Search

On the basis of the connectionist model of leadership, we examined perceptions of leadership as a function of the contextual factors of race (Asian American, Caucasian American) and occupation (engineering, sales) in 3 experiments (1 student sample and 2 industry samples). Race and occupation exhibited differential effects for within- and between-race comparisons. With regard to within-race comparisons, leadership perceptions of Asian Americans were higher when race--occupation was a good fit (engineer position) than when race--occupation was a poor fit (sales position) for the two industry samples. With regard to between-race comparisons, leadership perceptions of Asian Americans were low relative to those of Caucasian Americans. Additionally, when race--occupation was a good fit for Asian Americans, such individuals were evaluated higher on perceptions of technical competence than were Caucasian Americans, whereas they were evaluated lower when race--occupation was a poor fit. Furthermore, our results demonstrated that race affects leadership perceptions through the activation of prototypic leadership attributes (i.e., implicit leadership theories). Implications for the findings are discussed in terms of the connectionist model of leadership and leadership opportunities for Asian Americans. Keywords: implicit leadership theory, perceptions, prototypes, leadership, Asian American DOI: 10.1037/a0019501

The goal-directed perspective of performance appraisal suggests that raters with different goals will give different ratings. Considering the performance level as an important contextual factor, we conducted 2 studies in a peer rating context and in a nonpeer rating context and found that raters do use different rating tactics to achieve specific goals. Raters inflated their peer ratings under the harmony, fairness, and motivating goal conditions (Study l, N = 103). More important, raters inflated their ratings more for low performers than for high and medium performers. In a nonpeer rating context, raters deflated ratings for high performers to achieve the fairness goal and they inflated ratings for low performers to motivate them (Study 2, N = 120). Keywords: performance evaluation, performance appraisal, rater goals, leniency, performance level DOI: 10.1037/a0018866

The present two studies integrate and extend the literatures on dynamic performance, performance attributions, and rating purpose, making several important contributions. First, examining attributions of dynamic performance, Study 1 predicted that performance mean and trend would affect judged ratee ability and effort and that performance variation would affect locus of causality; both predictions were supported by the results. Second, investigating the interaction between dynamic performance and rating purpose, Study 2 predicted that performance mean would have a stronger impact on administrative than on developmental ratings, whereas performance trend and variation would have a stronger impact on developmental than on administrative ratings; again, both predictions were borne out by the results. Third, both studies found that performance trend interacted with performance mean and variability to predict overall ratings. Fourth, both studies replicated main effects of dynamic performance characteristics on ratings in a different culture and, in Study 2, a sample of more experienced managers. Keywords: dynamic performance, performance attributions, performance evaluation, performance ratings, rating purpose DOI: 10.1037/a0017237

The article reports the findings from a Monte Carlo investigation examining the impact of faking on the criterion-related validity of Conscientiousness for predicting supervisory ratings of job performance. Based on a review of faking literature, 6 parameters were manipulated in order to model 4,500 distinct faking conditions (5 [magnitude] X 5 [proportion] X 4 [variability] X 3 [faking-Conscientiousness relationship] X 3 [faking--performance relationship] X 5 [selection ratio]). Overall, the results indicated that validity change is significantly affected by all 6 faking parameters, with the relationship between faking and performance, the proportion of fakers in the sample, and the magnitude of faking having the strongest effect on validity change. Additionally, the association between several of the parameters and changes in criterion-related validity was conditional on the faking-performance relationship. The results are discussed in terms of their practical and theoretical implications for using personality testing for employee selection. Keywords: faking, simulation, validity, personality, selection

The impact of performance-based feedback and incentives, on the perception of empowerment and motivation of lower-level employees in organizations, is examined.

