The Influence of Self-Ratings versus Peer Ratings on Supervisors' Performance Judgments

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Volumn 74, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 212-228

  Makiney, Jeanné D ^a   Levy, Paul E ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0039449533     PISSN: 07495978     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2776     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Anderson N. H. Information integration theory: A brief survey. Contemporary developments in mathematical psychology. 2:1974;W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco. p. 236-305.
2. Anderson N. H. Contributions to information integration theory: Vol. 1. Cognition. 1991;Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
3. Anderson N. H. Contributions to information integration theory: Vol. 2. Social. 1991;Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
4. Berkowitz L., Donnerstein E. External validity is more than skin deep: Some answers to criticisms of laboratory experiments. American Psychologist. 61:1982;441-445.
5. Birnbaum M. H., Mellers B. A. Bayesian inference: Combining base rates with opinions of sources who vary in credibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 45:1983;792-804.
6. Blakely G. L. The effects of performance rating discrepancies on supervisors and subordinates. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 54:1993;57-80.
7. Bohl D. L. Minisurvey: 360-degree appraisals yield superior results, survey shows. Compensation and Benefits Review. 28:1996;16-19.
8. Bretz R. D. Jr., Milkovich G. T., Read W. The current state of performance appraisal research and practice: Concerns, directions, and implications. Journal of Management. 18:1992;321-352.
9. Cleveland J. N. Using hypothetical and actual applicants in assessing person-organization fit: A methodological note. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 21:1991;1004-1001.
10. Conway, J. M. Huffcutt, A. I. 1996, April, Testing assumptions of 360-degree feedback: A meta-analysis of supervisor, peer, subordinate and self-ratings.
11. Fedor D. B., Bettenhausen K. L. The impact of purpose, participant preconceptions, and rating level on the acceptance of peer evaluations. Group and Organization Studies. 14:1989;182-197.
12. Fleishman E. A. Leadership opinion questionnaire (LOQ): Examiners' manual revised ed. 1959;Science Research Associates, Rosemont.
13. Funderburg S. A., Levy P. E. The influence of individual and contextual variables on 360-degree feedback system attitudes. Group and Organization Management. 22:1997;210-235.
14. Harris M. M., Schaubroeck J. A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology. 41:1988;43-62.
15. Klimoski R., Inks L. Accountability forces in performance appraisal. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 45:1990;194-208.
16. Landy F. J., Farr J. L. Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin. 87:1980;72-107.
17. Lawler E. E. Multitrait-multirater approach to measuring managerial job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 51:1967;369-381.
18. Levy P. E., Cawley B. D., Foti R. J. Reactions to appraisal discrepancies: Performance ratings and attributions. Journal of Business and Psychology. 12:1998;437-455.
19. London M., Smither J. W. Can multi-source feedback change perceptions of goal accomplishment, self-evaluations, and performance-related outcomes? Theory-based applications and directions for research. Personnel Psychology. 48:1995;803-839.
20. MacGregor D., Slovic P. Graphic representation of judgmental information. Human-Computer Interaction. 2:1986;179-200.
21. Mellers B. Test of a distributional theory of intuitive numerical prediction. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 38:1986;279-294.
22. Merrick B. Pay and performance. Credit Union Magazine. 63:1997;44-49.
23. Moore P. J., Gump B. B. Information integration in juror decision making. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 25:1995;2158-2179.
24. Murphy K. R., Cleveland J. N. Performance appraisal: An organizational perspective. 1991;Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights.
25. Murphy K. R., Cleveland J. N. Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. 1995;Sage Publications Inc. Thousand Oaks.
26. Petzold P. Context effects in judgments of attributes: An information-integration approach. Geissler H-G., Link S. W., Townsend J. T. Cognition, information processing, and psychophysics: Basic issues. 1992;175-205.
27. Shore T. H., Shore L. M., Thornton G. C. Construct validity of self-and peer evaluations of performance dimensions in an assessment center. Journal of Applied Psychology. 77:1992;42-54.
28. Sorkin R. D., Mabry T. R., Weldon M. S., Elvers G. Integration of information from multiple element displays. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 49:1991;167-187.
29. Thornton G. C. III. Psychometric properties of self-appraisals of job performance. Personnel Psychology. 33:1980;263-271.
30. Woehr D. J., Lance C. E. Paper people versus direct observation: An empirical examination of laboratory methodologies. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 12:1991;387-397.