CAN MULTI-SOURCE FEEDBACK CHANGE PERCEPTIONS OF GOAL ACCOMPLISHMENT,SELF-EVALUATIONS,AND PERFORMANCE-RELATED OUTCOMES? THEORY-BASED APPLICATIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH

Multi-source feedback extends traditional performance appraisal by collecting information from subordinates, peers, supervisors, and customers. Ratees often receive the results along with normative data and self-ratings. This paper explores how multi-source feedback goes beyond traditional performance appraisal by providing ratees with comparative information. Focusing on person perception and information processing dynamics, this paper develops a model and associated propositions to explain the effects of multi-source feedback on perceptions of goal accomplishment, re-evaluation of self-image, and changes in outcomes such as goals, development, behavior, and performance. Moderators of relationships between the major components in the model include individual difference variables (self-image, feedback seeking, self-monitoring, task-specific self-efficacy, and impression management) and situational conditions (the content and process of multi-source feedback and organizational performance standards). Issues of research and practice intended to improve understanding and effectiveness of multi-source feedback are discussed.     

Ethical Principles and Standards: A Racial-Ethnic Minority Research Perspective

This article directs attention to philosophical changes that if implemented would make Ethical Principles and Standards more responsive and relevant to the pragmatic research needs of minorities.     

RATINGS OF MANAGERIAL CHARACTERISTICS: EVALUATION DIFFICULTY, CO-WORKER AGREEMENT, AND SELF-AWARENESS

This research examined variables contributing to self-awareness and coworker agreement on 30 managerial characteristics. The first study collected data from 233 management students on the difficulty of rating different characteristics. It also developed reliable measures of self-protection mechanisms that may negatively influence self-awareness. Four self-protection factors were identified: Denial, Giving Up, Self-Promotion, and Fear of Failure. The second study collected self-, supervisor, peer, and subordinate ratings of the managerial characteristics to derive multiple measures of self-awareness. There was a total of 283 co-worker ratings for 36 target middle managers. The results showed that within-sample co-worker disagreement measures from Study 2 were higher for items that were perceived by the sample in Study 1 as more difficult to rate. Self-ratings were more highly related to the average of co-worker ratings than to the ratings provided by any one co-worker alone. Co-workers' ratings of the target's use of self-protection mechanisms were negatively associated with self-awareness measures. Ideas are discussed for other correlates of self-awareness and ways to enhance the value of feedback processes.     

The Mexican American in Higher Education: An Example of Subtle Stereotyping

This article focuses on four major weaknesses that are prevalent in behavioral science articles on Mexican Americans: (a) overgeneralization from a small subgroup to the total Mexican-American population; (b) misuse and misinterpretation of data; (c) adherence to a culture-blame syndrome; and (d) inappropriate treatment suggestions. In order to facilitate discussion, examples are drawn from an article published recently in the Personnel and Guidance Journal. Suggestions for improving counseling research and practice relative to Mexican Americans and other minorities are presented.     

DOES PERFORMANCE IMPROVE FOLLOWING MULTISOURCE FEEDBACK? A THEORETICAL MODEL,META‐ANALYSIS,AND REVIEW OF EMPIRICAL FINDINGS

We review evidence showing that multisource feedback ratings are related to other measures of leadership effectiveness and that different rater sources conceptualize performance in a similar manner. We then describe a meta-analysis of 24 longitudinal studies showing that improvement in direct report, peer, and supervisor ratings over time is generally small. We present a theoretical framework and review empirical evidence suggesting performance improvement should be more likely for some feedback recipients than others. Specifically, improvement is most likely to occur when feedback indicates that change is necessary, recipients have a positive feedback orientation, perceive a need to change their behavior, react positively to the feedback, believe change is feasible, set appropriate goals to regulate their behavior, and take actions that lead to skill and performance improvement.     

Qualia that It Is Right to Quine*

Dennett (1988) provides a much discussed argument for the nonexistence of qualia, as conceived by philosophers like Block, Chalmers, Loar and Searle. My goal in this paper is to vindicate Dennett's argument, construed in a certain way. The argument supports the claim that qualia are constitutively representational. Against Block and Chalmers, the argument rejects the detachment of phenomenal from information‐processing consciousness; and against Loar and Searle, it defends the claim that qualia are constitu‐tively representational in an externalist understanding of this. The core of the argument is contained in section 3. In the first part, I contrast a minimal conception of qualia, relative to which their existence is not under dispute, with the sort of view to which I will object. In the second part I set the stage by presenting the facts about (minimal) qualia on which a Dennett‐like argument can be based.     

Boghossian’s Inference Argument against Content Externalism Reversed*

I deal here with one of Boghossian’s arguments against content externalism, related to our inferential rationality (to use his term). According to his reasoning, the apriority of our logical abilities is inconsistent with certain externalist assumptions. Nevertheless, the problem constitutes an important challenge for any theory of content, not just for externalism. Furthermore, when we examine what internalists may propose to solve the problem, we see that externalists have at their disposal a more promising repertoire of possible replies than internalists. In that sense, insofar as Boghossian’s scenario is relevant to the debate externalism/internalism, it can be seen (against Boghossian’s original intention) as providing additional evidence for content externalism.