This longitudinal study used D. R. Ilgen, C. D. Fisher, and M. S. Taylor's (1979) feedback process model as a theoretical framework to determine whether a sequential chain of cognitive variables mediates an individual's response to performance feedback. One hundred two employees were surveyed 2 weeks after their performance appraisal, and performance was assessed 11 months later at the end of the review cycle. Covariance structure analysis supported the convergent and discriminant validity of the constructs underlying the model and the constellation of structural relationships. A set of cognitive variables was found to completely mediate the relationship between an individual's receipt and response to feedback. Implications for the feedback process and future research are discussed.

This study examined the effects of demographic similarity and dissimilarity on perceptions of performance appraisals and reactions to negative feedback. We surveyed a sample of 180 non-supervisory employees from an organization whose members represent over 120 nationalities. Consistent with predictions based on status characteristics theory, employees reacted more favorably to feedback from White managers. An asymmetrical dissimilarity effect was observed in which men reacted more unfavorably to feedback from women. Contrary to predictions based on the similarity-attraction hypothesis, employees reacted more unfavorably to negative feedback from same-race managers. Implications with regard to self-identity threat are discussed as a possible explanation for this phenomenon. KEYWORDS affect * diversity * negative feedback * performance appraisal * relational demography * social identity

Two studies investigated the mediating effects of liking and attributions of motives on the relationship between a ratee's reputation and helpful behaviors and raters' reward decisions. During managerial simulations, raters evaluated individuals after watching videotapes in which the individual's reputation and helpful behaviors were manipulated. Results indicated an interaction effect between reputation and helpful behaviors such that a helpful person with a good reputation received more rewards than did a helpful person with a bad reputation. In contrast, an unhelpful person with a good reputation did not receive better rewards than an unhelpful person with a bad reputation. Moreover, raters' liking of ratees and the motives raters attributed to ratees' helpful behaviors mediated the relationship between the manipulations and raters' reward decisions.

In a series of studies, the authors established empirical support for a general decision-making bias that they termed a person sensitivity bias. Specifically, a person sensitivity bias consists of a person positivity bias (D. O. Sears, 1983) under positive performance conditions and a person negativity bias under negative performance conditions. The authors conducted the first empirical studies of a direct comparison between individuals and objects performing the same task under both positive and negative performance conditions. Two additional studies tested the boundaries of the sensitivity bias within negatively framed decision dilemmas. The results are discussed in terms of their relevance toward a more comprehensive theory of person-object evaluation differences.

The purpose of this study was to examine the possibility that feedback regarding team performance may influence team members' reports of organizational citizenship behaviors. Ninety-five teams of business students (N = 412) participated in a labor-scheduling simulation over a local area network. Teams were provided with false negative, false positive, or neutral feedback regarding their performance. Results support the hypothesis that the perception of 2 forms of organizational citizenship behavior (helping behavior and civic virtue) in work groups may, in part, be a function of the nature of the performance feedback that group members receive. However, negative feedback appears to play a more critical role than positive feedback in this attributional process. Possible reasons for these findings, as well as their implications, are discussed.

This paper extends previous work on the psychological impact on candidates of selection and assessment processes, presenting results from a study of 32 participants in an assessment center (AC) program of a major U.K financial services organization. Both quantitative and qualitative methodologies are used to investigate: (a) the impact of the assessment outcome on cognitive and affective reactions to the assessment process and candidates' post-assessment psychological states, job-related attitudes, and intentions, and (b) the role of factors such as quality of feedback from the assessor, managerial support, and career line position on the impact process. Results show that the assessment outcome decision does have an effect on post-assessment psychological states and work-related attitudes but this effect works through a person's perception of the impact the assessment process will have on their career. This perception of impact is well predicted by the candidate's perceived quality of feedback and current career position. Good feedback helps careers more than poor feedback and the nearer the person's current role is to the position for which they are being assessed the more likely they are to benefit from the process.

