THE IMPACT OF INFORMATION CUES ON FACULTY PROMOTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION: THE APPLICATION OF A LINEAR MODEL IN DECISION MAKING

The purpose of this research was twofold. It was primarily a methodological validation of a linear decision making model. It was also designed to bring together literature on decision making organizational theory, on promotion and tenure policies in higher education, on simulation as a useful research tool for predicting behavior, and on applications of linear statistical models to human decision making. The research questions asked were (a) did the decision makers use the five information cues of faculty quality (scholarship, teaching, university service, years of service at rank, and rank under consideration) in a linear, reliable method to make judgments about faculty promotion; (b) was the use of those information cues stable when additional information about race and sex was provided; and (c) did faculty members and administrators make different promotion decisions when given the same information about a candidate\u27s quality? The study involved a sample of professors with teaching or administrative responsibilities judging 105 candidate profiles using five information cues and then judging 105 candidate profiles using seven information cues. The demographic characteristics of the sample group included sex, race, status, position, and school. Using multiple regression and covariance as the statistical analyses, this study found that decision makers do reliably use the five information cues about faculty quality when making promotion judgments; that the addition of more information results in a change in the weights of the original five cues; and that faculty and administrative decisions do differ significantly. Based on these results, five conclusions may be appropriately drawn: Stewart\u27s Two-Component Lens Model is a reliable methodology to independently validate factors utilized in promotion and employment decisions in a research oriented university; simulated decision making is a valid and reliable methodology to identify how multiple pieces of information are utilized; individuals have patterns of cue utilization which are altered by additional information; individuals do not utilize all information provided to them in a decision making situation, and, in fact, the predictability of those decisions is diminished by the presence of many discrete pieces of information; and full-time faculty and department heads evaluate information about faculty quality differently than do university-level administrators and are more likely to rate a prospective candidate higher