Perceptions of Academic Malpractice are not Always Biased by Halo Effects.

Abstract

The attractiveness halo effect has been discussed for over a century. Physically attractive people are often judged more favourably and accrue many life advantages. Halo effects have been observed in university settings for decades, but perhaps their influence is waning due to increased awareness of unconscious bias. The first study examined judgments of students accused of academic malpractice. Undergraduate student participants (N = 302) completed an online survey. They were presented with a vignette outlining a fictional but realistic academic malpractice scenario, beside a photograph of an attractive or unattractive 'student'. Participants rated the fictional student in terms of guilt, appropriate punishment, and seriousness of malpractice. There was no evidence for halo effects. The second study examined judgements of fictional researchers accused of questionable research practices. Psychology researchers (N = 42) completed another online survey. They were presented with a vignette describing dubious data manipulation, beside a photo of an attractive or unattractive 'researcher'. The same rating scales were used, and again, there were no halo effects. Evidently, university students and staff can sometimes make professional judgements without emotional bias. These null results are important, because they show that halo effects may not now be so pervasive.