Managers' reactions to utility analysis were investigated as a function of how the standard deviation of performance ([SD.sub.y]) in dollars was estimated, how the ultimate utility estimate was framed, and what human resource (HR) program was being analyzed. Managers (N = 179) read a scripted dialogue between an HR manager and a company president describing a utility analysis of a trial HR program. The dialogues differed between subjects by [SD.sub.y] method (40% salary vs. global vs. the Cascio-Ramos estimate), information frame (cost vs. gain), and HR intervention (selection vs. training). Results showed that managers were most favorable toward utility analysis when the 40% salary method was used to calculate [SD.sub.y]. Also, an interaction was found between framing condition and manager comprehension of the utility material. Those managers having a stronger comprehension of the utility information presented were not affected by information frame. However, managers with less comprehension of the utility information were more favorable toward utility analysis when it was presented as an opportunity cost rather than as a monetary gain.

In 3 prior meta-analyses, the relationship between the Big Five factors of personality and job criteria was investigated. However, these meta-analyses showed different findings. Furthermore, these reviews included studies carried out only in the United States and Canada. This study reports meta-analytic research on the same topic but with studies conducted in the European Community, which were not included in the prior reviews. The results indicate that Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability are valid predictors across job criteria and occupational groups. The remaining factors are valid only for some criteria and for some occupational groups. Extraversion was a predictor for 2 occupations, and Openness and Agreeableness were valid predictors of training proficiency. These findings are consistent with M. R. Barrick and M. K. Mount (1991) and L.M. Hough, N.K. Eaton, M. D. Dunnette, J. D. Kamp, and R. A. McCloy (1990). Implications of the results for future research and the practice of personnel selection are suggested.

On the basis of a distinction between test content and method of testing, the present study examined several conceptually and practically important effects relating race, reading comprehension, method of assessment, face validity perceptions, and performance on a situational judgment test using a sample of 241 psychology undergraduates (113 Blacks and 128 Whites). Results showed that the Black-White differences in situational judgment test performance and face validity reactions to the test were substantially smaller in the video-based method of testing than in the paper-and-pencil method. The Race x Method interaction effect on test performance was attributable to differences in reading comprehension and face validity reactions associated with race and method of testing. Implications of the findings were discussed in the context of research on adverse impact and examinee test reactions.

A longitudinal laboratory experiment was conducted to evaluate the effects of leadership style (transactional vs. transformational) and anonymity level (identified vs. anonymous) on group potency and effectiveness of 36 undergraduate student work groups performing a creativity task using a Group Decision Support System (GDSS). GDSS are interactive networks of computers for generating solutions to unstructured problems. Results indicated that GDSS anonymity amplified the positive effect of transformational leadership on group potency relative to transactional leadership in the group writing session of the task. GDSS anonymity also increased the effect of transformational leadership relative to transactional leadership on group effectiveness. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

Using the five factor model with an emphasis on extraversion and conscientiousness, the authors investigated how personality is related to small group processes and outcomes. Graduate students (N = 289) assigned to 4- and 5-person teams in 61 groups engaged in a series of creative problem-solving tasks over a period of several weeks. Extraversion was associated with group processes and outcomes at both individual and group levels of analysis. At the individual level, extraverts were perceived by others as having greater effect than introverts on group outcomes. Covariance structure modeling suggested that extraverts induce these perceptions through the provision of both socioemotional and task-related inputs. At the group level, the proportion of relatively extraverted members was related curvilinearly to task focus and group performance. Contrary to expectations, Conscientiousness was unrelated to processes and outcomes at either the individual or group level.

The relationship between job performance and voluntary employee turnover was investigated for 5,143 exempt employees in a single firm. As hypothesized, support was found for E. F. Jackofsky's (1984) curvilinear hypothesis, as turnover was higher for low and high performers than it was for average performers. Two potential moderators of the curvilinearity were examined in an attempt to explain conflicting results in the performance-turnover literature. As predicted, low salary growth and high promotions each produced a more pronounced curvilinear performance-turnover relationship. Most notably, salary growth effects on turnover were greatest for high performers, with high salary growth predicting rather low turnover for these employees, whereas low salary growth predicted extremely high turnover. Additionally, once salary growth was controlled, promotions positively predicted turnover, with poor performer turnover most strongly affected.

