Journal article


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


Publication Details
Author(s): Heidemeier H, Moser K
Publisher: American Psychological Association
Publication year: 2009
Volume: 94
Pages range: 353-370
ISSN: 0021-9010

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



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
Share link
Last updated on 2017-09-25 at 02:43
PDF downloaded successfully