Advisees’ Expectations for Support as Moderator Between Advisor Behavior and Advisee Perceptions of Advisor Behavior Julia M. Fullick, Quinnipiac University Kimberly A. Smith-Jentsch, University of Central Florida Dana L. Kendall, Seattle Pacific University We tested relationships between students’ expec- tations of psychosocial and career support through a peer advising program, the frequency of advisor behaviors consistent with these types of support (coded from transcripts), and advisee perceptions after receiving such support. Participants were 179 advisor–advisee dyads at a large southeastern university. Results demonstrated that advisees’ expectations of psychosocial support were posi- tively related to their perceptions of having received such support but not to the frequency of relevant advisor behaviors. Advisee expectations for career support did not predict advisor behavior. However, such expectations strengthened the relationship between the frequency of relevant advisor behaviors and advisees’ perceptions of the career support received. These results underscore the importance of aligning advisor–advisee expec- tations and behaviors. [doi:10.12930/NACADA-11-383] KEY WORDS: expectations, peer advising, perceptions Albert Einstein once said, ‘‘Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.’’ Brunswik (1952) proposed that each individual views the world through a unique, interpretive lens that censors incoming information from the environ- ment according to his or her own personal attributes, such as predetermined expectations. These unique interpretations of life’s events and circumstances result in biases that may not reflect reality. In the current investigation, we sought to understand the ways in which students’ initial expectations of psychosocial and career support may affect their perceptions of such support received through peer advising relationships; the peer advisor is a more experienced, senior student who provides the more junior, novice student with academic guidance, support, and advice. Subjec- tive assessments of relationship quality are almost exclusively used to evaluate peer advising pro- grams and other similar peer-to-peer mentoring programs (e.g., see Allen & Eby, 2008; Young & Perrewé , 2000, 2004). Therefore, most agree that understanding the factors affecting participant perceptions is a worthy pursuit prior to initiating program improvement efforts. However, adminis- trators who wrongly assume that perceptions accurately represent observable behavior may make faulty decisions when remedying problems. We address this issue by examining the moderating role of initial expectations of the types of support provided to advisees. As a first step, it is important to differentiate between mentoring and advising. One’s advisor ‘‘might or might not be a mentor, depending on the quality of the relationship. A mentoring relationship develops over an extended period, during which a student’s needs and the nature of the relationship tend to change’’ (National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, 1997, p. 1). In our study, which includes participants in a formal peer-advising context, we conceptualize high relationship quality as advising relationships that include psychosocial and career support, core mentoring functions described in the literature. Psychosocial support comprises behaviors such as confirmation, counseling, acceptance, and friendship and includes those ‘‘aspects of the relationship that primarily enhance sense of compe- tence, clarity of identity, and effectiveness’’ (Kram, 1983, p. 614). Career support includes behaviors such as sponsorship and coaching and involves those ‘‘aspects of the mentoring relationship that primarily enhance career advancement’’ (Kram, 1983, p. 614). Prior research suggests that behavioral expecta- tions shape the ways in which individuals make sense of the inner workings of interpersonal relationships. We expect these principles to extend to academic advising relationships. Propp and Rhodes (2006) cited two reasons for their call to explore student expectations about advising quality as they relate to advisor behavior. First, under- standing students’ advising needs will better ensure that advisors will be equipped to meet those needs. Second, advisee expectations about advising qual- ity can potentially influence the way they evaluate NACADA Journal Volume 33(2) 2013 55