Heuristic Processing in Organizational Judgments

  • Carol T. Kulik
  • Elissa L. Perry
Part of the Social Psychological Applications to Social Issues book series (SPAS, volume 3)


Traditional information processing models (e.g., Greenwald, 1968) have often assumed that perceivers process information in an effortful, systematic fashion. Several authors (Chaiken, 1987; Fiske & Neuberg, 1990; Petty & Cacioppo, 1979) have suggested, however, that in many contexts (e.g., when individuals have low motivation or limited cognitive resources), people form judgments with a minimum of information processing. In these contexts, perceivers rely heavily on heuristics or social categories as a basis for judgments.


Target Person Heuristic Processing Cognitive Category Prototypical Feature Prototypical Condition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adler, S., Skov, R. B., & Salvemini, N. J. (1985). Job characteristics and job satisfaction: When cause becomes consequence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35, 266–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arvey, R. D., Davis, G. A., McGowen, S. L., & Dipboye, R. L. (1982). Potential sources of bias in job analytic processes. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 618–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowers, D. G., & Seashore, S. E. (1966). Predicting organizational effectiveness with a four-factor theory of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 11, 238–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Calder, B. J. (1977). An attribution theory of leadership. In B. M. Staw & G. R. Salancik (Eds.), New directions in organizational behavior (pp. 179–204). Chicago: St. Clair.Google Scholar
  5. Cellar, D. F., & Barrett, G. V. (1987). Script processing and intrinsic motivation: The cognitive sets underlying cognitive labels. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 40, 115–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chaiken, S. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, & C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 3–39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Cronshaw, S. F., & Lord, R. G. (1987). Prototypes and scripts: The effects of alternative methods of processing information on rating accuracy. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 318–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1980). The empirical exploration of intrinsic motivational processes. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 39–80). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  10. Duncan, S. L. (1976). Differential social perception and attribution of intergroup violence: Testing the lower limits of stereotyping of blacks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 590–598.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Favero, J. L., & Ilgen, D. R. (1989). The effects of ratee prototypicality on rater observation and accuracy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 932–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fiske, S. T. (1982). Schema-triggered affect: Applications to social perception. In M. S. Clark & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Affect and cognition: The 17th Annual Carnegie Symposium (pp. 55–78). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. Fiske, S. T. (1988). Compare and contrast: Brewer’s dual process model and Fiske et al.’s continuum model. In T. K. Srull & R. S. Wyer Jr. (Eds.), Advances in social cognition (Vol. 1, pp. 65–76). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  14. Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 1–74). San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
  15. Fiske, S. T., Neuberg, S. L., Beattie, A. E., & Milberg, S. J. (1987). Category-based and attribute reactions of some informational conditions of stereotyping and individuating processes. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 23, 399–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fiske, S. T., & Pavelchak, M. A. (1986). Category-based versus piecemeal-based affective responses: Developments in schema-triggered affect. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (pp. 167–203). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  17. Fraser, S. L., & Lord, R. G. (1988). Stimulus prototypicality and general leadership impressions: Their role in leadership and behavioral ratings. Journal of Psychology, 122, 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glynn, M. A. (In press). Framing tasks: The effects of work and play cues on task motivation, evaluations, and information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology. Google Scholar
  19. Greenwald, A. G. (1968). Cognitive learning, cognitive response to persuasion, and attitude change. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock, & T. M. Ostrom (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (pp. 147–170). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  21. Jacobs, S. L., Kulik, C. T., & Fichman, M. (1993). Category-based and feature-based cognitive processes in job impressions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1226–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kraiger, K., Billings, R. S., & Isen, A. M. (1989). The influence of positive affective stages on task perceptions and satisfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 44, 12–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kulik, C. T. (1989). The effects of job categorization on judgments of the motivating potential of jobs. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 68–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lind, E. A. (1992, June). Procedural justice and procedural preferences: Evidence for a fairness heuristic. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Association of Conflict Management, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  25. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). Work motivation and satisfaction: Light at the end of the tunnel. Psychological Science, 1, 240–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lord, R. G. (1985). An information processing approach to social perceptions, leadership and behavioral measurement in organizations. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 87–128). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lord, R. G., Binning, J. F., Rush, M. C., & Thomas, J. C. (1978). The effect of performance cues and leader behavior on questionnaire ratings of leadership behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 21, 27–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & DeVader, C. L. (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 343–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Martell, R. F. (1991). Sex bias at work: The effects of attentional and memory demands on performance ratings of men and women. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1939–1960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mitchell, T. R., Larson, J. R., & Green, S. G. (1977). Leader behavior, situational moderators and group performance: An attributional analyses. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 18, 254–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. O’Sullivan, C. S., & Durso, F. T. (1984). Effect of schema-incongruent information on memory for stereotypical attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 55–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1979). Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915–1926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pfeffer, J. (1977). The ambiguity of leadership. Academy of Management Review, 2, 104–112.Google Scholar
  34. Phillips, J. S., & Lord, R. G. (1981). Causal attributions and perceptions of leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 28, 143–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Phillips, J. S., & Lord, R. G. (1982). Schematic information processing and perceptions of leadership in problem solving groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 486–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Porac, J. F., & Meindl, J. (1982). Undermining overjustification: Inducing intrinsic and extrinsic task representations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 29, 208–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rice, R. W., McFarlin, D. B., Hunt, R. G., & Near, J. P. (1985). Organizational work and the perceived quality of life: Toward a conceptual model. Academy of Management Review, 10, 296–310.Google Scholar
  38. Rosenberg, M. J. (1956). Cognitive structure and attitudinal affect. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 53, 367–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sagar, H. A., & Schofield, J. W. (1980). Racial and behavioral cues in black and white children’s perceptions of ambiguously aggressive acts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 590–598.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Salancik, G., & Pfeffer, J. (1977). An examination of need-satisfaction models of job attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 427–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sandelands, L. E. (1988). Effects of work and play signals on task evaluation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 1032–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schwab, D. P., Rynes, S. L., & Aldag, R. J. (1987). Theories and research on job search and choice. In K. M. Rowland & G. R. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 5, pp. 129–166). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  44. Smith, J. E., & Hakel, M. D. (1979). Convergence among data sources, response bias, and reliability and validity of a structured job analysis questionnaire. Personnel Psychology, 32, 677–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Staw, B. M., & Ross, J. (1980). Commitment in an experimenting society: A study of the attribution of leadership from administrative scenarios. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 249–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stogdill, R. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership. Journal of Psychology, 25, 35–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tang, T. L., & Baumeister, R. F. (1984). Effects of personal values, perceived surveillance, and task labels on task preference: The ideology of turning play into work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tsujimoto, R. N., Wilde, J., & Robertson, D. R. (1978). Distorted memory for exemplars of a social structure: Evidence for schematic memory processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1402–1414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Veres, J. G. III, Locker, T., & Sims, R. R. (1990). Job analysis in practice: A brief review of the role of job analysis in human resource management. In G. R. Ferris, K. M. Rowland, & M. R. Buckley (Eds.), Human resource management: Perspective and issues. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  50. Vroom, V. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carol T. Kulik
    • 1
  • Elissa L. Perry
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Business AdministrationUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignChampaignUSA
  2. 2.Institute of Labor and Industrial RelationsUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations