An Experimental Study of Bias in the Rating Process: Effects of Rater and Ratee Sex and Job Type.

This study was designed to examine the influence of several potential sources of bias in the rating process. It specifically examined the potential effect of sex of rater and ratee, information about ratee characteristics, information about the job, and two rater personality factors on the way raters use performance information in coming to a final promotion decision. The study itself took place in a laboratory setting designed to simulate an assessment center. Raters were 320 business students at a large university. Pretesting was used to identify two jobs as recognizably "male" and "female" and two patterns of personality characteristics as either "male" or "female". Male and female raters were then asked to judge prcstotability of ratees who were identified as either male or female, and who had either "male" or "female" characteristics. Candidates were being considered for either "male" or "female" jobs. Rater cognitive complexity, as measured by the Hidden Figures Test, and attitudes toward women, as measured by the Women as Managers Scale, were also examined. Results were examined i n a 2 X 2 X 2 X 2 factorial design with two covariates. Variables were male vs. female rater, male vs. female ratee, male vs. female characteristics and male vs. female job. The rater personality characteristics were treated as covariates. Overall results indicated that a contrast effect was operating and that women having masculine characteristics were strongly preferred for all jobs, even over males having the same characteristics. Women with feminine characteristics were strongly rejected, when compared to males with the same characteristics. Results of regression analysis of vil characteristics judged as most important also supported these findings. Male and female raters shared the biases identified. There was little evidence that raters made use of job information or that the personality characteristics identified affected the rating process. Practical implications of this study are described and suggestions for future research are made. CHAPTER 1 INTRDDUCTICN An important problem facing any organization is the identification of managerial talent. Regardless of whether the organization elects to promote from within or to bring in managers from outside, the problem of determining which individuals are likely to succeed in managerial jobs remains central. In recent years, the passage of civil rights legislation and pressure to assure fair treatment of minority groups have compounded problems of managerial selection and led organizations to search for methods of identifying managerial talent which are relatively free from bias. Older such circumstances, the use of managerial assessment centers in the selection process has been an appealing alternative. As Stein (1978) points out, the relatively standardized design of assessment centers is assumed to be an important factor in assuring that ratees receive relatively unbiased ratings. In the assessment center, ratees are candidates for promotion. Judgments about their suitability for promotion are based on their performance in a series of exercises designed to simulate the demands of the actual managerial job. Typically, these exercises include speaking before a group, handling simulated in-baskets or working in a problem-solving group. During the exercises, a group of trained raters observes ratee performance. The raters next "translate" ratee performance into ratings on a series of "dimensions" of managerial performance. The dimensions consist of skills and abilities considered critical for success in the managerial job. Typical of such dimensions are leader­