RATER-RATEE RACE EFFECTS IN DEVELOPMENTAL PERFORMANCE RATINGS OF MANAGERS

The effects of rater and ratee race on performance ratings of managers were examined. Ratings were obtained from peers, subordinates and bosses as part of a multirater, developmental feedback program for managers. Two data sets were created for purposes of this study. The between-subjects data set consisted of ratings from over 20,000 bosses, over 50,000 peers, and over 40,000 subordinates. The repeated measures data set was substantially smaller because it included only those Black and White managers who were rated by both a Black and White rater from each of the three perspectives. Results for rater race indicated that Black raters from all perspectives (peers, subordinates, and bosses) assigned more favorable ratings to ratees of their own race. Results for White raters differed according to the particular rating source. White bosses assigned more favorable ratings to ratees of their own race, but White subordinates did not. White peers assigned more favorable ratings to Whites in the repeated measures analysis, but not in the between-subjects analysis. Results for ratee race indicated that both White and Black managers received higher ratings from Black raters than from White raters, and the effect was more pronounced for ratings assigned to Black managers.     

The Effect of Giving Informal Performance Feedback on Subsequent Formal Memory-Based Performance Evaluations1

Two experiments tested the hypothesis that raters' formal memory-based performance evaluations can be significantly influenced by their having previously given the ratee informal performance feedback. In Experiment 1 subjects either did or did not give informal feedback to another person who performed either well or poorly on an interviewing task. In Experiment 2 subjects role played giving informal feedback about behavior relevant to only one of the two performance dimensions subsequently evaluated. In both experiments subjects later ratcd the interpersonal and task performance of the feedback recipient. The results of both studies support the hypothesis for ratings of interpersonal performance. Giving informal feedback to a ratee exhibiting good interpersonal performance led to more positive interpersonal performance ratings, whereas giving informal feedback to a ratee exhibiting poor interpersonal performance led to more negative interpersonal performance ratings. Task performance ratings, on the other hand, were not affected. Conditions likely to have mitigated the impact of giving informal feedback on the task performance ratings are discussed, as are the implications of the results for practical strategies to improve the quality of formal memory-based performance evaluations.     

Accountability and need for cognition effects on contrast, halo, and accuracy in performance ratings

In the present study, the authors investigated the effects of accountability and need for cognition on contrast errors, halo, and accuracy of performance ratings examined in good and poor performance context conditions, as well as in a context-free control condition. The accountability manipulation reduced the contrast effect and also modified rater recall of good ratee behavior. Accountability reduced halo in ratings and increased rating accuracy in a poor performance context. Accountability also interacted with need for cognition in predicting individual rater halo.     

A LONGITUDINAL EXAMINATION OF RATER AND RATEE EFFECTS IN PERFORMANCE RATINGS

The consistency and loci of leniency, halo, and range restriction effects in performance ratings were investigated in a longitudinal study. Ratings were provided by approximately 90 supervisors in a metropolitan police department, who rated approximately 350 police-rank subordinates on five occasions over a three and one-half year period. Rating effects were computed separately as rater-and ratee-based statistics, and intercorrelated among the five rating periods. The nature of the data set made it possible to hold either raters or ratees constant for each analysis, thus permitting inferences regarding the sources of reliable variance in effects as due to raters or ratees. It was concluded that reliable variance in mean ratings is partly attributable to ratees, but mainly introduced by raters. Reliable halo variance is attributable to raters, and range restriction is a product of stable group performance variability within intact ratee groups. Implications of these results for future rating process research are discussed.     

Hedonic arousal, time intervals, and excitation transfer

Zillmann’s (1978, 1983) excitation transfer theory was tested in relation to arousal processes opposite in hedonic valence. Sixty female subjects, randomly assigned to six experimental conditions, were initially exposed either to arousal stimulation positive in hedonic valence (sexual humor), or to arousal stimulation negative in hedonic valence (insulting remarks), or to a neutral unarousing task. In each condition, half of the subjects rated mildly arousing positively valenced male models’ photographs on several scales either immediately or with a 4 minute delay following prior arousal. In support of Zillmann’s theory, subjects in the positive hedonic arousal condition gave significantly lower photograph ratings on the arousal-related scales at the immediate, than at the delayed, rating time. However, contrary to Zillmann’s theory, the pattern of these ratings was reversed in the negative hedonic arousal condition, with the significantly higher ratings at the immediate, rather than delayed, rating time. Also, there were significant differences in these ratings among all three conditions both at the immediate and at the delayed rating time, but, as predicted, no significant differences were obtained for these ratings between the rating times in the control unarousing condition. The differences in excitation transfer between arousal processes positive and negative in hedonic valence may be due to their differences on a temporal dimension with regard to the speed of accumulation and the speed of dissipation of each arousal type.     

