dipl.-Psych. Thomas Haar

2004






Dekan:Prof. Dr. Klaus Roth Berater / 1. Gutachter:PDDr. Henning Plessner
2. Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Thomas Mussweiler (Köln) Assimilation and Contrast in Sequential Judgments Page 2





Dedicated to Claudia & Coralie

The two nicest little women that have ever breathed
-
(I now declare this bazaar opened!)

Assimilation and Contrast in Sequential Judgments Page 3


Acknowledgements



I would like to thank:


Ali der Tanzmaus, Alina, Amy, Andreas G., Andreas St., Andrei, Anja D.,
Anja Sch., Anna L., Anna T., Antoine, Arie, Armin, Arthur, Bäcker-Katrin,
Barbara, Basti, Beate, Bernd, Birgit, Bob F., Bob the Hero, Calvin, Cello-
Andreas, Cello-Jonathan, Chris L., Chris Sch., Christian R., Christiane,
Christina, Christine, Christoph M., Christoph R., Christoph S., Claudi,
Clemens, Connie, Coralie, Cornelia, Cordel, Csaba, Dara, David, dem
Eiermann, dem King of Queens, dem Iltis, dem Kaiser, dem Meister,
dem Nobody, dem Schleicher, der Weberwurst, den Lehmanns, den
Mensafrauen, DFG, Dino, Dirk, Ditsche, DLH, Doris, Dr. Christian B., Dr.
Christian G., Dr. Christian U., Dr. Günther, Dr. Henning, Dr. Mavridis, Dr.
Simon, Dunga, EAESP, Edo, Emilie, Emma, ESCON, Eva, Family Kanie,
Flo, Franka, Frau Dr. Branke, Frau Schmitt, Friederike, Geoffrey, Gerd,
Gerit, Gideon, Götz, Gregor “Kuhgott" W., Janne, Hanna, Harriet, Hasan,
Heike, Heinz, Helge, Helen, Hendrik, Henni, Henning, Herrn Bothe,
Herrn Kaiser, Herrn Schollmeyer, Hobbes, Horst, HSC, HSV, Ines D.,
Ines P., Ingo Dimingo, Iris, Isabell, Jan-Oliver, Jasper, Jens, Jens-Erik,
Jessika, Joanette, Joe, Johann von, Johanna, John, Jonathan, Julian,
Juliane B., Juliane D., Jürgen, Kai, Kaiser, Käpt’n Blaubär, Kati, Katja H.,
Katja R., Katrin mit Kind, Katrin ohne Kind, Katrin J., Karin, Ken, Ketten-
Jan, Kirsten, Klaus F., Klaus Sch., Klinsi, Konne, Kröning, Linda, Line B.,
Line J., Lili, Majid, Malte, Marcel, Mareile, Maren, Marion, Manni, Mario,
Markus, Martin, Matt, Matthias, Matze, Meyer, Michule, Miriam Sch.,
Miriam Sp., Mom and Dad Hanley, Mr. Aufziehvogel, Mutter, Murat,
Nana, Nici, Nina, Norbert, Oliver, Olivia, Olivier, Oma, Onkel Andi, Onkel
David, Orhan, Özlem, P&S, Pascal, Paulo, Peppi, Peter F., Peter K., Pfr.
Mohr, Pfr. Tonka, Phil, Philipp, Preussi, Prof. Dr. Abdul Nachtigaller, Ralf
E., Ralf R., Rasi, Rebecca, Rocko, Rolf, Rohel, Rudi, Rüdiger, Rumo,
Ruxi, Sabine C., Sabine H., Sarah, Saskia, Schildkröte, Schulze,
Sebastian, Seppl, Silke, Simon, Sören, Sprolli, Stanna, Stas, Stefan H.,
Stefan J., Stefan K., Steffi, Steino, Stirl, Susanne, Tante Erika, Tante
Linda, Thomas B., Thomas M., Tilmann, Timon, Tina, Tini, Tobi K., Tobi
M., Tobias, Tom, Tommie, Ulli, Ulrike, Uschi, Vater, Volker, Walter, Willy,
Wolfram, Yaël, Yvonne. Assimilation and Contrast in Sequential Judgments Page 4
Contents
Summary.............................................................................................................. 6
Chapter 1 - Exams put to test: Assimilation and contrast effects
in performance judgments ............................................................................... 8
1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 8
1.2 What it is all about ........................................................................................ 10
1.3 Sequential performance judgments in exams............................................ 12
1.3.1 Subjective biases in objective judgments..................................................12
1.3.2 How sequences affect judgments .............................................................16
1.3.3 How prior judgments influence subsequent judgments.............................19
1.4 Comparisons cause assimilation and contrast effects in judgments ...... 23
1.4.1 Social Comparison Theory – a selective review........................................23
1.4.2 The Selective-Accessibility Model (SAM)26
1.4.3 A comparison model in comparison with other models .............................36
1.5 Goals.............................................................................................................. 45
1.5.1 Goal 1 .......................................................................................................45
1.5.2 Goal 246
Chapter 2 - Assimilation and contrast effects when grading exams
