Effects of procedural and outcome accountability on judgment quality

Siegel-Jacobs, Karen; Yates, J.Frank

doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0001

Cited by 327Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsSocial and Intergroup PsychologyExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

Effects of procedural and outcome accountability on judgment quality

Siegel-Jacobs, Karen, Yates, J.Frank·1996·Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0001

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/obhd.1996.0001

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Prior research shows that performance improves when decision makers are responsible for the decision-making process, but not when they are responsible for the decision-making outcome.
“One potential explanation comes from prior research showing that performance improves when decision makers are responsible for the decision-making process, but not when they are responsible for the decision-making outcome (Doney and Armstrong, 1995; Siegel-Jacobs and Yates, 1996).”
From Check the box! How to deal with automation bias in AI-based personnel selection (2023) · cites this paper as Siegel-Jacobs and Yates, 1996

Still being checked.

Sorted by citations

Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00003435 · Cited by 4,255 · see citing works
Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment
Bottom, W. P., Gilovich, T. D., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. J. (2004) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/20159081 · Cited by 3,579 · see citing works
Accounting for the effects of accountability.
Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.255 · Cited by 2,383 · see citing works
The Affect Heuristic
Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.025 · Cited by 2,349 · see citing works
Heuristics and Biases
(2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098 · Cited by 2,214 · see citing works
Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment.
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.004 · Cited by 3,476 · see citing works
Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration
Burke, C. S., Sims, D. E., Lazzara, E. H., & Eduardo Salas, A. (2007) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.006 · Cited by 891 · see citing works
Confirmation bias in sequential information search after preliminary decisions: An expansion of dissonance theoretical research on selective exposure to information.
Jonas, E., Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., & Thelen, N. (2001) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.4.557 · Cited by 725 · see citing works
Ambiguity and Self-Evaluation: The Role of Idiosyncratic Trait Definitions in Self-Serving Assessments of Ability
Dunning, D. A., Meyerowitz, J. A., & Holzberg, A. D. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.020 · Cited by 688 · see citing works
Social functionalist frameworks for judgment and choice: Intuitive politicians, theologians, and prosecutors.
Tetlock, P. E. (2002) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.109.3.451 · Cited by 635 · see citing works
The Role Of Organizational Controls In Managing Knowledge
Turner, K. L., & Makhija, M. (2006) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2006.19379631 · Cited by 471 · see citing works
Unpacking, repacking, and anchoring: Advances in support theory.
Rottenstreich, Y., & Tversky, A. (1997) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.104.2.406 · Cited by 437 · see citing works
Incorporating the Irrelevant: Anchors in Judgments of Belief and Value
Chapman, G. B., & Johnson, E. J. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.008 · Cited by 410 · see citing works
How Prevalent Is the Negativity Effect in Consumer Environments?
Ahluwalia, R. (2002) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/341576 · Cited by 415 · see citing works
Two Systems of Reasoning
Sloman, S. A. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.024 · Cited by 407 · see citing works
A review of dashboards in performance management: Implications for design and research
Yigitbasioglu, O. M., & Velcu, O. (2012) · International Journal of Accounting Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.accinf.2011.08.002 · Cited by 398 · see citing works
How do threshold firms sustain corporate entrepreneurship? The role of boards and absorptive capacity
Zahra, S. A., Filatotchev, I. V., & Wright, M. (2008) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.09.001 · Cited by 382 · see citing works
When less is more: Counterfactual thinking and satisfaction among Olympic medalists.
Medvec, V. H., Madey, S. F., & Gilovich, T. D. (1995) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.69.4.603 · Cited by 507 · see citing works
A Reflection and Evaluation Model of Comparative Thinking
Markman, K. D., & McMullen, M. N. (2003) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0703_04 · Cited by 337 · see citing works
Debiasing
Larrick, R. P. (2004) · Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1002/9780470752937.ch16 · Cited by 328 · see citing works
Accountability and automation bias
SKITKA, L. J., MOSIER, K., & BURDICK, M. D. (2000) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1006/ijhc.1999.0349 · Cited by 324 · see citing works
The Balanced Scorecard: The Effects of Assurance and Process Accountability on Managerial Judgment
Libby, T., Salterio, S. E., & Webb, A. (2004) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr.2004.79.4.1075 · Cited by 317 · see citing works
Motivated information processing and group decision-making: Effects of process accountability on information processing and decision quality
Scholten, L., van Knippenberg, D., Nijstad, B. A., & Dreu, C. K. W. D. (2006) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.010 · Cited by 313 · see citing works
Introduction – Heuristics and Biases: Then and Now
Gilovich, T. D., & Griffin, D. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.002 · Cited by 305 · see citing works
Norm Theory: Comparing Reality to Its Alternatives
