A Constant Error in Psychological Ratings.¶
Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A Constant Error in Psychological Ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(1), 25-29.
Cited by¶
11 citations across 11 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
Domain-specific¶
- Halo Effect
- The halo effect (Edward Thorndike, 1920) is the well-replicated finding that a judge's positive impression of one salient attribute of a target contaminates the judge's evaluations of other, structurally unrelated attributes of the same target, inflating apparent cross-attribute correlations well beyond what the underlying trait covariances warrant
This sourceReports officer-rating correlations across physique, intelligence, leadership and character that came out implausibly high and too much alike relative to the underlying traits (Thorndike 1920, 137 aviation cadets rated by one conscientious flight commander).
Supported in partVerified against a saved copy of the source
“Their ratings were apparently affected by a marked tendency to think of the person in general as rather good or rather inferior and to color the judgments of the qualities by this general feeling.”
- The halo effect (Edward Thorndike, 1920) is the well-replicated finding that a judge's positive impression of one salient attribute of a target contaminates the judge's evaluations of other, structurally unrelated attributes of the same target, inflating apparent cross-attribute correlations well beyond what the underlying trait covariances warrant
Mechanisms¶
- Committee Scoring
- Its failure mode is that rubric scores can carry low inter-rater reliability while looking authoritative, and the halo effect lets one salient strength inflate every dimension.
This sourceShows halo error in which a rater's overall impression colors ratings of otherwise distinct qualities.
- Its failure mode is that rubric scores can carry low inter-rater reliability while looking authoritative, and the halo effect lets one salient strength inflate every dimension.
- Domain-Specific Trust Evidence and Exposure Matrix
- Its strength is that it is the antidote to the halo effect — the tendency for one salient positive impression to color unrelated judgments — because a grid physically prevents a strong cell from filling in a blank one.
This sourceFinds that a general favorable or unfavorable impression colors otherwise separate judgments of a person's traits.
- Its strength is that it is the antidote to the halo effect — the tendency for one salient positive impression to color unrelated judgments — because a grid physically prevents a strong cell from filling in a blank one.
- Dynamic Source-Reliability Scorecard
- A halo effect lets a source's reputation for reliability inflate its credibility on a topic it knows nothing about; tiers left un-revised go stale and keep endorsing a source whose context has moved; and if the axes are not kept distinct, the scorecard quietly becomes a single popularity score dressed up as many.
This sourceIdentifies a halo error in which a person's rating on one trait improperly affects ratings on other traits.
- A halo effect lets a source's reputation for reliability inflate its credibility on a topic it knows nothing about; tiers left un-revised go stale and keep endorsing a source whose context has moved; and if the axes are not kept distinct, the scorecard quietly becomes a single popularity score dressed up as many.
- Founder Shadow Review Board
- Because its members stand outside the shadow, it can name a deference dynamic that insiders literally cannot see — the founder's accumulated glow makes their preferences feel self-evidently right, so a favorable general impression radiates onto every specific judgment attached to them.
This sourceFinds that a favorable general impression can systematically color judgments of a person's specific qualities.
- Because its members stand outside the shadow, it can name a deference dynamic that insiders literally cannot see — the founder's accumulated glow makes their preferences feel self-evidently right, so a favorable general impression radiates onto every specific judgment attached to them.
- Halo and Taint Decomposition Table
- Its strength is making visible how much of a "strong impression" is affect — the classic halo effect and its negative twin, the horns effect.
This sourceIdentifies a halo error in which a rater’s global impression creates excessive correlation among ratings of distinct traits.
- Its strength is making visible how much of a "strong impression" is affect — the classic halo effect and its negative twin, the horns effect.
- Peer Review
- Without a benchmark or safety frame, peer review degrades into a popularity or status judgment, where a reviewer's overall impression of the author colors the assessment of the work — the halo effect at play.
This sourceDemonstrates the halo error in which an overall impression of a person colors judgments of specific qualities.
- Without a benchmark or safety frame, peer review degrades into a popularity or status judgment, where a reviewer's overall impression of the author colors the assessment of the work — the halo effect at play.
- Performance Context Review
- Trust-Tier Badging
- Worst, a badge gets read as a guarantee rather than a probability — the halo effect
This sourceDefines the halo effect as a general favorable impression spilling over into unwarranted judgments of specific qualities.
- Worst, a badge gets read as a guarantee rather than a probability — the halo effect
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 11 citations: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Was it audited? Yes. A second, independent pass read the citation against the article text and recorded a verdict.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:9cf7d503f4b9 · see in the full table