STUDIES OF THE RATED FAVORABLENESS OF OFFERS TO GAMBLE

S jöberg , L. Studies of the rated favorableness of offers to gamble. Scand. J. Psychol . 1968, 9, 257–273.—Subjects rated the favorableness of offers to gamble on lotteries and wagers on bipolar graphic scales in 5 experiments. It was found for lotteries that the structure of ratings could be described as an effect of variation in probability plus a multiplicative prize probability interaction. A similar model could be fitted to ratings of wagers, with a main effect due to prizes plus an effect due to losses or a loss-prize interaction.     

Context Effects in Performance Evaluation: The Impact of Ratee Sex and Performance Level on Performance Ratings and Behavioral Recall

We extend the research on context effects in performance evaluation by examining the impact of ratee sex and context performance level as moderators of context effects in performance ratings and in the recall of performance information. Subjects (N= 269) rated the performance of an average performer (male or female) alone or following a low or high performing context (male or female). We found significant differences in the magnitude of contrast effects for an average target ratee as a function of both target ratee sex and performance level. These differences were found for both performance ratings and the evaluative content of performance information recalled.     

A FIELD STUDY OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PURPOSE: RESEARCH- VERSUS ADMINISTRATIVE- BASED RATINGS

Many researchers have discussed the theoretical and practical importance of rating purpose. Nevertheless, the body of empirical studies, the majority of which were conducted in a laboratory setting, focus on leniency. There has been little research on other effects of rating purpose. The present study examines 223 ratees in a field setting for whom there were both administrative-based performance appraisal ratings (which were actually used for personnel decisions) and research-based performance appraisal ratings (obtained for a validation study). Two of the hypotheses were supported; administrative ratings were more lenient than research-based ratings. The administrative-based ratings demonstrated a statistically significant relationship with ratee seniority, while the research-based ratings did not. There was mixed support for a third hypothesis: Research ratings were significantly correlated with a predictor, while the administrative ratings were not. The difference between the validity coefficients, however, was not significant. Contrary to the hypothesis, the rank order between administrative-based and research-based ratings was relatively high ( r = 33).     

Three aspects of self-disclosure as they relate to quality of adjustment

Subjects completed two measures of actual self-disclosure (one for intimacy of self-presentation and one for inwardness of self-presentation)and a self-report of past self-disclosure. and California Psychological Inventory. For both sexes the two measures of actual disclosure correlated positively but neither instrument related positively to the self-report measure. Females disclosed more than males on both measures of actual disclosure. Quadratic, inverted-U relationships were hypothesized for the self-disclosure and CPI scales, but by and large they were not found. Linear associations were noted, the major ones being a positive pattern of correlations between the inwardness of actual disclosure and measures of flexible autonomy, responsibility and socialization for the males, a negative set of relations between the intimacy of actual disclosure and scales indicative of good interpersonal adjustment for the females, and a positive relationship between the self-report measure and scales indicative of social poise, extraversion and socialization for both sexes.     

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF STUDIES COMPARING BEHAVIORALLY ANCHORED RATING SCALES (BARS) AND OTHER RATING FORMATS1

All published studies comparing behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) with other rating formats were reviewed. Results indicate that BARS and other formats appear to differ relatively little (if at all) with regard to psychometric characteristics (leniency, halo, interrater agreement, ratee discriminability, validity and “accuracy”). Other variables, such as degree of rater participation in scale construction and rater preferences for different rating scale formats, also exhibited relatively little differences between BARS and other formats. A close examination of the studies, however, reveals numerous methodological problems confounding interpretations of results, making conclusions about the superiority or inferiority of BARS quite tenuous. Suggestions are made for more appropriate research directions and questions which seem more appropriate for rating scale investigations.     

