Effects of performance context on processing speed and performance ratings

Journal of Business and Psychology

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 453-463

  Jennings, Tiffany ^a   Palmer, Jerry K ^b   Thomas, Adrain ^c  

^a WIDENER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c AUBURN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Context performance; Contrast effect; General impression; Halo; Processing speed

Indexed keywords

EID: 4043129565     PISSN: 08893268     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/B:JOBU.0000028446.84429.4e     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Balzer, W. & Sulsky, L. (1992). Halo and performance appraisal research: A critical reexamination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 975-985.
2. Cacioppo, J. T. & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.
3. Fazio, R., Chen, J., McDonel, E., & Sherman, S. (1982). Attitude accessibility-behavior consistency, and the strength of the object-evaluation association. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 339-357.
4. Fazio, R. & Williams, C. (1986). Attitude accessibility as a moderator of the attitude-perception and attitude-behavior relations: An investigation of the 1984 presidential election. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(3), 505-514.
5. Feldman, J. (1981). Beyond attribution theory: Cognitive processes in performance appraisal. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 127-148.
6. Feldman, J. (1992). The Case for non-analytic performance appraisal. Human Resource Management Review, 2(1), 1434-1469.
7. Feldman, J. & Lynch, J. (1988). Self-generated validity and other influences of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 421-435.
8. James, L. R., & Brett, J. M. (1984). Mediators, moderators, and tests for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(2), 307-321.
9. Kravitz, D. & Balzer, W. (1992). Context effects in performance appraisal: A methodological critique and empirical study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(1), 24-31.
10. Lance, C., LaPointe, J., & Stewart, A. (1994). A test of the dependency of three causal models of halo rater error. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3), 83-96.
11. Lance, C., LaPointe, J. A., & Fisicaro, S. A. (1994). Tests of three causal models of halo error. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57, 83-96.
12. Maurer, T. & Alexander, R. (1991). Contrast effects in behavioral measurement: An investigation of alternative process explanations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 3-10.
13. Murphy, K., Balzer, W., Lockhart, M., & Eisenman, E. (1985). Effects of previous performance on evaluations of present performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(1), 72-84.
14. Palmer, J., Feldman, J., & Maurer, T. (1998). Contrast, halo, and accuracy: Systematic relationships explored. Paper presented at the 13th annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX.
15. Palmer, J., Maurer, T., & Feldman, J. (1999). Accountability in Performance Appraisal: Higher Accuracy and Reduced Errors. Paper presented at the 14th annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta GA.
16. Skowronski, J. J. & Carlston, D. E. (1989). Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of explanations. Psychological Bulletin, 105(1), 131-142.
17. Srull, T. & Wyer, R. (1989). Person memory and judgement. Psychological Review, 96, 58-84.
18. Wexley, K. N., Yukl, G. A., Kovacs, S. Z., & Sanders, R. E. (1972). Importance of contrast effects in employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56(1), 45-48.