The literature on student evaluations of teaching (SETs) generally presents two opposing camps: those who believe in the validity and usefulness of SETs, and those who do not. Some researchers have suggested that 'SET deniers' resist SETs because of their own poor SET results. To test this hypothesis, I analysed essays by 230 SET researchers (170 lead authors) and classified the researchers as having negative, neutral or positive attitudes towards SETs. I retrieved their RateMyProfessors.com (RMP) scores and, using logistic regression, found that lead authors with negative attitudes towards SETs were 14 times more likely to score below an estimated RMP average than lead authors with positive attitudes towards SETs. Co-authors and researchers with neutral attitudes, on the other hand, did not significantly differ from the RMP average. These results suggest that personal attitudes towards SETs may drive research findings.