To date, cognitive and affective influences on performance evaluations have been addressed separately, although it is likely that affect may influence ratings indirectly through its impact on the cognitive processing involved in the evaluation. Eighty-three management students participated in a study of the influence of affect on the cognitive processing of performance information. The results suggest that an affect-consistency bias influences ratings even though the cognitive processes that require some judgment indicated a bias toward both affect-consistent and affect-inconsistent performance. Additional findings suggest that the practical utility of affect as something distinct from past performance perceptions may be limited in field settingns. Job-related affect, past performance perceptions, and social affect had similar influences on the cognitive process and ratings in performance evaluations. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

The authors examined the validity of observer ratings (supervisor, coworker, and customer) and self-ratings of personality measures. Results based on a sample of 105 sales representatives supported the 2 hypotheses tested. First, supervisor, coworker, and customer ratings of the 2 job-relevant personality dimensions - conscientiousness and extraversion - were valid predictors of performance ratings, and the magnitude of the validities were at least as large as for self-ratings. Second, supervisor, coworker, and customer ratings accounted for significant variance in the criterion measure beyond self-ratings alone for the relevant dimensions. Overall, the results suggest that validities of personality measures based on self-assessments alone may underestimate the true validity of personality constructs. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

A sample of 336 undergraduate students (168 women and 168 men) read summaries of ficticious court cases prompted by 1 of 4 possible promotion decisions in 1 of 3 different jobs or occupations. Subjects assessed the fairness of the promotion decision and the qualifications of the promoted and nonpromoted employees. Women and men perceived promotion of a member of the opposite sex instead of a member of their own sex as significantly less fair than any of the other three possible promotion decisions (opposite sex instead of opposite sex, same sex instead of same sex, or same sex instead of opposite sex). Perceptions of promotion candidates' qualifications, however, were not influenced by sex, job sex type (masculine vs. sex neutral), or promotion decision or by any interactions of these variables. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Supervisors' decisions about whether to formally evaluate their subordinates for each of two consecutive performance appraisal periods were found to be related to a linear combination of the following variables: subordinate's time under current supervisor, subordinate's job experience, subordinate-supervisor trust, supervisor's initiating structure behaviors, and subordinate's confidence in the operation of the personnel appraisal system. A follow-up analysis, in which the criterion was the consistency with which subordinates were rated in both performance appraisal periods, suggested that relations among the predictors, relative to the criterion, may be quite complex. This complexity may reflect the decision strategy used by raters to combine information on the focal predictors when deciding whether to evaluate a particular subordinate. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Person- and context-oriented definitions of age were used to predict three sets of work outcomes: work attitudes, performance ratings, and reports of developmental practices. The five age measures included employee chronological age, employee subjective age (i.e., self-perceptions of age), and social age (i.e., others' perceptions of age), as well as self- and supervisors' perceptions of the employee's relative age (i.e., compared with employee's work group). The study assessed (a) the relationships among the age measures, (b) the additive relationships among the age measures that predicted work outcomes, and (c) the interactive relationships among the age measures that predicted work outcomes. Each prediction received some support except for (b). Furthermore, many of the age-work-outcome relationships were replicated in the managerial sample. Implications for the use of alternative age measures are discussed. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Male-female differences in performance ratings were examined in 486 work groups across a wide variety of jobs and organizations. As suggested by the sex stereotyping literature, women received lower ratings when the proportion of women in the group was small, even after male-female cognitive ability, psychomotor ability, education, and experience differences were controlled. Replication of the analyses with racial differences (White-Black) in 814 work groups demonstrated that group composition had little effect on performance ratings. The effects of group composition on stereotyping behaviors do not appear to generalize to all minority contexts. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Performance monitoring refers to gathering information about the work effectiveness of others. Traditionally, monitoring has been assumed to influence people's work behavior only to the extent that it is accompanied by additional managerial action (e.g., delivering positive or negative performance consequences). It seems likely, however, that performance monitoring may also have an independent effect on work behavior by influencing the perceived importance of the monitored task. This hypothesis was tested in a laboratory experiment in which subjects worked at 2 tasks for 2 hr. Subjects' work output was significantly affected both by monitoring alone and by monitoring coupled with contingent performance consequences, and the effect of monitoring alone was mediated by perceptions of task importance. The latter result is discussed in terms of social-information-processing theory, especially as it relates to role-making processes in organizations. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

