Effects of procedural and outcome accountability on judgment quality
Effects of procedural and outcome accountability on judgment quality
复制标题
程序和结果问责对判断质量的影响
DOI：
10.1006/obhd.1996.0001
复制
发表时间：
1996
影响因子：
4.6
通讯作者：
J. Yates
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Karen Siegel;J. Yates
摘要 每当个人的表现受到监控并且产生与该评估相关的后果（有形或无形）时，就意味着个人要承担责任。我们建议至少有两种不同类型的问责制。一个重点是对用于采取行动的程序的合理性（程序问责制，PA）；另一个侧重于该行动结果的质量（结果问责制或 OA）。在三个实验中，受试者根据一组人的背景信息判断这些人持有特定态度的可能性。实验 1 和 2 的结果表明，PA 鼓励人们更多地考虑可用信息。然而，这种效果是否有益取决于该信息与目标判断的相关程度。 OA 只会产生有害影响，增加受试者判断中的噪音（或“分散”）量，从而导致整体准确性降低。实验 3 扩展了 PA 的工作，重点关注其与结果反馈效果的关系。结果表明，PA 通过减少与目标事件无关的判断的可变性，显着减少了对此类反馈过度反应的倾向。讨论了实践和理论意义。
Abstract Individuals are said to be accountable whenever their performance is monitored and there are consequences (either tangible or intangible) associated with that evaluation. We propose that there are at least two distinct types of accountability. One focuses on justification of the procedure used to arrive at an action (procedural accountability, or PA); the other focuses on the quality of the outcomes of that action (outcome accountability, or OA). In three experiments, subjects judged the likelihood that each of a set of individuals held a particular attitude on the basis of background information about those individuals. Results from Experiments 1 and 2 suggested that PA encourages people to take more of the available information into account. Whether or not this effect was beneficial, however, depended on how relevant that information was to the target judgment. OA had only detrimental effects, increasing the amount of noise (or “scatter”) in subjects' judgments and thus leading to lower accuracy overall. Experiment 3 extended the work on PA, focusing on its relationship to the effects of outcome feedback. Results indicated that PA significantly reduced the tendency to be overly responsive to such feedback by reducing the variability in judgment unrelated to the target event. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.