Kahneman, D. J., & Miller, D. T. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.022 · Cited by 284 · see citing works
An accountability account: A review and synthesis of the theoretical and empirical research on felt accountability
Hall, A. T., Frink, D. D., & Buckley, M. R. (2017) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.2052 · Cited by 335 · see citing works
An accountability framework for financial statement auditors and related research questions
Peecher, M. E., Solomon, I., & Trotman, K. T. (2013) · Accounting Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2013.07.002 · Cited by 262 · see citing works
Compatibility Effects in Judgment and Choice
Slovic, P., Griffin, D., & Tversky, A. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.014 · Cited by 233 · see citing works
Political skill as neutralizer of felt accountability—job tension effects on job performance ratings: A longitudinal investigation
Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., Gavin, M. B., Perrewé, P. L., Hall, A. T., & Frink, D. D. (2006) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.003 · Cited by 229 · see citing works
Leader reputation and accountability in organizations: Implications for dysfunctional leader behavior
Hall, A. T., Blass, F. R., Ferris, G. R., & Massengale, R. (2004) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.05.005 · Cited by 227 · see citing works
Performance Pressure as a Double-edged Sword
Gardner, H. K. (2012) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0001839212446454 · Cited by 222 · see citing works
The Availability Heuristic Revisited: Ease of Recall and Content of Recall as Distinct Sources of Information
Schwarz, N., & Vaughn, L. A. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.007 · Cited by 210 · see citing works
When Predictions Fail: The Dilemma of Unrealistic Optimism
Armor, D. A., & Taylor, S. E. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.021 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
Sympathetic Magical Thinking: The Contagion and Similarity “Heuristics”
Rozin, P. N., & Nemeroff, C. J. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.013 · Cited by 192 · see citing works
Individual Differences in Reasoning: Implications for the Rationality Debate?
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.026 · Cited by 168 · see citing works
Inside the Planning Fallacy: The Causes and Consequences of Optimistic Time Predictions
Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & Ross, M. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.016 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Resistance of personal risk perceptions to debiasing interventions.
Weinstein, N. D., & Klein, W. M. P. (1995) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037//0278-6133.14.2.132 · Cited by 593 · see citing works
Toward a Public Administration Theory of Felt Accountability
Overman, S., & Schillemans, T. (2021) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.13417 · Cited by 185 · see citing works
Reflecting on Six Decades of Selective Exposure Research: Progress, Challenges, and Opportunities
Smith, S. M., Fabrigar, L. R., & Norris, M. E. (2008) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00060.x · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Inferential Correction
Gilbert, D. T. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.011 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Feelings as Information: Moods Influence Judgments and Processing Strategies
Schwarz, N. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.031 · Cited by 146 · see citing works
The calibration of expert judgment: heuristics and biases beyond the laboratory
Koehler, D. J., Brenner, L., & Griffin, D. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.041 · Cited by 146 · see citing works
Accountability and Extra-Role Behavior
Hall, A. T., & Ferris, G. R. (2010) · Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal · doi:10.1007/s10672-010-9148-9 · Cited by 143 · see citing works
Giving Advice or Making Decisions in Someone Else’s Place: The Influence of Impression, Defense, and Accuracy Motivation on the Search for New Information
Jonas, E., Schulz‐Hardt, S., & Frey, D. (2005) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167204274095 · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Do key audit matters impact financial reporting behavior?
Nöteberg, A., Heilmann, M., Pott, C., & Rematzki, J. (2020) · International Journal of Auditing · doi:10.1111/ijau.12190 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
Good probabilistic forecasters: The ‘consumer's’ perspective
Yates, J., Price, P. C., Lee, J. W., & Ramirez, J. (1996) · International Journal of Forecasting · doi:10.1016/0169-2070(95)00636-2 · Cited by 136 · see citing works
Self-citation
Coping Responses in Phishing Detection: An Investigation of Antecedents and Consequences
Wang, J., Li, Y., & Rao, H. R. (2017) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2016.0680 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Negative affectivity as a moderator of the form and magnitude of the relationship between felt accountability and job tension
Hochwarter, W. A., Perrewé, P. L., Hall, A. T., & Ferris, G. R. (2005) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.324 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
Relationships between felt accountability as a stressor and strain reactions: The neutralizing role of autonomy across two studies.
Hall, A. T., Royle, M. T., Brymer, R. A., Perrewé, P. L., Ferris, G. R., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2006) · Journal of Occupational Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/1076-8998.11.1.87 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Counterfactual Thought, Regret, and Superstition: How to Avoid Kicking Yourself
Miller, D. T., & Taylor, B. R. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.023 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Leader power and self-serving behavior: The Moderating Role of Accountability
Rus, D., van Knippenberg, D., & Wisse, B. M. (2011) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.11.002 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
