Effects of rater goals on rating patterns: Evidence from an experimental field study

Journal of Applied Psychology

Volumn 92, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 577-585

  Wong, Kin Fai Ellick ^a   Kwong, Jessica Y Y ^b  

^a HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Hong Kong)

^b CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Performance appraisal; Performance evaluation; Rater goals; Rating discriminability; Rating patterns

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EMPLOYMENT; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MOTIVATION; PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT;

EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL; EMPLOYMENT; GOALS; HUMANS;

EID: 33947393086     PISSN: 00219010     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.577     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267-299). New York: Academic Press.
2. Atkinson, J. W. (1958). Towards experimental analysis of human motivation in terms of motive expectancies, and incentives. In J. W. Atkinson (Ed.), Motives in fantasy, action, and society (pp. 288-305). Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
3. Balzer, W. K., & Sulsky, L. M. (1992). Halo and performance appraisal research: A critical examination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 975-985.
4. Bass, B. M. (1956). Reducing leniency in merit ratings. Personnel Psychology, 9, 359-369.
5. Bierhoff, H. W., Cohen, R. L., & Greenberg, J. (Eds.). (1986). Justice in social relations. New York: Plenum Press.
6. Burke, M. J., & Dunlap, W. P. (2002). Estimating interrater agreement with the average deviation index: A user's guide. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 159-172.
7. Burke, M. J., Finkelstein, L. M., & Dusig, M. S. (1999). On average deviation indices for estimating interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 49-68.
8. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.
9. Cleveland, J. N., & Murphy, K. R. (1992). Analyzing performance appraisal as goal-directed behavior. In. G. Ferris, & K. Rowland (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 10, pp. 121-185). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
10. Cleveland, J. N., Murphy, K. R., & Williams, R. E. (1989). Multiple uses of performance appraisal: Prevalence and correlates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 130-135.
11. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Cooper, W. (1981). Ubiquitous halo. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 218-244.
13. Cronbach, L. J. (1955). Processes affecting scores on "understanding of others" and "assumed similarity." Psychological Bulletin, 52, 177-193.
14. DeNisi, A. S. (1996). Cognitive approach to performance appraisal: A program of research. London: Routledge.
15. Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137-149.
16. Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice: A social psychological perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
17. DeVries, D. L., Morrison, A. M., Shullman, S. L., & Gerlach, M. L. (1986). Performance appraisal on the line. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
18. Feldman, J. M. (1981). Beyond attribution theory: Cognitive processes in performance appraisal. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 127-148.
19. Gilliland, S. W. (1993). The perceived fairness of selection systems: An organizational justice perspective. Academy of Management Review, 18, 694-734.
20. Gioia, D. A., & Longenecker, C. O. (1994). Delving into the dark side: The politics of executive appraisal. Organizational Dynamics, 22, 47-58.
21. Hauenstein, N. M. A. (1992). An information-processing approach to leniency in performance judgments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 485-493.
22. Heslin, P. A., Latham, G. P., & VandeWalle, D. (2005). The effect of implicit person theory on performance appraisals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 842-856.
23. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-284.
24. Landy, F. J., & Farr, J. L. (1980). Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 72-107.
25. Leventhal, G. S., Michaels, J. W., & Sanford, C. (1972). Inequity and interpersonal conflict: Reward allocation and secrecy about rewards as methods of preventing conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 88-102.
26. Longenecker, C. O., Sims, H. P., & Gioia, D. A. (1987). Behind the mask: The politics of employee appraisal. Academy of Management Executive, 1(3), 183-193.
27. Marin, G. (1981). Perceiving justice across cultures: Equity vs. equality in Colombia and in the United States. International Journal of Psychology, 16, 153-159.
28. McIntyre, R., Smith, D., & Hassett, C. (1984). Accuracy of performance ratings as affected by rater training and perceived purpose of rating. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 147-156.
29. Murphy, K. R., & Balzer, W. K. (1989). Rater errors and rating accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 619-624.
30. Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1991). Performance appraisal: An organizational perspective. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
31. Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32. Murphy, K. R., Cleveland, J. N., Skattebo, A. L., & Kinney, T. B. (2004). Raters who pursue different goals give different ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 158-164.
33. Murphy, K. R., & DeShon, R. (2000). Inter-rater correlations do not estimate the reliability of job performance ratings. Personnel Psychology, 53, 873-900.
34. Ng, S. H. (1984). Intergroup allocation bias before and after group discussion. Journal of Social Psychology, 124, 95-103.
35. Powers, W. T. (1973). Behavior: The control of perception. Chicago: Aldine.
36. Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Helplessness: On depression, development, and death. San Francisco: Freeman.
37. Vancouver, J. B., Thompson, C. M., Tischner, E. C., & Putka, D. J. (2002). Two studies examining the negative effect of self-efficacy on performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 506-516.
38. 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.
39. Vroom, V. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
40. Wexley, K. N., Sanders, R. E., & Yukl, G. A. (1973). Training interviewers to eliminate contrast effects in employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 233-236.
41. Whisler, T. L., & Harper, S. F. (Eds.). (1962). Performance appraisal: Research and practice. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
42. Wong, K. F. E., & Kwong, J. Y. Y. (2005). Between-individual comparisons in performance evaluation: A perspective from prospect theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 284-294.