Which outcome can result from the Halo Effect during evaluations?

The Halo Effect refers to a cognitive bias whereby an evaluator's overall impression of a person influences their ratings of the person's specific traits or performance in particular areas. When this effect occurs, a strong positive impression in one area can lead to excessively favorable evaluations in unrelated areas, and vice versa.

Choosing the outcome that relates to judgments being made based solely on evidence from one area highlights how the Halo Effect can skew evaluations. For example, if an employee is particularly charismatic, an evaluator might overlook shortcomings in their actual work performance because of that positive impression. This narrow focus on one aspect, while neglecting other crucial performance areas, can lead to misleading assessments of capabilities and potential.

The other options do not accurately reflect the consequences of the Halo Effect. More accurate ratings of overall performance would not result from this bias, as it typically leads to distorted evaluations. Equal ratings of all candidates suggest fairness which contradicts the inherent nature of the Halo Effect, where biases lead to uneven assessments. Lastly, improved objectivity goes against the essence of the Halo Effect, which creates subjective evaluations rather than maintaining an objective standard. Thus, the selected outcome accurately captures the essence of how the Halo Effect can distort performance assessments.