The title of the post is a copy and paste from the following sections of the linked academic press release here:
> Ratings Rise Over Time Because They Feel Easier to Make
Last sentence of the second paragraph:
> “This effect emerged with judges on a dance show, with teachers who give higher grades the longer they teach a course, and in the lab where we have people evaluate photos or short stories over successive days.”
First sentence of the fourth paragraph:
> “These findings suggest that people new to an evaluation task may be more critical than those who have been doing the evaluation task for longer,” O’Connor notes.
Kieran O’Connor, Amar Cheema.
Do Evaluations Rise With Experience?
Psychological Science, 2018; 095679761774451
> Sequential evaluation is the hallmark of fair review: The same raters assess the merits of applicants, athletes, art, and more using standard criteria. We investigated one important potential contaminant in such ubiquitous decisions: Evaluations become more positive when conducted later in a sequence. In four studies, (a) judges’ ratings of professional dance competitors rose across 20 seasons of a popular television series, (b) university professors gave higher grades when the same course was offered multiple times, and (c) in an experimental test of our hypotheses, evaluations of randomly ordered short stories became more positive over a 2-week sequence. As judges completed repeated evaluations, they experienced more fluent decision making, producing more positive judgments (Study 4 mediation). This seemingly simple bias has widespread and impactful consequences for evaluations of all kinds. We also report four supplementary studies to bolster our findings and address alternative explanations.
The more you teach the more you realize other people don’t understand the subject like you do, so you naturally ease up.
At first, everyone seems bad because you expect them to be awesome. Then time goes on and you realize almost no one is awesome. Then you start comparing everyone on a curve where everyone is measured against the most awesome ones you have actually seen, even if that awesome person is below your original expectations
This could explain why TA's are hated by freshmen, lol.
Does this apply to Code Reviews too?
I 100% believe this. If you get a professor and they say it's one of their first years, you're in for a rough semester. I was fairly lucky with most of mine, but there was a few that were about 3-5 years in that were brutal.
And this is why bell curves exist. Not just to drag UP mediocre scores... but to drag DOWN inflated ones.
The only websites with ratings I put any real weight in, report the deviation from average score, not absolute score.
I think people just get more mellow as they get older and just don't care. I've noticed that younger parents seem stricter than those being raised by grandparents.