Peer evaluations in an assessment center for personnel selection: Do they contain information indicative for ratees or raters?;Peer-urteile in einem assessment center zur personalauswahl. Enthalten sie informationen zum beurteilten oder zum Beurteiler?

Zeitschrift fur Personalpsychologie

Volumn 4, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 159-169

  Höft, Stefan ^a   Schümann Sen, Mitra ^b   Maschke, Peter ^b  

^a GERMAN AEROSPACE CENTER DLR   (Germany)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Airline pilot; Assessment center; Peer rating; Personnel selection

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645281910     PISSN: 16176391     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1026/1617-6391.4.4.159     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bernardin, H. & Orban, J. A. (1990). Leniency effect as a function of rating format, purpose for appraisal, and rater individual differences. Journal of Business and Psychology, 5, 197-211.
2. Campbell, D. & Fiske, D. W (1959). Convergent and discriminant validitation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
3. Cheung, G. W. (1999). Multifaceted conceptions of self-other ratings agreement. Personnel Psychology, 52, 1-36.
4. Conway, J. & Huffcutt, A. I. (1997). Psychometric properties of multisource performance ratings: A meta-analysis of subordinate, supervisor, peer, and self-ratings. Human Performance, 10, 331-360.
5. Cronbach, L. J. (1955). Processes affecting scores on understanding of others' and assumed similarity'. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 177-193.
6. Damitz, M., Manzey, D., Kleinmann, M. & Severin, K. (2003). Assessment center for pilot selection: Construct and criterion validity and the impact of assessor type. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 52, 193-212.
7. Harris, M. M. (1994). Rater motivation in the performance appraisal context: A theoretical framework. Journal of Management, 20, 737-756.
8. Hell, B., Boramir, I., Schaar, H. & Schuler, H. (in Druck). Interne Personalauswahl und Personalentwicklung in deutschen Unternehmen. Wirtschaftspsychologie.
9. Höft, S. & Bolz, C. (2004). Zwei Seiten derselben Medaille? Empirische Überlappungen zwischen Persönlichkeitseigenschaften und Assessment Center-Anforderungsdimensionen. Zeitschrift für Personalpsychologie, 3, 6-23.
10. Höft, S. & Pecena, Y. (2004). Behaviour-oriented assessment for the selection of aviation personnel. In K.-M. Goeters (Ed.), Aviation psychology: Practice and research (pp. 153-170). Aldershot: Ashgate.
11. Hunter, J. & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis. Correcting error and bias in research findings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12. Jeserich, W. (1995). Kollegenurteile. In W. Sarges (Hrsg.), Management-Diagnostik (S. 671-676). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
13. Klimoski, R. & Strickland, W. J. (1977). Assessment centers: Valid or merely prescient. Personnel Psychology, 30, 353-363.
14. Lievens, F. & Klimoski, R. (2001). Understanding the assessment center process: Where are we now? In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 16, pp. 245-286). Chicester: John Wiley.
15. Mount, M. K., Judge, T. A., Scullen, S. E., Sytsma, M. R. & Hezlett, S. A. (1998). Trait, rater and level effects in 360-degree performance ratings. Personnel Psychology, 51, 557-576.
16. Neuberger, O. (2000). Das 360°-Feedback: Alle fragen? Alles sehen? Alles sagen? München: Hampp.
17. Papon, A. & von Rüden, R. (2005). Assessment Center als Chance, nicht als Schicksal - Ein Beispiel eines Orientation Centers (OC) bei der Lilly Pharma Holding GmbH. In K. Sünderhauf, S. Stumpf, & S. Höft (Hrsg.), Assessment Center: Von der Auftragsklärung bis zur Qualitätssicherung (S. 324-333). Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers.
18. Shavelson, R. & Webb, N. M. (1991). Generalizability theory: A primer. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19. Shore, T. H., Shore, L. & Thornton, G. C. (1992). Construct validity of self- and peer evaluations of performance dimensions in an assessment center. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 42-54.
20. Shrout, P. & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
21. Silverman, W. H., Dalessio, A., Woods, S. B. & Johnson, R. L. (1986). Influence of assessment center methods on assessor's ratings. Personnel Psychology, 39, 565-578.
22. Stelling, D. (2001). DCT - Dyadic Cooperation Test. In W. Sarges & H. Wottawa (Hrsg.), Handbuch wirtschaftspsychologischer Testverfahren (S. 197-199). Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers.
23. Sulsky, L. & Balzer, W. K. (1988). Meaning and measurement of performance rating accuracy: Some methodological and theoretical concerns. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 497-506.
24. Thornton, G. C., Gaugler, B. B., Rosenthal, D. B. & Bentson, C. (1987). Die prädiktive Validität des Assessment Centers - eine Metaanalyse. In H. Schuler & W. Stehle (Hrsg.), Assessment Center als Methode der Personalentwicklung (S. 36-77). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
25. Valle, M. & Bozeman, D. (2002). Inter-rater agreement on employee job performance: Review and directions. Psychological Reports, 90, 975-985.
26. Viswesvaran, C., Ones, D. S. & Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 557-574.
27. Zazanis, M. M., Zaccaro, S. J. & Kilcullen, R. N. (2001). Identifying motivation and interpersonal performance using peer evaluations. Military Psychology, 13], 73-88.