Evaluation is critical in talent development because it can significantly determine
perceived effectiveness and experiences. Utilizing the logic of procedural justice
and extending the theory, we have created a model of constructive procedural justice
consisting of three interdependent stages (constructiveness of written feedback, fairness
of decision-making, and psychological gains). This study analyzes the evaluation process
of a series of national-level student academic conferences and competitions in Hungary
using this constructive procedural justice model. Concerning written evaluations,
our results highlight that constructive textual feedback is more decisive than the
score achieved. Participants perceive a lower score as fair if the textual assessment
is detailed, thorough, supportive, suggests areas for improvement, and contains a
forward-looking approach. In addition, providing support for voice and jury neutrality
is essential to ensuring that students leave with a truly positive experience and
continue working with renewed vigor, regardless of the competition scores achieved.
The results obtained apply to other activities evaluated by written feedback, including
theses, dissertations, or publications.
