ach ers ▁who ▁were ▁sus cept ible ▁to ▁bias ing ▁information ▁treated ▁their ▁low - expect ancy ▁students ▁more ▁dog matically ▁than ▁their ▁high - expect ancy ▁students . ▁ ▁Con sequently , ▁low - expect ancy ▁students ▁performed ▁worse ▁than ▁their ▁high - expect ancy ▁counter parts . ▁ ▁Te ach ers ▁who ▁were ▁not ▁sus cept ible ▁to ▁bias ▁did ▁not ▁show ▁any ▁dist in ctions ▁in ▁behavior ▁between ▁high ▁and ▁low - expect ancy ▁students . ▁ ▁Although ▁the ▁majority ▁of ▁research ▁looking ▁at ▁the ▁G ole m ▁effect ▁has ▁focused ▁on ▁educational ▁context s , ▁the ▁effect ▁has ▁also ▁been ▁studied ▁in ▁the ▁work place . ▁ ▁A ▁study ▁by ▁Sch rank ▁that ▁pred ated ▁the ▁Ros ent hal ▁and ▁Jacob son ▁article ▁looked ▁at ▁US ▁Air ▁Force ▁Academy ▁air men . ▁The ▁author ▁induced ▁a ▁" label ing ▁effect " ▁by ▁randomly ▁assigning ▁incoming ▁fresh men ▁to ▁one ▁of ▁five ▁class ▁sections ▁supposed ly ▁design ating ▁ability ▁levels . ▁Mc N att ▁performed ▁a ▁meta - analysis ▁on ▁studies ▁with ▁work place ▁samples ▁and ▁found ▁that ▁the ▁G ole m ▁( and ▁P yg mal ion ) ▁effects ▁still ▁hold ▁true ▁to ▁around ▁the ▁same ▁magnitude ▁at ▁the ▁work place ▁as ▁they ▁do ▁in ▁the ▁class room . ▁ ▁Furthermore , ▁the ▁G ole m ▁effect ▁can ▁influence ▁entire ▁organizations , ▁not ▁just ▁super vis ors ▁and ▁their ▁direct ▁sub ordinates . ▁ ▁Ab solute ▁and ▁relative ▁David son ▁and ▁E den ▁suggested ▁there ▁are ▁two ▁different ▁types