The impact of rater agreeableness and rating context on the evaluation of poor performance

Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology

Volumn 85, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 42-59

  Randall, Raymond ^a   Sharples, Daniel ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b Department for Work and Pensions ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857100383     PISSN: 09631798     EISSN: 20448325     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/2044-8325.002002     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Arnold, J., Silvester, J., Patterson, F., Robertson, R., Cooper, C., & Burnes, B. (2005). Work psychology: Understanding human behaviour in the workplace (4th ed.). Harlow : Prentice Hall.
2. Arvey, R. D., & Murphy, K. R. (1998). Performance evaluation in work settings. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 141-168.
3. Bass, B. M. (1956). Reducing leniency in merit ratings. Personnel Psychology, 9, 359-369.
4. Bernardin, H. J., Cooke, D. Ross, S., & Villanova, P. (2000). Conscientiousness and agreeableness as predictors of rating leniency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 232-236.
5. Bernardin, H. J., Tyler, C. L., & Villanova, P. (2009). Rating level and accuracy as a function of rater personality. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 300-310.
6. Blumberg, H. H. (1972). Communication of interpersonal evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 157-162.
7. Borman, W. C. (1978). Exploring upper limits of reliability and validity in job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 135-144.
8. Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (2005). Survey report September 2005: Performance management. London : Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
9. DeGregorie, M., & Fisher, C. D. (1988). Providing performance feedback: Reactions to alternative methods. Journal of Management, 14, 605-616.
10. Dipboye, R. L. (1990). Laboratory vs. field research in industrial and organizational psychology. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5, 1-34.
11. Dunning, D. (2006). Strangers to ourselves? The Psychologist, 19, 600-603.
12. Furnham, A., & Stringfield, P. (2001). Gender difference in rating reports: Female managers are harsher raters, particularly of males. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 16, 281-289.
13. Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big 5 factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42.
14. Goldberg, L. R. (2001). Possible questionnaire format for administering the 100-item set of IPIP Big-Five Factor markers. Retrieved from
15. Hannum, K. M. (2007). Measurement equivalence of 360° assessment data: Are different raters rating the same constructs? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 293-301.
16. Harris, M. (1994). Rater motivation in the performance appraisal context: A theoretical framework. Journal of Management, 20, 737-756.
17. 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.
18. Ilgen, D. R., & Favero, J. L. (1985). Limits in generalization from psychological research to performance appraisal processes. Academy of Management Review, 10, 311-321.
19. Jackson, D. N., Ashton, M. C., & Tomes, J. L (1996). The six-factor model of personality: Facets from the Big-Five. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 391-402.
20. Jawahar, I. M. (2001). Attitudes, self-monitoring, and appraisal behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 875-883.
21. Kane, J. S., Bernardin, J. J., Villanova, P., & Peyrefitte, J. (1995). Stability of rater leniency: Three studies. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1036-1051.
22. Kasten, R., & Weintraub, Z. (1999). Rating errors and rating accuracy: A field experiment. Human Performance, 12, 137-153.
23. Klimoski, R., & Inks, L. (1990) Accountability forces in performance appraisal. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 194-208.
24. Lefkowitz, J. (2000). The role of interpersonal affective regard in supervisory performance ratings: A literature review and proposed causal model. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 67-86.
25. Longenecker, C. O., Sims, H. P., & Gioia, D. A. (1987). Behind the mask: The politics of employee appraisal. Academy of Management Executive, 1, 183-193.
26. Mero, N. P., Guidice, R. M., & Brownlee, A. L. (2007). Accountability in a performance appraisal context: The effect of audience and form of accounting on rater response and behavior. Journal of Management, 33, 223-252.
27. Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, Organizational and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage Publications.
28. Murphy, K. B., Cleveland, J. N., Kinney, T. B., Skattebo, A. L., Newman, D. A., & Sin, H. P. (2004). Unit climate, rater goals and performance ratings in an instructional setting. Journal of Management, 24, 48-65.
29. Murphy, K., 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.
30. Rockart, J. (1998). Towards survivability of communication-intensive new organization forms. Journal of Management Studies, 35, 417-420.
31. Schwab, D. P., & Heneman, H. G. (1978). Age stereotyping in performance appraisal. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 573-578.
32. Shore, T. H., Adams, J. S., & Tashchian, A. (1998). Effects of self-appraisal information, appraisal purpose, and feedback on performance appraisal ratings. Journal of Business and Psychology, 12, 283-298.
33. Shore, T. H., & Tashchian, A. (2002). Accountability forces in performance appraisal: Effects of self-appraisal information, normative information and task performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17, 261-274.
34. Tetlock, P. E. (1983). Accountability and complexity of thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 74-83.
35. Tziner, A., Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (2005). Contextual and rater factors affecting rating behavior. Group and Organization Management, 30, 89-98.
36. Tziner, A., Latham, G. P., Price, B. S., & Haccoun, R. (1996). Development and validation of a questionnaire for measuring perceived political considerations in performance appraisal. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 179-190.
37. Tziner, A., Murphy, K. R., Cleveland, J. N., Yavo, A. & Hayoon, E. (2008). A new old question: Do contextual factors relate to rating behavior: An investigation with peer evaluations. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 16, 59-67.
38. Waung, M., & Highhouse, S. (1997). Fear of conflict and empathic buffering: Two explanations for the inflation of performance feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71, 37-54.
39. Yun, G. J., Donahue, L. M., Dudley, N. M., & McFarland, L. A. (2005). Rater personality, rating format, and social context: Implications for performance appraisal ratings. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13, 97-107.