x

Please fill out this short user survey of only 3 questions in order to help us improve the site. We appreciate your feedback!
Effects of the assessment format on performance ratings
Last registered on May 05, 2021

Pre-Trial

Trial Information
General Information
Title
Effects of the assessment format on performance ratings
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0007599
Initial registration date
May 04, 2021
Last updated
May 05, 2021 11:25 AM EDT
Location(s)

This section is unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information
Primary Investigator
Affiliation
Paderborn University
Other Primary Investigator(s)
Additional Trial Information
Status
In development
Start date
2021-05-24
End date
2021-07-30
Secondary IDs
Abstract
When evaluating employees' job performance, subjective appraisals are frequently used. A large variety of studies has stressed that these subjective performance ratings tend to be biased: they are often too lenient and too similar between employees, meaning that raters do not differentiate between high and low performers. This study investigates which influence the appraisal format has on the performance rating by evaluating written and spoken appraisals.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Citation
Gutt, Jana Kim. 2021. "Effects of the assessment format on performance ratings." AEA RCT Registry. May 05. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.7599-1.0.
Experimental Details
Interventions
Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2021-05-24
Intervention End Date
2021-07-30
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
We study the influence of the assessment format (written or spoken) on the performance rating.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
Respondents are shown videos of individuals in work contexts. Each video highlights a different individual. After viewing a video, respondents are asked to evaluate the individual's performance. The evaluation involves free texts and rating scales. The control group's free texts are in written form, whereas the treatment group speaks about the performance.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
The randomization is done by a computer.
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
We do not have clusters.
Sample size: planned number of observations
We plan to have about 200 observations.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
100 respondents control, 100 respondents treatment
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS (IRBs)
IRB Name
Ethik-Kommision Universit├Ąt Paderborn (Ethics Comittee Paderborn University)
IRB Approval Date
2021-05-04
IRB Approval Number
N/A