How Good are Fast and Frugal Heuristics?
Gigerenzer, G., Czerlinski, J., & Martignon, L. F. (1999) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-5089-1_6 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Understanding Misunderstanding: Social Psychological Perspectives
Pronin, E., Puccio, C., & Ross, L. D. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.038 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
The accountability lens: A new way to view management issues
Hall, A. T., Bowen, M. G., Ferris, G. R., Royle, M. T., & Fitzgibbons, D. E. (2007) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2007.04.005 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
Masters of the universe: How power and accountability influence self-serving decisions under moral hazard.
Pitesa, M., & Thau, S. (2013) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0031697 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Meso-level theory of accountability in organizations
Frink, D. D., Hall, A. T., Perryman, A. A., Ranft, A. L., Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., & Royle, M. T. (2008) · Research in personnel and human resources management · doi:10.1016/s0742-7301(08)27005-2 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Extensional versus Intuitive Reasoning
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. J. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.003 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
Reducing uncertainty in supplier selection decisions: Antecedents and outcomes of procedural rationality
Riedl, D. F., Kaufmann, L., Zimmermann, C., & Perols, J. L. (2012) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2012.10.003 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Quantification and Persuasion in Managerial Judgement*
Kadous, K., Koonce, L. L., & Towry, K. L. (2005) · Contemporary Accounting Research · doi:10.1506/568u-w2fh-9yqm-qg30 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Automated Choice Heuristics
Frederick, S. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.032 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Overconfidence in personnel selection: When and why unstructured interview information can hurt hiring decisions
Kausel, E. E., Culbertson, S. S., & Madrid, H. P. (2016) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.07.005 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
Too arrogant for their own good? Why and when narcissists dismiss advice
Kausel, E. E., Culbertson, S. S., Leiva, P. I., Slaughter, J. E., & Jackson, A. (2015) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.07.006 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Effects of procedure and outcome accountability on interview validity.
Brtek, M. D., & Motowidlo, S. J. (2002) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037//0021-9010.87.1.185 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Overconfidence in Phishing Email Detection
Wang, J., Li, Y., & Rao, H. R. (2016) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00442 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Accountability and ideology: When left looks right and right looks left
Tetlock, P. E., Vieider, F. M., Patil, S. V., & Grant, A. M. (2013) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.03.007 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
On the social nature of eyes: The effect of social cues in interaction and individual choice tasks
Baillon, A., Selim, A., & van Dolder, D. (2013) · Evolution and Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.12.001 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
How Uncertainty and Accountability can Derail Strategic ‘Save Life’ Decisions in Counter‐Terrorism Simulations: A Descriptive Model of Choice Deferral and Omission Bias
van den Heuvel, C., Alison, L. J., & Crego, J. (2010) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.723 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
The effects of process and outcome accountability on judgment process and performance
de Langhe, B., van Osselaer, S. M. J., & Wierenga, B. (2011) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.02.003 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Do Analysts Overreact?
Bondt, W. F. M. D., & Thaler, R. H. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.040 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
How Does the Strength of the Financial Regulatory Regime Influence Auditors' Judgments to Constrain Aggressive Reporting in a Principles-Based Versus Rules-Based Accounting Environment?
Cohen, J. R., Krishnamoorthy, G., Peytcheva, M., & Wright, A. M. (2013) · Accounting Horizons · doi:10.2308/acch-50502 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Improving sourcing decisions in NPD projects: Monetary quantification of points of difference
Wouters, M. J. F., Anderson, J. C., Narus, J. A., & Wynstra, F. (2008) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2008.07.001 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
The Effects of Joint Provision and Disclosure of Nonaudit Services on Audit Committee Members' Decisions and Investors' Preferences
Gaynor, L. M., McDaniel, L. S., & Neal, T. L. (2006) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr.2006.81.4.873 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Time to Try a Little Tenderness? The Detrimental Effects of Accountability When Coupled With Abusive Supervision
Breaux, D. M., Perrewé, P. L., Hall, A. T., Frink, D. D., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2008) · Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies · doi:10.1177/1548051808321787 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Mental Contamination and the Debiasing Problem
Wilson, T. D., Centerbar, D. B., & Brekke, N. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.012 · Cited by 160 · see citing works
How accountability type influences information search processes and decision quality
Via, N. D., Perego, P., & van Rinsum, M. (2018) · Accounting Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2018.10.001 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
