Self-other agreement in job performance ratings: a meta-analytic test of a process model.

Heidemeier H, Moser K (2009)


Publication Type: Journal article

Publication year: 2009

Journal

Publisher: American Psychological Association

Book Volume: 94

Pages Range: 353-370

URI: http://pubget.com/paper/19271795

DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.94.2.353

Abstract

{This meta-analysis explores agreement in self- and supervisory ratings of job performance (k = 128 independent samples). It suggests a 3-stage model of the rating process and reviews the empirical evidence for the relevance of each of these 3 stages to an understanding of agreement in ratings. The proposed 3-stage model serves as the guiding rationale for the examination of an extensive set of variables that moderate rater agreement. Results are reported for 2 indicators of rater agreement (correlational and mean-level agreement). Self-supervisor ratings yielded an overall correlation of .22 (rho = .34; k = 115; n = 37,752). Position characteristics and the use of nonjudgmental performance indicators were the main moderators. Leniency in self-ratings is indicated by higher mean levels of self-ratings compared with supervisory ratings. Within Western samples, performance self-ratings showed leniency (d = 0.32

Authors with CRIS profile

How to cite

APA:

Heidemeier, H., & Moser, K. (2009). Self-other agreement in job performance ratings: a meta-analytic test of a process model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 353-370. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.94.2.353

MLA:

Heidemeier, Heike, and Klaus Moser. "Self-other agreement in job performance ratings: a meta-analytic test of a process model." Journal of Applied Psychology 94 (2009): 353-370.

BibTeX: Download