Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

The effect of satisfaction and gender on self-evaluations of task performance

  • 60 Accesses

  • 5 Citations

Abstract

Previous research has found that the illusory correlation of job satisfaction and job performance may influence self-evaluations of performance. Specifically, people who think they are satisfied with a task may evaluate their task performance more favorably than those who think they are dissatisfied. Two experiments examined the effects of gender on this illusory correlation effect using college students. Satisfaction level was manipulated via descriptive feedback. In experiment 1, female students demonstrated the illusory correlation effect on a financial puzzle task whereas male students did not. That is, female students who were told that they were relatively dissatisfied with the task rated their performance on the task significantly lower than females who were told they were satisfied and than males in both conditions. Experiment 2, using a “planning a wedding” task, replicated the gender by satisfaction level interaction found in Experiment 1, and ruled out the explanation that the interaction effect was due to differences in attribution patterns or task sex typing. Results are discussed as possibly due to gender differences in self-confidence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Adler, S., Skov, R., & Salvemini, N. Job characteristic and job satisfaction: When cause becomes consequence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 1985, 35, 266–278.

  2. Basow, S. A. Gender stereotypes: Traditions and alternatives. 2nd ed. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1986.

  3. Basow, S. A., & Medcalf, K. L. Academic achievement and attributions among college students: Effects of gender and sex-typing. Sex Roles, 1988, 19, 555–567.

  4. Basow, S. A., & Silberg, N. T. Student evaluations of college professors: Are female and male professors rated differently? Journal of Educational Psychology, 1987, 79, 308–314.

  5. Burke, J. P., Hunt, J. P., & Bickford, R. L. Causal internalizations of academic performance as a function of self-esteem and performance satisfaction. Journal of Research in Personality, 1985, 19, 321–329.

  6. Chapman, L. J., & Chapman, J. P. Illusory correlation as an obstacle to the use of valid psychodiagnostic signs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1969, 74, 271–280.

  7. Crombie, G. Women's attribution patterns and their relation to achievement: An examination of within-sex differences. Sex Roles, 1983, 9, 1171–1182.

  8. Deaux, K., & Emswiller, T. Explanations of successful performance on sex-linked tasks: What is skill for the male is luck for the female. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 80–85.

  9. DeNisi, A. S., Cafferty, T. P., & Meglino, B. M. A cognitive view of the performance appraisal process: A model and research proposition. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1984, 33, 360–396.

  10. Doherty, W. J., & Baldwin, C. Shifts and stability in locus of control during the 1970's: Divergence of the sexes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1985, 48, 1048–1053.

  11. Frieze, I. H., Whitley, B. E., Hanusa, B. H., & McHugh, M. C. Assessing the theoretical models for sex differences in causal attributions for success and failure. Sex Roles, 1982, 8, 333–343.

  12. Gitelson, I. B., Petersen, A. C., & Tobin-Richards, M. H. Adolescents' expectancies of success, self-evaluations, and attributions about performance on spatial and verbal tasks. Sex Roles, 1982, 8, 411–419.

  13. Iaffaldano, M. T., & Muchinsky, P. M. Job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 1985, 97, 251–273.

  14. Ilgen, D. R., & Feldman, J. M. Performance appraisal: A process focus. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behaviors, Vol. 5. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1983.

  15. Lenney, E. Women's self-confidence in achievement settings. Psychological Bulletin, 1977, 84, 1–13.

  16. Lenney, E. What's fine for the gander isn't always good for the goose: Sex differences in self-confidence as a function of ability area and comparison with others. Sex Roles, 1981, 7, 905–924.

  17. Lenney, E., Mitchell, L., & Browning, C. The effect of clear evaluation criteria on sex bias in judgments of performance. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 1983, 7, 313–328.

  18. Lippa, R., & Beauvais, C. Gender jeopardy: The effects of gender, assessed femininity and masculinity and false success/failure feedback on performance in an experimental quiz game. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1983, 44, 344–353.

  19. McMahan, I. D. Expectancy of success on sex linked tasks. Sex Roles, 1982, 8, 421–432.

  20. Muchinsky, P. M. Psychology applied to work. Chicago: Dorsey, 1987.

  21. Sherman, S. J., Skov, R. B., Stock, C. B., & Hervitz, E. F. The effects of explaining hypothetical future events: From possibility to probability to actuality and beyond. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1981, 17, 142–158.

  22. Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. The measurement of satisfaction in work and retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1969.

  23. Smither, J. W., Collins, H. C., & Buda, R. When ratee satisfaction influences performance evaluations: A case of illusory correlation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1989, in press.

  24. Staw, B. Attribution of the ‘causes’ of performance: A general alternative interpretation of cross-sectional research on organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1975, 13, 414–432.

  25. Vollmer, F. Sex differences in personality and expectancy. Sex Roles, 1984, 11, 1121–1139.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Susan A. Basow.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Basow, S.A., Smither, J.W., Rupert, L. et al. The effect of satisfaction and gender on self-evaluations of task performance. Sex Roles 20, 413–427 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00288000

Download citation

Keywords

  • Interaction Effect
  • College Student
  • Social Psychology
  • Task Performance
  • Female Student