Back to search

(Not) Getting What You Deserve: How Misrecognized Evaluators Reproduce Misrecognition in Peer Evaluations

DSEID
DSEID-001-2876775
DOI
10.1177/00031224251318051
Journal
American Sociological Review
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2025-6
Status
metadata_only

Abstract

In most evaluation systems—such as those governing the allocation of prestigious awards—the evaluator’s primary task is to reward the highest quality candidates. However, these systems are imperfect; top performers may not be acknowledged and thus be underrecognized, and low performers may receive unwarranted recognition and thus be overrecognized. An important feature of many evaluation systems is that people alternate between being candidates and being evaluators. How does experiencing misrecognition as a candidate affect how people subsequently evaluate others? We develop novel theory that underrecognition and overrecognition lead people to reproduce those experiences when they are evaluators. Across three studies—a quasi-natural experiment and two preregistered, multistage experiments, we find that underrecognized evaluators are less likely to grant recognition to others—even to the highest-performing candidates. Conversely, overrecognized evaluators are more likely to grant rewards to others—even to the lowest-performing candidates. Whereas underrecognized evaluator behavior is driven by individuals’ perceptions that their experience was unfair, overrecognized evaluator behavior is driven by the informational cues people glean on how to evaluate others. Thus, in evaluation processes where people oscillate between being the evaluated and being the evaluator, we show how and why seemingly innocuous initial inefficiencies are reproduced in subsequent evaluations.

Metadata is indexed. Open-access discovery has not completed for this record yet.

Publisher or DOI landing page

PDF

No local PDF is available.

GROBID Extracted text; discontinued.

This text is generated from TEI extraction for accessibility, search, and TTS. Formulas, tables, figures, page layout, and references may not perfectly match the original PDF.

No accessible text representation is available. The text extraction service has been discontinued for the time being. If you require this service, for accessibility or any other reason, please submit an issue/request on this page.

Metadata

Title
(Not) Getting What You Deserve: How Misrecognized Evaluators Reproduce Misrecognition in Peer Evaluations
Delta ID
DSEID-001-2876775
Authors
Mabel Abraham, Tristan L. Botelho, James T. Carter
Abstract source
crossref
Source URL
None
Access
closed_or_uncertain
Licence
unknown
PDF SHA-256
TEI SHA-256
GROBID

Issues

No public issues have been filed for this DOI.

Submit an issue

Record history

WhenEventFieldOldNew
2026-06-18 19:37:53.011249+00:00identifier_assignedDSEIDDSEID-001-2876775