The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Effects of Procedural and Outcome Accountability on Judgment Quality
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“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
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
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 4,481
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 3,583
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
Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.025 · Cited by 2,349
(2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098 · Cited by 2,293
Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment.
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.004 · Cited by 3,476
Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration
Burke, C. S., Sims, D. E., Lazzara, E. H., & Salas, E. (2007) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.006 · Cited by 980
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
Dunning, D. A., Meyerowitz, J. A., & Holzberg, A. D. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.020 · Cited by 689
Tetlock, P. E. (2002) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.109.3.451 · Cited by 646
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 483
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 446
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 424
How Prevalent Is the Negativity Effect in Consumer Environments?
Ahluwalia, R. (2002) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/341576 · Cited by 415
Sloman, S. A. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.024 · Cited by 412
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
Zahra, S. A., Filatotchev, I. V., & Wright, M. (2008) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.09.001 · Cited by 382
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 526
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 344
Larrick, R. P. (2004) · Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1002/9780470752937.ch16 · Cited by 328
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
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
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
Introduction – Heuristics and Biases: Then and Now
Gilovich, T. D., & Griffin, D. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.002 · Cited by 312
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 285
Hall, A. T., Frink, D. D., & Buckley, M. R. (2017) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.2052 · Cited by 335
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 263
Compatibility Effects in Judgment and Choice
Slovic, P., Griffin, D., & Tversky, A. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.014 · Cited by 235
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
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 238
Performance Pressure as a Double-edged Sword
Gardner, H. K. (2012) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0001839212446454 · Cited by 230
Schwarz, N., & Vaughn, L. A. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.007 · Cited by 215
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 211
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 195
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 178
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 169
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 614
Toward a Public Administration Theory of Felt Accountability
Overman, S., & Schillemans, T. (2021) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.13417 · Cited by 185
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
Gilbert, D. T. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.011 · Cited by 153
Feelings as Information: Moods Influence Judgments and Processing Strategies
Schwarz, N. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.031 · Cited by 149
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
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
Jonas, E., Schulz‐Hardt, S., & Frey, D. (2005) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167204274095 · Cited by 148
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 169
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
Self-citationCoping 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
Hochwarter, W. A., Perrewé, P. L., Hall, A. T., & Ferris, G. R. (2005) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.324 · Cited by 136
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 138
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
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
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 125
Understanding Misunderstanding: Social Psychological Perspectives
Pronin, E., Puccio, C., & Ross, L. D. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.038 · Cited by 120
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
Pitesa, M., & Thau, S. (2013) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0031697 · Cited by 110
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 120
Extensional versus Intuitive Reasoning
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. J. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.003 · Cited by 111
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
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 107
Frederick, S. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.032 · Cited by 103
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 109
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 109
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
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
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 91
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 94
van den Heuvel, C., Alison, L. J., & Crego, J. (2010) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.723 · Cited by 84
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 89
Bondt, W. F. M. D., & Thaler, R. H. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.040 · Cited by 82
Cohen, J. R., Krishnamoorthy, G., Peytcheva, M., & Wright, A. M. (2013) · Accounting Horizons · doi:10.2308/acch-50502 · Cited by 78
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
Gaynor, L. M., McDaniel, L. S., & Neal, T. L. (2006) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr.2006.81.4.873 · Cited by 77
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 77
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
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
Tetlock, P. E., & Lerner, J. S. (1999) · Cited by 71
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
Accountability – are We Better off Without It?
Ossege, C. (2012) · Public Management Review · doi:10.1080/14719037.2011.642567 · Cited by 69
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
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
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
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
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
“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).”
ResultDevelopment 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
Markman, K. D., & Tetlock, P. E. (2000) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167200262004 · Cited by 56
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
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
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
Self-citationPayne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Luce, M. F. (1998) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-012099975-0.50007-5 · Cited by 57
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 61
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
Decision Difficulty: Effects of Procedural and Outcome Accountability
Zhang, Y., & Mittal, V. (2005) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/497558 · Cited by 52
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
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 52
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
Heuristics and Biases in Application
Fischhoff, B. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.043 · Cited by 51
Clinical versus Actuarial Judgment
Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.042 · Cited by 53
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
Peytcheva, M., Wright, A. M., & Majoor, B. (2014) · Behavioral Research in Accounting · doi:10.2308/bria-50707 · Cited by 50
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
Metadata
- 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)
- 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
- 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 › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › 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