Regular Article
Differences in Accuracy of Absolute and Comparative Performance Appraisal Methods☆,☆☆

https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1997.2698Get rights and content

Abstract

The primary question of this experiment was whetherabsoluteandcomparativeperformance appraisal ratings differ in terms of four components of accuracy: differential elevation (DE), differential accuracy (DA), elevation (EL), and stereotype accuracy (SA). Becausecomparativeperformance appraisal methods often useglobalitems (overall performance dimensions), whereas certainabsoluteperformance appraisal methods utilizespecificitems (critical incidents), the effect ofspecificversusglobalitems was also investigated. Eighty participants viewed four videotaped lecturers and rated their performance 24 h later with bothabsoluteandcomparativeperformance appraisal methods which used bothspecificandglobalitem-types. No advantages were associated with theabsoluterating method, however,comparativeratings were more accurate thanabsoluteratings with respect to DA and SA.Globalitems resulted in greater DE and EL accuracy than didspecific;however, the converse was true with respect to DA and SA accuracy. Implications for the practice of performance appraisal are discussed.

References (33)

  • W.C Borman

    Consistency of rating accuracy and rating errors in the judgment of human performance

    Organizational Behavior and Human Performance

    (1977)
  • H.J Bernardin et al.

    Performance appraisal

    Generalizing from laboratory to field settings

    (1986)
  • W.H Bommer et al.

    On the interchangeability of objective and subjective measures of employee performance: A meta-analysis

    Personnel Psychology

    (1995)
  • R.L Cardy et al.

    Performance appraisal: Alternative perspectives

    (1994)
  • S.J Carroll et al.

    Performance appraisal and review systems: The identification measurement and development of performance in organizations

    (1982)
  • N.D Christiansen et al.

    Correcting the Sixteen Personality Factors test for faking: Effects on criterion-related validity and individual hiring decisions

    Personnel Psychology

    (1994)
  • J Cohen

    Statistical power analysis for behavioral sciences

    (1988)
  • L.J Cronbach

    Processes affecting scores on “understanding of others” and “assumed similarity.”

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1955)
  • P.F Drucker

    The practice of management

    (1954)
  • J.L Farh et al.

    Effects of comparative performance information on the accuracy of self-ratings and agreement between self- and supervisor ratings

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (1989)
  • C.H Fay et al.

    Effects of training and rating scales on rating errors

    Personnel Psychology

    (1982)
  • L Festinger

    A theory of social comparison processes

    Human Relations

    (1954)
  • R.D Goffin et al.

    Criterion validation of two approaches to performance appraisal: The Behavioral Observation Scale and the Relative Percentile Method

    Journal of Business and Psychology

    (1996)
  • R.D Goffin et al.

    Personality testing and the assessment center: Incremental validity for managerial selection

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (1996)
  • R.L Heneman

    Traits, behaviors, and rater training: Some unexpected results

    Human Performance

    (1988)
  • R.L Heneman

    The relationship between supervisory ratings and results-oriented measures of performance: A meta-analysis

    Personnel Psychology

    (1986)

    • Cited by (0)

    ☆

    The second author is now at the Department of Psychology. The University of Western Ontario. This research was carried out as the first author's M.A. thesis. The authors are indebted to Peter Villanova for his input during the planning of this project and the writing of this article. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Eleventh Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, April, 1996, San Diego, CA.

    Address correspondence and reprint requests to Richard D. Goffin, Department of Psychology, The University of Western Ontario, Canada N6A 5C2.

    ☆☆

    E. Locke, Ed

    View full text
    Copyright © 1997 Academic Press. All rights reserved.