................................................................................................................................. 47
2.1 Experiment 1: Judgment of written protocols............................................ 47
2.1.1 Overview ...................................................................................................47
2.1.2 Method ......................................................................................................48
2.1.3 Results51
2.1.4 Discussion.................................................................................................53
2.2 Experiment 2: Judgment of audio recorded protocols.............................. 56
2.2.1 Overview56
2.2.2 Method56
2.2.3 Results ......................................................................................................58
2.2.4 Discussion60
2.3 Experiment 3: Judgment of audio recorded protocols (part II)................. 64
2.3.1 Overview ...................................................................................................64
2.3.2 Method65
2.3.3 Results66
2.3.4 Discussion.................................................................................................68
2.4 Studies 1 to 3: A ‘mini meta-analysis’ ......................................................... 71
2.4.1 Overview71
2.4.2 Results ......................................................................................................71
2.5 General discussion of experiments 1-3 ...................................................... 75 Assimilation and Contrast in Sequential Judgments Page 5
Chapter 3 - Comparative judgments: A closer look at the
underlying process of hypothesis testing................................................ 79
3.1 Experiment 4: Grading students taking a psychology exam .................... 79
3.1.1 Overview ...................................................................................................79
3.1.2 Method ......................................................................................................83
3.1.3 Results86
3.1.4 Discussion.................................................................................................91
3.2 Experiment 5: Comparing students taking a general knowledge exam... 95
3.2.1 Overview95
3.2.2 Method96
3.2.3 Results98
3.2.4 Discussion...............................................................................................104
3.3 Experiment 6: Testing the general knowledge of three pupils................ 110
3.3.1 Overview110
3.3.2 Method ....................................................................................................111
3.3.3 Results114
3.3.4 Discussion121
3.4 General discussion of experiments 4-6 .................................................... 126
Chapter 4 - Concluding thoughts ........................................................... 131
4.1 Systematic influences of prior judgments on subsequent ones ............ 131
4.2 Processes underlying assimilation and contrast effects in judgments.138
4.3 Deductions and an outlook: Some suggestions for improving evaluative
performance judgments ................................................................................... 144
4.4 Critical remarks: The work is not complete.............................................. 146
4.5 Conclusion .................................................................................................. 148
References...................................................................................................... 150
Appendices .................................................................................................... 163
Appendices chapter 2....................................................................................... 163
Appendix 2.A: Priming task (instructions, comparison task).............................164
Appendix 2.B: Written protocols (instructions, high standard, low standard,
target).............................................................................................................. 166
Appendices chapter 3 173
Appendix 3.A: Exam questions (exp. 4) ...........................................................174
Appendix 3.B: Exam questions (exp. 5)175
Appendix 3.C: Instructions and pictures used in the priming task (exp. 6)...