The social contingency model: Identifying empirical and normative boundary conditions on the error-and-bias portrait of human nature.
Tetlock, P. E., & Lerner, J. S. (1999) · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Information Exchange in Group Decision Making: The Hidden Profile Problem Reconsidered
Lightle, J. P., Kagel, J. H., & Arkes, H. R. (2009) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1080.0975 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Accountability – are We Better off Without It?
Ossege, C. (2012) · Public Management Review · doi:10.1080/14719037.2011.642567 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
The effect of an Audit Judgment Rule on audit committee members’ professional skepticism: The case of accounting estimates
Kang, Y. J., Trotman, A. J., & Trotman, K. T. (2015) · Accounting Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2015.03.001 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Self-Anchoring in Conversation: Why Language Users Do Not Do What They “Should”
Keysar, B., & Barr, D. J. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.010 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Durability Bias in Affective Forecasting
Gilbert, D. T., Pinel, E. C., Wilson, T. D., Blumberg, S. J., & Wheatley, T. P. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.018 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Toward a New Understanding of Leader Accountability: Defining a Critical Construct
Wood, J. A., & Winston, B. E. (2005) · Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies · doi:10.1177/107179190501100307 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Check the box! How to deal with automation bias in AI-based personnel selection
Kupfer, C., Prassl, R., Fleiß, J., Malin, C., Thalmann, S., & Kubicek, B. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1118723 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
“One potential explanation comes from prior research showing that performance improves when decision makers are responsible for the decision-making process, but not when they are responsible for the decision-making outcome (Doney and Armstrong, 1995; Siegel-Jacobs and Yates, 1996).”
Result
Development of three scales to measure leader accountability
Wood, J. A. (., & Winston, B. E. (2007) · Leadership & Organization Development Journal · doi:10.1108/01437730710726859 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Accountability and Close-Call Counterfactuals: The Loser Who Nearly Won and the Winner Who Nearly Lost
Markman, K. D., & Tetlock, P. E. (2000) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167200262004 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Implications of organizational exchanges for accountability theory
Erdoğan, B., Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., & Dunegan, K. J. (2004) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2004.02.002 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Evidence-based guidelines for assessment of software development cost uncertainty
Jørgensen, M. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2005.128 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Probability Judgment across Cultures
Yates, J. F., Lee, J., Sieck, W. R., Choi, I., & Price, P. C. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.017 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Self-citation
Behavioral Decision Research
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Luce, M. F. (1998) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-012099975-0.50007-5 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Validity and reliability of forensic firearm examiners
Mattijssen, E. J. A. T., Witteman, C. L. M., Berger, C. E. H., Brand, N. W., & Stoel, R. D. (2019) · Forensic Science International · doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.110112 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Social Prediction and the “Allegiance Bias”
Markman, K. D., & Hirt, E. R. (2002) · Social Cognition · doi:10.1521/soco.20.1.58.20943 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Decision Difficulty: Effects of Procedural and Outcome Accountability
Zhang, Y., & Mittal, V. (2005) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/497558 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Context effects on group-based employee selection decisions
Slaughter, J. E., Bagger, J., & Li, A. (2006) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.01.003 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
P-E Fit as moderator of the accountability – employee reactions relationships: Convergent results across two samples
Lanivich, S. E., Brees, J. R., Hochwarter, W. A., & Ferris, G. R. (2010) · Journal of Vocational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2010.05.004 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Knowing Too Much: Expertise-Induced False Recall Effects in Product Comparison
Mehta, R., Hoegg, J., & Chakravarti, A. (2011) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/659380 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Heuristics and Biases in Application
Fischhoff, B. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.043 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Clinical versus Actuarial Judgment
Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.042 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
The comparative effect of process and outcome accountability in enhancing professional scepticism
Kim, S., & Trotman, K. T. (2014) · Accounting and Finance · doi:10.1111/acfi.12084 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
The Impact of Principles-Based versus Rules-Based Accounting Standards on Auditors' Motivations and Evidence Demands
Peytcheva, M., Wright, A. M., & Majoor, B. (2014) · Behavioral Research in Accounting · doi:10.2308/bria-50707 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Putting Adjustment Back in the Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic
Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. D. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.009 · Cited by 52 · see citing works

