The impact of non-performance information on ratings of job performance: A policy-capturing approach

Journal of Organizational Behavior

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 587-608

  Spence, Jeffrey R ^a   Keeping, Lisa M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^b WILFRID LAURIER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955633529     PISSN: 08943796     EISSN: 10991379     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/job.648     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Aiman-Smith, L., Scullen, S.,& Barr, S. (2002). Conducting studies of decision making in organizational contexts: A tutorial for policy-capturing and other regression-based techniques. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 388-414.
2. Barrick, M., & Mount, M. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
3. Barrick, M., Mount, M., & Judge, T. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 9-30.
4. Barrick, M., Mount, M., & Strauss, J. (1993). Conscientiousness and performance of sales representatives: Test of the mediating effects of goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 715-722.
5. Bass, B. (1956). Reducing leniency in merit ratings. Personnel Psychology, 9, 359-369.
6. Benedict, M. E., & Levine, E. L. (1988). Delay and distortion: Tacit influences on performance appraisal effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 507-514.
7. Bernardin, H., & Beatty, R. (1984). Performance appraisal: Assessing human behavior at work. Boston, MA: Kent.
8. Bernardin, H., & Villanova, P. (2005). Research streams in rater self-efficacy. Group & Organization Management, 30, 61-88.
9. Bernardin, J., Cooke, D., & Villanova, P. (2000). Conscientiousness and agreeableness as predictors of rating leniency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 232-236.
10. Bernthal, P., Sumlin, R., Davis, P., & Rogers, B. (1997). Performance management practices survey report. Pittsburgh, PA: Development Decisions International.
11. Bickel, R. (2007). Multilevel analysis for applied research. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
12. Brett, J., & Atwater, L. (2001). 360-degree feedback: Accuracy, reactions and perceptions of usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 930-942.
13. Bretz, R., Milkovich, G., & Read, W. (1992). The current state of performance appraisal research and practice: Concerns, directions, and implications. Journal of Management, 18, 321-352.
14. Brown, T. (1972). A comparison of judgmental policy equations obtained from human judges under natural and contrived conditions. Mathematical Biosciences, 15, 205-230.
15. Cardy, R., & Dobbins, G. (1986). Affect and appraisal accuracy: Liking as an integral dimension in evaluating performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 672-678.
16. Carroll, J., & Johnson, E. (1990). Decision research: A field guide. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
17. Chase, W. G., & Ericsson, K. A. (1981). Skilled memory. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 141-189). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 5-81.
19. Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
20. Cleveland, J., & Murphy, K. (1992). Analyzing performance appraisal as goal-directed behavior. In G. Ferris, & K. Rowland (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (pp. 121-185). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
21. Cooksey, R. (1996). Judgment analysis: Theory, methods, and application. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
22. Curtis, A., Harvey, R., & Ravden, D. (2005). Sources of political distortion in performance appraisals: Appraisal purpose and rater accountability. Group & Organization Management, 30, 42-60.
23. DeCotiis, T., & Petit, A. (1978). The performance appraisal process: A model and some testable propositions. Academy of Management Review, 3, 635-645
24. Dipboye, R. (1985). Some neglected variables in research on discrimination in appraisals. Academy of Management Review, 10, 116-127.
25. Fisher, D. (1979). Transmission of positive and negative feedback to subordinates: A laboratory investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 533-540.
26. Fried, Y., Levi, A. S., Ben-David, H. A., & Tiegs, R. B. (1999). Inflation of subordinates' performance ratings: Main and interactive effects of rater negative affectivity, documentation of work behavior, and appraisal visibility. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 431-444.
27. Gellatly, I. (1996). Conscientiousness and task performance: Test of a cognitive process model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 474-482.
28. Glickman, A. (1955). Effects of negatively skewed ratings on motivations of the rated. Personnel Psychology, 8, 39-47.
29. Gorman, C., Clover, W., & Doherty, M. (1978). Can we learn anything about interviewing real people from "interviews" of paper people? Twostudies on the external validity of a paradigm. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 22, 165-192.
30. Harris, M. (1994). Rater motivation in the performance appraisal context: A theoretical framework. Journal of Management, 20, 737-756.
31. Harris, M., Smith, D., & Champagne, D. (1995). A field study of performance appraisal purpose: Research-versus administrative-based ratings. Personnel Psychology, 48, 151-160.
32. Highhouse, S., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2008). Do samples really matter that much? In C. E. Lance, & R. J. Vandenberg (Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in organizational and social sciences (pp. 247-266). New York, NY: Routledge Academic.
33. Hofmann, D. (1997). An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. Journal of Management, 23, 723-744.
34. Hofmann, D., Griffin, M., & Gavin, M. (2000). The application of hierarchical linear modelling to organizational research. In K. J. Klein, & S. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 467-511). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
35. Howell, D. C. (2002). Statistical methods for psychology. Pacific Grove, CA: Wadsworth Group.
36. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
37. Ilgen, D., & Knowlton, W. (1980). Performance attributional effects on feedback from superiors. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 441-456.
38. Ilgen, D., Mitchell, R., & Fredrickson, J. (1981). Poor performers: Supervisors' and subordinates' responses. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 27, 386-410.
39. John, O., Donahue, E., & Kentle, R. (1991). The Big Five inventory. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research.
