The effects of sex (rater and ratee) on raters' accountability in the context of performance appraisal were investigated. The 130 participating undergraduates (men and women) rated a fictitious male or female's performance on a clerical task subsequent to receiving self-assessment information. As expected, raters' knowledge of a high self-assessment was followed by significantly higher performance ratings than after knowledge of a low self-assessment. Contrary to expectations, no differences were found for either raters' or ratees' sex. The results suggest that the sex of the rater or ratee is not associated with raters' accountability.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AusterE. R. (1989) Task characteristics as a bridge between macro and micro level research on salary inequity between men and women. Academy of Management Review, 14, 173–193.
2.
BartolK. M.ButterfieldD. A. (1976) Sex effects in evaluating leaders. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 446–454.
3.
BergerJ.RosenholtzS.ZelditchM. (1980) Status organizing processes. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 479–508.
4.
BrennerO. C.TomkiewiczJ.ScheinV. E. (1989) The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics revised. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 662–669.
5.
BrovermanI. K.VogelS. R.BrovermanD. M.ClarksonF. E.RosenkrantzP. (1972) Sex-role stereotypes: A current appraisal. Journal of Social Issues, 28(2), 59–78.
6.
ChenS.ShecterD.ChaikenS. (1996) Getting at the truth or getting along: Accuracy-versus impression-motivated heuristic and systematic processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 262–275.
7.
DeauxK.EmswillerT. (1974) Explanation of successful performance on sex linked tasks: What is skill for the male is luck for the female. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 80–85.
8.
DipboyeR. L.ArveyR. D.TerpstraD. E. (1977) Sex and physical attractiveness of raters and applications as determinants of resume evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 288–294.
9.
FagensonE. A.JacksonJ. (1993) The status of women managers in the United States. International Studies of Management and Organization, 23, 93–112
10.
FeldmanJ. (1986) A note on the statistical correction for halo error. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 173–176.
11.
Glass Ceiling Commission. (1997) In DunnD. (Ed.), Workplace/women's place. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury. Pp. 226–233.
12.
GoldbergP. A. (1968) Are women prejudiced against women?Transaction, 5, 28–30.
13.
HamnerW. C.KimJ. S.BairdL.BigonessW. J. (1974) Race and sex as determinants of ratings of potential employers in a simulated work sampling task. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 705–711.
14.
HarrisM. M. (1994) Rater motivation in the performance appraisal context: A theoretical framework. Journal of Management, 20, 737–756.
15.
HeilmanM. E.BlockC. J.MartellR. F.SimonM. C. (1989) Has anything changed? Current characterizations of men, women, and managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 935–942.
16.
IlgenD. R.KnowltonW. A. (1980) Performance attributional effects on feedback from supervisors. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 441–456.
17.
KlimoskiR.InksL. (1990) Accountability forces in performance appraisal. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 194–208.
18.
KohlbergL. (1966) A cognitive-developmental analysis of children's sex-role concepts and attitudes. In MaccobyE. E. (Ed.), The development of sex differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univer. Press. Pp. 78–97.
19.
LandyF. J.FarrJ. L. (1980) Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 72–107.
20.
LennyE.MitchellE.BrowningC. (1983) The effects of clear evaluation criteria on sex bias in judgments of performance. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 7, 313–328.
21.
LernerJ. S.TetlockP. E. (1999) Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 255–275.
22.
LockheedM. E.HallK. P. (1976) Conceptualizing sex as status characteristics applications to leadership training strategiesJournal of Social Issues, 32, 111–124.
23.
LongeneckerC. O.GioiaD. A.SimsH. P. (1987) Behind the mask: The politics of employee appraisal. Academy of Management Executive, 1, 183–193.
24.
MischelH. N. (1974) Sex bias in the evaluation of professional achievements. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 157–166.
25.
MobleyW. H. (1982) Supervisor and employee race and sex effects on performance appraisals: A field study of adverse impact and generalizability. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 598–606.
26.
NievaV. F.GutekB. A. (1980) Sex effects of evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 5, 267–276.
27.
PetersL. H.O'ConnerE. J.WeekleyJ.PooyanA.FrankB.ErenkrantzB. (1984) Sex bias and managerial evaluations: A replication and extension. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 349–352.
28.
PowellG. N.ButterfieldD. A.ParentJ. D. (2002) Gender and managerial stereotypes: Have the times changed?Journal of Management, 28, 177–193.
29.
PulakosE. D.WhiteL. A.OpplerS. H.BormanW. C. (1989) Examination of race and sex effects on performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 770–780.
30.
RosenB.JerdeeT. H. (1973) The influence of sex-role stereotypes on evaluations of male and female supervisory behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 44–48.
31.
RosenB. R.JerdeeT. H. (1974a) Effects of applicant's sex and difficulty of job on evaluations of candidates for managerial positions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 511–512.
32.
RosenB. R.JerdeeT. H. (1974b) The influence of sex role stereotypes on personnel decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 9–14.
33.
SackettP. R.DuBoisC. L.NoeA. W. (1991) Tokenism in performance evaluations: The effects of work group representation on male-female and white-black differences in performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 263–267.
34.
ShafferM. A.JoplinJ. R. W.BellM. P.LauT.OguzC. (2000) Gender discrimination and job-related outcomes: A cross-cultural comparison of working women in the United States and China. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 57, 395–427.
35.
ShoreL. M.ThorntonG. C.III, (1986) Effects of gender on self- and supervisory ratings. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 115–129.
36.
ShoreT. H.AdamsJ. S.TashchianA. (1998) Effects of self-appraisal information, appraisal purpose, and feedback target on performance appraisal ratings. Journal of Business and Psychology, 12, 283–298.
37.
SmitherR. D. (1994) The psychology of work and human performance. New York: HarperCollins.
38.
StoneT. H. (1973) An examination of six prevalent assumptions concerning performance appraisal. Public Personnel Management, 5, 408–414.
39.
SuttonC. D.MooreK. K. (1985) Executive women—20 years later. Harvard Business Review, 63(5), 42–66.
40.
TetlockP. E. (1985) Accountability: The neglected social context of judgment and choice. In StawB. M.CummingsL. L. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior. Vol. 7. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Pp. 297–332.
41.
TetlockP. E.KimJ. I. (1987) Accountability and judgment processes in a personality prediction task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 700–709.
42.
ThomasP. J. (1989) Appraising the performance of women: Gender and the naval officer. In GutekB. A.LarwoodL. (Eds.), Women's career development. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Pp. 86–109.
43.
WagnerD. G.FordR. S.FordT. W. (1986) Can gender inequities be reduced?American Sociological Review, 51, 47–61.
44.
Wall Street Journal. (1998) Pay gap between men and women begins to narrow again after a pause. June 10, B6A.
45.
WalshJ. P.WeinbergR. M.FairfieldM. L. (1987) The effects of gender on assessment center evaluations. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 60, 305–309.
46.
WexleyK. N.KlimoskiR. (1984) Performance appraisal: An update. In FerrisG. R.RowlandK. R. (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resource management. Vol. 2. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Pp. 35–79.
47.
WexleyK. N.PulakosE. D. (1982) Sex effects on performance ratings in manager-subordinate dyads: A field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 433–439.