An integrated model of social psychological and personality psychological perspectives on personality and wellbeing

This article uses multi-rater data from 458 triads (students, mother, father, total N = 1374) to examine the relationship of personality ratings with wellbeing ratings, using a multi-method approach to separate accurate perceptions (shared across raters) from biased perceptions of the self (rater-specific variance). The social-psychological perspective predicts effects of halo bias in self-ratings on wellbeing, whereas the personality-psychological perspective predicts effects of personality traits on wellbeing. Results are more consistent with the personality perspective in that neuroticism (negative), extraversion, agreeableness, and to a lesser extent conscientiousness predicted wellbeing, whereas positive illusions about the self were only weakly and not significantly related to wellbeing. These results cast doubt on the hypothesis that self-enhancement is beneficial for wellbeing.     

True intercorrelation among job components, time delay in rating, and rater intelligence as determinants of accuracy in performance ratings

Ninety subjects viewed one of three sets of videotapes which presented simulated work performances by five ratees. Subjects viewed videotapes where the true intercorrelation among the three job components was either high, moderate, or low. Half of the subjects completed ratings immediately after viewing all five ratees and again, 24 h later. The remaining subjects completed ratings only once, 24 h after viewing the videotapes. Rater intelligence was assessed via the Wesman Personnel Classification Test. Performance ratings for each ratee on each of the three job components were completed using a magnitude estimation scale. Subjects' ratings were compared to ratee true scores (based on objective worker output) to obtain four components of rater accuracy: elevation, differential elevation, stereotype accuracy, and differential accuracy as well as a measure of overall accuracy. Results indicated that subjects' ratings were more accurate with respect to overall accuracy and differential accuracy when the true intercorrelation among job components was high rather than low. Rater intelligence was significantly correlated with stereotype accuracy. In addition, rater intelligence was significantly related to overall accuracy, differential elevation, and elevation, but only when the true intercorrelation among job components was moderate or high. Also, there was a curvilinear component to the relationship between intelligence and both differential accuracy and stereotype accuracy such that the most intelligent raters tended to be less accurate than more moderately intelligent raters who were, in turn, more accurate than the least intelligent raters. Finally, subjects' immediate ratings were not more accurate than ratings provided by subjects who completed only delayed ratings. However, repeated measures analyses found that for subjects who completed both immediate and delayed ratings, delayed ratings were less accurate than immediate ratings with respect to overall accuracy, differential accuracy, and differential elevation.     

THE INFLUENCE OF UPWARD FEEDBACK ON SELF- AND FOLLOWER RATINGS OF LEADERSHIP

The impact of upward feedback (followers' perceptions of leadership provided to leaders) on leaders' self-evaluations and followers' subsequent ratings of leadership was assessed in a field setting. Subjects were 978 student leaders and their 1,232 followers. Results indicated that overall, leaders' behaviors as rated by followers improved after feedback. Leaders' self-evaluations following feedback became more similar to the evaluations provided by followers. Interestingly, when leaders were grouped according to whether feedback was positive, neutral, or negative based on agreement between self- and follower ratings, differences between groups in post-feedback self-evaluations and follower ratings emerged. Self-evaluations for leaders receiving negative feedback (high self- relative to followers' ratings) went down, while self-evaluations for leaders receiving positive feedback (low self- relative to follower's ratings) went up. Follower ratings of leaders who received negative feedback improved following feedback to leaders, while there was no change in follower ratings for those receiving positive feedback. Implications for using upward feedback in organizations are discussed.     

Studies of mood and humor appreciation

A total of 189 students in two studies rated jokes on funniness and several other scales after rating their own mood on the Nowlis-Green Mood Adjective Check List. Subjects in Experiment 1 gave a second and third set of mood ratings after their joke-funniness ratings. Three mood factors—surgency, elation, and vigor—reliably predicted joke appreciation in both studies. More tentative evidence linked humor appreciation to concentration, social affection, excitement, freedom, and (lack of) fatigue, but humor appeared independent of aggression, anxiety, tension, and inhibition. Relationships among joke-scale ratings were highly similar for subjects reporting relatively positive moods and those reporting more negative moods. Results were discussed with reference to several humor theories.The authors would like to thank Carol Pierce, Marguerite Ponder, and Ron Fox for their help with this research.     

