Denrell, Jerker and Liu, Chengwei (2012) Top performers are not the most impressive when extreme performance indicates unreliability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol.109 (No.24). pp. 9331-9336. doi:10.1073/pnas.1116048109

Research output not available from this repository.

Request-a-Copy directly from author or use local Library Get it For Me service.

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

The relationship between performance and ability is a central concern in the social sciences: Are the most successful much more able than others, and are failures unskilled? Prior research has shown that noise and self-reinforcing dynamics make performance unpredictable and lead to a weak association between ability and performance. Here we show that the same mechanisms that generate unpredictability imply that extreme performances can be relatively uninformative about ability. As a result, the highest performers may not have the highest expected ability and should not be imitated or praised. We show that whether higher performance indicates higher ability depends on whether extreme performance could be achieved by skill or requires luck.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Divisions:	Faculty of Social Sciences > Warwick Business School > Behavioural Science Faculty of Social Sciences > Warwick Business School > Operational Research & Management Sciences Faculty of Social Sciences > Warwick Business School
Journal or Publication Title:	Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
Publisher:	National Academy of Sciences
ISSN:	1091-6490
Official Date:	12 June 2012
Dates:	Date Event 12 June 2012 Published
Volume:	Vol.109
Number:	No.24
Page Range:	pp. 9331-9336
DOI:	10.1073/pnas.1116048109
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Publication Status:	Published
Access rights to Published version:	Restricted or Subscription Access

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item