Effects of procedure- and outcome-oriented accountability on judgment quality.
Siegel-Jacobs, K. (1993) · Deep Blue (University of Michigan) · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Self-citation
The effects of process and outcome accountability on judgment process and performance
de Langhe, B., van Osselaer, S. M. J., & Wierenga, B. (2011) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.02.003 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Justifying the judgment process affects neither judgment accuracy, nor strategy use
Hoffmȧnn, J., Gaissmaier, W., & von Helversen, B. (2017) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500006744 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Justifying the judgment process neither affects judgment accuracy, nor strategy use
Hoffmann, J. A., Gaissmaier, C., & von Helversen, B. (2017) · Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) · doi:10.5167/uzh-145086
Justifying the judgment process affects neither judgment accuracy, nor
Hoffmann, J., Gaissmaier, W., & von Helversen, B. (2017) · Max Planck Digital Library

Authors: Siegel-Jacobs, K., & Yates, J. F.
Affiliations: University of Colorado Boulder (US)
University of Michigan (US)
Venue: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Published: 1996-01
Volume: 65
Issue: 1
Pages: 1-17
ISSN: 0749-5978 (ISSN-L)
DOI: 10.1006/obhd.1996.0001
OpenAlex: W1970614775
Cited by: 327
References: 0
Citations by year: 2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 12
FWCI: 3.46
Type: journal article
Language: en
Open access: closed
Licence: www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (publishedVersion)
RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics: Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords: procedural accountability, outcome accountability, judgment quality, attitude judgment, information use, judgment accuracy, outcome feedback

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Effects of procedural and outcome accountability on judgment quality

Integrity signals

Claims the paper makes

Claims other papers make about this one

Cites

Cited by

Related

Record

About these checks