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

We tested the effects of rater agreeableness on the rating of others’ poor performance in performance appraisal (PA). We also examined the interactions between rater agreeableness and two aspects of the rating context: ratee self‐ratings and the prospect of future collaboration with the ratee. Participants (n= 230) were allocated to one of six experimental groups (a 3 × 2 between‐groups design) or a control group (n= 20). Participants received accurate, low‐deviated, or high‐deviated self‐ratings from the ratee. Half were notified they would collaborate with the ratee in a future task. High rater agreeableness, positive deviations in self‐rating, and the prospect of future collaboration were all independent predictors of higher PA ratings. The interactions between rater agreeableness and rating context were very small. We argue that conflict avoidance is an important motivation in the PA process.     

Is Sex by Itself Enough? An Exploration of Gender Bias Issues in Performance Appraisal

Past research on the effects of sex of a ratee on performance ratings has produced inconsistent results. The present study was an attempt to extend this literature in two ways. First, the scope in prior research was expanded by examining not only the effects of ratee sex on evaluations but also the effects of perceived masculinity/femininity of ratees in conjunction with occupation and gender-relevant stereotypes and attitudes held by raters. Results illustrated that while sex of a ratee may have no effect on ratings, perceived masculinity/femininity of the ratee may have an effect, and attitudes held by raters regarding women in the relevant occupation may moderate this effect. The second intent of the study was to explore a potential underlying process variable for relationships with both performance ratings and the gender-relevant variables. Accessibility in memory of behavioral information was related to performance ratings and to the gender-relevant variables. While most of the variables explored in the study seemed to be potentially relevant and of value in understanding the gender bias process, sex by itself was of no significant value. Implications for practice and future research were discussed.     

Affective responses to hyperventilation: a test of the cognitive model of panic

A cognitive explanation of the association between acute hyperventilation and panic attacks has been proposed: the extent to which sensations produced by hyperventilation are interpreted in a negative and catastrophic way is said to be a major determinant of panic. Non-clinical subjects were provided with a negative or a positive interpretation of the sensations produced by equivalent amounts of voluntary hyperventilation. As predicted, there was a significant difference between positive and negative interpretation conditions on ratings of positive and negative affect. Subjects in the positive interpretation condition experienced hyperventilation as pleasant, and subjects in the negative interpretation condition experienced hyperventilation as unpleasant, even though both groups experienced similar bodily sensations and did not differ in their prior expectations of the affective consequences of hyperventilation. When the subjects were given a positive interpretation, the number of their sensations correlated with positive affect; when a negative interpretation was given, the number of bodily sensations correlated with negative affect. The results provide support for a cognitive model of panic and are inconsistent with the view that panic is simply a symptom of hyperventilation syndrome.     

Sex,sex roles,and response styles for negative affect: Selectivity in a free recall task

Study 1 examined how responses to negative affect may be influenced by sex differences in response styles [S. Nolen-Hoeksema (1987), “Sex Differences in Unipolar Depression: Evidence and Theory,” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 101, pp. 259–282] and situational norms. Male and female experimental subjects were led to experience negative affect by reading and rating sad stories, and were then given either nonnormative or normative feedback. Nonnormative subjects were informed that their story ratings were more negative than other participants' ratings. Normative subjects were informed that their ratings were similar to others' ratings. For nonnormative subjects, men recalled less negative material than women, suggesting that response styles are most apparent when negative affect is considered inappropriate. As both sex and sex role orientation are predictive of response styles, Study 2 examined the hypothesis that both sex and sex role orientation are predictive of recall in a manner similar to sex in Study 1. Male and female subjects high and low in masculinity and femininity were assigned to negative-nonnormative and neutral affect conditions. In addition to a marginally significant sex effect consistent with Study 1, results revealed that high-masculinity individuals tended to recall more positive material in the negative-nonnormative condition than in the neutral affect condition. In contrast, low-masculinity individuals recalled less positive material in the negative-nonnormative condition than in the neutral affect condition. The implications of this research for the impact of negative affect on recall are addressed.