Assessing task difficulty for other people: when deeper evaluation means “it’s more about me!”

Abstract

Empirical studies have revealed that teachers face problems when assessing task difficulty for their students. By drawing on research that focuses on how individuals assess what others know, we argue that these difficulties are a consequence of the imputation of one’s own knowledge to others (i.e., social projection). In particular, we tested the assumption that individuals impute more of their own knowledge to others, the more they elaborate what these others might know. In a first experiment, students were asked to judge task difficulty for their best friend. In the second experiment, teacher trainees were asked to assess task difficulty for 9th graders. Results revealed that individuals, who deeply elaborated when assessing task difficulty for another person, more closely relied on their own rating of task difficulty than individuals with a lower elaboration depth. These findings support the notion that social projection becomes stronger, the deeper individuals elaborate.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Ames, D. R. (2004). Strategies for social inference: A similar contingency model of projection and stereotyping in attribute prevalence estimates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(5), 573–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Brenner, L., & Bilgin, B. (2011). Preferences, projection, and packing: Support theory models of judgments of others’ preferences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(1), 121–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cho, J. C., & Knowles, E. D. (2013). I’m like you and you’re like me: Social projection and self-stereotyping both help explain self-other correspondence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(3), 444–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral science. Mahaw, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Helmke, A., & Schrader, F.-W. (1987). Interactional effects of instructional quality and teacher judgement accuracy on achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(2), 91–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Impara, J. C., & Plake, B. S. (1998). Teachers’ ability to estimate item difficulty: A test of the assumptions in the Angoff standard setting method. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35(1), 69–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kawada, C. L. K., Oettinger, G., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Bargh, J. A. (2004). The projection of implicit and explicit goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(4), 545–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kelley, C. M., & Jacoby, L. L. (1996). Adult egocentrism: Subjective experience vs. analytic bases for judgment. Journal of Memory and Language, 35(2), 157–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Marks, G., & Miller, N. (1987). Ten years of research on the false-consensus effect: An empirical and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 102(1), 72–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Neugebauer, M., Helbig, M., & Landmann, A. (2011). Unmasking the myth of the same-sex teacher advantage. European Sociological Review, 27(5), 669–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Nickerson, R. S. (1999). How we know—and sometimes misjudge—what others know: Imputing one’s own knowledge to others. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 737–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Nickerson, R. S., Baddeley, A., & Freeman, B. (1987). Are people’s estimates of what other people know influenced by what they themselves know? Acta Psychologica, 64(3), 245–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. PISA-Konsortium Deutschland. (2003). PISA 2003: Der Bildungsstand der Jugendlichen in Deutschland—Ergebnisse des zweiten internationalen Vergleichs. Münster u.a: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  16. PISA-Konsortium Deutschland, (2006). PISA 2006: Die Ergebnisse der dritten internationalen Vergleichs. Münster u.a: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Stanley, J. C. (1971). Reliability. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 356–442). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Van de Watering, G., & van de Rijt, J. (2006). Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of assessments: A review and a study into the ability and accuracy of estimating the difficulty levels of assessment items. Educational Research Review, 1(2), 133–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wood, W. (1982). Retrieval of attitude-relevant information from memory: Effects of susceptibility to persuasion and on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(5), 798–810.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Studies reported in this article were supported by a grant from the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) to the second (DI 929/2_2) and third author (RE 2218/1_2).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ann Krispenz.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Ann Krispenz, Oliver Dickhäuser and Marc-André Reinhard have contributed equally to this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Krispenz, A., Dickhäuser, O. & Reinhard, MA. Assessing task difficulty for other people: when deeper evaluation means “it’s more about me!”. Soc Psychol Educ 19, 865–877 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-016-9341-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Task difficulty
  • Working model of other’s knowledge
  • Social projection
  • Elaboration depth