40. Kane, J. (1994). A model of volitional rating behavior. Human Resource Management Review, 4, 283-310.
41. Kane, J., Bernardin, J., Villanova, P., & Peyrefitte, J. (1995). Stability of rater leniency: Three studies. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1036-1051.
42. Kirwan, J., Chaput de Saintonge, D., Joyce, C., & Currey, H. (1983). Clinical judgment in rheumatoid arthritis. I. Rheumatologists' opinions and the development of "paper patients". Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 42, 644-647.
43. Klimoski, R., & Inks, L. (1990). Accountability forces in performance appraisal. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 194-208.
44. Larson, J. (1984). The performance feedback process: A preliminary model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 33, 42-76.
45. Laurenceau, J. P., Troy, A. B., & Carver, C. S. (2005). Two distinct emotional experiences in romantic relationships: Effects of perceptions regarding approach of intimacy and avoidance of conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1123-1133.
46. Lee, C., Ashford, S. J., & Bobko, P. (1990). Interactive effects of "Type A" behavior and perceived control on worker performance, job satisfaction, and somatic complaints. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 870-881.
47. Levy, P., & Williams, J. (2004). The social context of performance appraisal: A review and framework for the future. Journal of Management, 30, 881-905.
48. Longenecker, C., Sims, H., Jr, & Gioia, D. (1987). Behind the mask: The politics of employee appraisal. The Academy of Management Executive, 1, 183-193.
49. McCrae, R., & John, O. (1992). An introduction to the Five-Factor Model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175-215.
50. McCullough, M. E., Tsang, J., & Emmons, R. A. (2004). Gratitude in intermediate affective terrain: Links of grateful moods to individual differences and daily emotional experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 295-309.
51. McGregor, D. (1957). An uneasy look at performance appraisal. Harvard Business Review, 35, 89-94.
52. Mischel,W. (1977). The interaction of person and situation. In D. Magnusson, & N. S. Endler (Eds.), Personality at the crossroads: Current issues in interactional psychology (pp. 333-352). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
53. Mohrman, A., & Lawler, E. (1983). Motivation and performance appraisal behavior. In F. Landy, S. Zedeck, & J. Cleveland (Eds.), Performance measurement and theory (pp. 173-189). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
54. Mount, M., Barrick, M., & Stewart, G. (1998). Five-Factor Model of personality and performance in jobs involving interpersonal interactions. Human Performance, 11, 145-165.
55. Murphy, K., & Cleveland, J. (1995). Understanding performance appraisals. London, UK: Sage.
56. Murphy, K., Cleveland, J., Skattebo, A., & Kinney, T. (2004). Raters who pursue different goals give different ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 158-164.
57. Napier, N., & Latham, G. (1986). Outcome expectancies of people who conduct performance appraisals. Personnel Psychology, 39, 827-837.
58. Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A., Cheong, Y. F., & Congdon, R. (2004). HL M6: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
59. Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
60. Schmitt, N., & Lappin, M. (1980). Race and sex as determinants of the mean and variance of performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 428-435.
61. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
62. Simmering, M. J., Colquitt, J. A., Noe, R. A., & Porter, C. (2003). Conscientiousness, autonomy fit, and development: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 954-963.
63. Sinclair, R. (1988). Mood, categorization, breadth, and performance appraisal: The effects of order of information acquisition and affective state on halo, accuracy, information, retrieval, and evaluations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 42, 22-46.
64. Stagner, R. (1977). On the reality and relevance of traits. Journal of General Psychology, 96, 185-207.
65. Stockford, L., & Bissel, H. (1949). Factors involved in establishing a merit-rating scale. Personnel, 26, 94-116.
66. Sulsky, L. M., & Day, D. V. (1992). Frame-of-reference training and cognitive categorization: An empirical investigation of rater memory issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 501-510.
67. Tett, R. P., & Burnett, D. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 500-517.
68. Tsui, A., & Barry, B. (1986). Interpersonal affect and rating errors. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 586-599.
69. Tziner, A., & Murphy, K. (1999). Additional evidence of attitudinal influences in performance appraisal. Journal of Business and Psychology, 13, 407-419.
70. Tziner, A., Murphy, K., & Cleveland, J. (2002). Does conscientiousness moderate the relationship between attitudes and beliefs regarding performance appraisal and rating behavior? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10, 218-224.
71. Tziner, A., Murphy, K., & Cleveland, J. (2005). Contextual and rater factors affecting rating behavior. Group & Organization Management, 30, 89-98.
72. U.S Census Bureau. (1990). Name Files. Retrieved 19 November 2005, from http://www.census.gov/genealogy/names/names_files.html.
73. Villanova, P., & Bernardin, J. (1989). Impression management in the context of performance appraisal. In R. Giacalone, & P. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Impression management in the organization (pp. 299-313). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
74. Villanova, P., Bernardin, J., Dahmus, S., & Sims, R. (1993). Rater leniency and performance appraisal discomfort. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 53, 789-799.
75. Watson, D. (2000). Mood and temperament. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
76. Watson, D., Clark, L., & Harkness, A. (1994). Structure of personality and their relevance to psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103, 18-31.
77. Weiss, H. M., & Adler, S. (1984). Personality and organizational behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 1-50.
78. Whisler, T. (1958). Performance appraisal and the organization man. Journal of Business, 31, 19-27.
79. Yun, G., Donahue, L., Dudley, N., & McFarland, L. (2005). Rater personality, rating format, and social context: Implications for performance appraisal ratings. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13, 97-107.