Unrecognized Bullying: III

Many of us are improving our ability to recognize workplace bullying. That's a good thing, because recognition is a necessary prerequisite for control, correction, and deterrence. But there are limits to how effective we can be at recognizing bullying behavior. Contributing to those limits, as I noted in a previous post, are members of a set of phenomena called cognitive biases.

Briefly, a cognitive bias is a pattern of thinking that leads us to make systematic errors that we would not make if we were engaged in evidence-based critical thinking. These aren't "mistakes" in the sense of, say, sloppy thinking. Our brains work the way they do because of the complexity of the tasks they must complete. Cognitive biases improve throughput with "acceptable" error rates in many circumstances.

A variety The Halo Effect and the Horn Effect
might be intertwined manifestations
of one phenomenonof cognitive biases prevent targets, bystanders, perpetrators, and supervisors of perpetrators from perceiving bullying behavior as bullying. In this post, I explore the effects of two particular closely related cognitive biases: the Halo Effect and the Horn Effect.

The Halo Effect and the Horn Effect

The Halo Effect causes our evaluation of people, concepts, or objects to be influenced by our perceptions of one attractive or positive attribute of those people, concepts, or objects. [Brenner 2012] It was first identified in 1920 by Edward Thorndike, who was studying how military officers evaluated their subordinates. [Thorndike 1920] He found that high ratings in one attribute tended to be correlated with high ratings in other seemingly unrelated attributes. But the effect is universal, extending beyond military performance evaluation. In modern experiments, for example, researchers have demonstrated that people tend to judge physically attractive people as possessing more socially desirable personality traits than do less physically attractive people.

Just as the Halo Effect pertains to desirable attributes, the Horn Effect pertains to undesirable attributes. In the context of performance reviews, researchers have demonstrated that when evaluators perceive in subordinates attributes that they regard as negative, those evaluators tend to assess more negatively the unrelated attributes of those subordinates. This effect is known as the Horn Effect. [Forgas 2007]

Effects on targets

Persons who lack confidence about their potential to perform well at work, or who otherwise assess themselves as deficient, can become targets of bullying without recognizing what is happening. Because of the Horn Effect, their negative self-assessment can lead them to believe that the abuse they experience is justified. Their stance can be expressed as, "I deserved that." They can adopt and hold this view even though abuse in the form of bullying is never justified.

Likewise, consider targets who assess their bullies as capable high performers, as they might if their bullies are their supervisors. Because of the Halo Effect, these targets are more likely to assess their abusers' behavior as correct and consistent with organizational policy. Their stance can be expressed as, "My boss is probably right because my boss is my boss."

Effects on bystanders

The Halo Effect has a different impact on bystanders who directly witness the bullying, or who trust the incident reports they receive from others. Those who regard the bully as a positive, powerful leader, based on professional accomplishments, quite naturally tend to interpret the incident as anything but bullying. To them, the target must have done something to cause the incident.

Curiously, the Horn Effect works the same way, though on a different group of bystanders. Bystanders who hold the target in low regard reach the same conclusion: the target must have done something to cause the incident.

Both groups conclude that bullying didn't occur, despite having witnessed it.

Effects on perpetrators

Perpetrators — those engaged in bullying — are subject to the Horn Effect, as are we all. For example, a perpetrator in search of a target might be inclined to favor targets who are socially isolated. The usual interpretation of this inclination is that perpetrators attack those who are unlikely to have defenders. Research does indicate that the unattractive are more likely to become targets of bullying. [Scott 2013] But the Horn Effect offers another possible explanation. It is that social isolation can be an indicator of personal weakness. If so, socially isolated targets would be attractive to perpetrators favoring targets who would be unlikely to counterattack.

The Halo Effect has a different impact on perpetrators. For example, consider a physically attractive potential target in the perpetrator's field of operation. The Halo Effect might be expected to cause the perpetrator to experience positive feelings toward the potential target. Those feelings might overcome the perpetrator's compulsion to engage in bullying.

Effects on supervisors of perpetrators

Supervisors of perpetrators might be perpetrators themselves, and if they are, both the Halo Effect and the Horn Effect can play roles in determining their behavior with respect to their own bullying. But with regard to supervising another perpetrator, these two effects can also be in play.

One possible point for these two effects to enter the scene is through the supervisor's vicarious identification with the subordinate's bullying. For example, consider what might happen if the supervisor is called upon to intervene in the subordinate's bullying of someone the supervisor regards as physically attractive. The Halo Effect might influence the supervisor's response. And if the supervisor regards the perpetrator's target as unattractive, one might expect the Horn Effect to play a role. Multiple possibilities arise, given the complexity of the situation, which involves the supervisor, the perpetrator, and the target.

Last words

The attributes of the target do not cause the perpetrator's bullying. The proximate cause lies entirely within the perpetrator. But the perpetrator's perceptions of the target do influence the perpetrator's behavior, for which the perpetrator is fully accountable.   First issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Is a workplace bully targeting you? Do you know what to do to end the bullying? Workplace bullying is so widespread that a 2014 survey indicated that 27% of American workers have experienced bullying firsthand, that 21% have witnessed it, and that 72% are aware that bullying happens. Yet, there are few laws to protect workers from bullies, and bullying is not a crime in most jurisdictions. 101 Tips for Targets of Workplace Bullies is filled with the insights targets of bullying need to find a way to survive, and then to finally end the bullying. Also available at Apple's iTunes store! Just . Order Now!

Footnotes

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Ethics at Work:

Look Before You Leap

When we execute complex organizational change, we sometimes create disasters. It's ironic that even in companies that test their products thoroughly, we rarely test organizational changes before we "roll them out." We need systematic methods for discovering problems before we execute change efforts. One approach that works well is the simulation.

First Aid for Painful Meetings

The foundation of any team meeting is its agenda. A crisply focused agenda can make the difference between a long, painful affair and finishing early. If you're the meeting organizer, develop and manage the agenda for maximum effectiveness.

Looking the Other Way

Sometimes when we notice wrongdoing, and we aren't directly involved, we don't report it, and we don't intervene. We look the other way. Typically, we do this to avoid the risks of making a report. But looking the other way is also risky. What are the risks of looking the other way?

Influence and Belief Perseverance

Belief perseverance is the pattern that causes us to cling more tightly to our beliefs when contradictory information arrives. Those who understand belief perseverance can use it to manipulate others.

Polychronic Meetings

In very dynamic contexts, with multiple issues to address, we probably cannot rely on the usual format of single-threaded meeting with a list of agenda items to be addressed each in their turn. A more flexible, issue-driven format might work better.

See also Ethics at Work and Ethics at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming February 26: Devious Political Tactics: Bad Decisions

When workplace politics influences the exchanges that lead to important organizational decisions, we sometimes make decisions for reasons other than the best interests of the organization. Recognizing these tactics can limit the risk of bad decisions. Available here and by RSS on February 26.

And on March 5: On Begging the Question

Some of our most expensive wrong decisions have come about because we've tricked ourselves as we debated our options. The tricks sometimes arise from rhetorical fallacies that tangle our thinking. One of the trickiest is called Begging the Question. Available here and by RSS on March 5.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info