One strategy suggested for improving the accuracy of the complex evaluative judgments involved in performance evaluation is to decompose them into a series of simpler judgments. Another is to collect observations in a distributional rating scheme in which raters estimate the frequencies of different classes of behavior and performance is assessed in terms of the relative frequencies of effective and ineffective behaviors. In the present study, were compared distributional ratings to Likert-type ratings of videotaped lectures at 3 levels of dimensional decomposition; ratings were evaluated in terms of interrater agreement and rating accuracy. Decomposition led to increased agreement and accuracy, but the use of distributional ratings did not. The practical implications of the results are discussed. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Although evidence supports the unique contribution of task performance and contextual performance to overall evaluations, little is known about the relative contribution that specific dimensions of contextual performance make to overall performance judgments. This study evaluated the extent to which supervisors consider task and contextual performance by using relative weights (J. W. Johnson, 2000) to statistically describe the relative importance of specific dimensions of each type of performance to overall performance ratings. Within each of 8 job families in a large organization, each of 4 dimensions of contextual performance made not only a unique contribution but a relatively important contribution to the overall evaluation. Evidence also supports the adaptive performance dimension of handling work stress as an aspect of contextual performance and job-task conscientiousness as an aspect of both task and contextual performance.

This study examined the relationship of goal orientation and performance over a series of 2 challenging performance events. After providing performance feedback on the 1st event, the authors found that the relationship between a learning goal orientation and performance remained positive for the 2nd event, the relationship between a proving goal orientation and performance diminished from a positive to a nonsignificant level, and the relationship between an avoiding goal orientation and performance remained negative. Data analysis also indicated that the relationships between the 3 goal orientation dimensions and the performance event were differentially mediated by goal setting, self-efficacy, and effort.

Performance appraisal information is often used for employee feedback and development. Research has found that assessments that are global (i.e., based on broad aspects of performance) and comparative (i.e., explicit interratee comparisons) may be most accurate in terms of Cronbach's (1955) differential accuracy, a type of accuracy that is directly relevant to the provision of feedback. Unfortunately, a global-comparative assessment may not give recipients the most useful diagnostic feedback. In this experiment, an innovative rater-priming manipulation was developed and tested on a sample of 109 participants. The priming manipulation had the effect of improving differential accuracy and providing diagnostic feedback. A 2nd independent variable involving 2 different Behavioral Observation Scale formats also was investigated. Explanations of findings, limitations of this experiment, directions for future research, and implications for performance appraisal practice are discussed.

This study quantified the effects of 5 factors postulated to influence performance ratings: the ratee's general level of performance, the ratee's performance on a specific dimension, the rater's idiosyncratic rating tendencies, the rater's organizational perspective, and random measurement error. Two large data sets, consisting of managers (n = 2,350 and n = 2,142) who received developmental ratings on 3 performance dimensions from 7 raters (2 bosses, 2 peers, 2 subordinates, and self) were used. Results indicated that idiosyncratic rater effects (62% and 53%) accounted for over half of the rating variance in both data sets. The combined effects of general and dimensional ratee performance (21% and 25%) were less than half the size of the idiosyncratic rater effects. Small perspective-related effects were found in boss and subordinate ratings but not in peer ratings. Average random error effects in the 2 data sets were 11% and 18%.

Because appraisal-related interactions between supervisors and employees may influence more than task performance, the authors considered the potential effects of social and interpersonal processes in performance appraisal on contextual performance. They hypothesized that performance appraisal process and system facets were associated with employees' contextual performance as well as with their perceptions of appraisal accuracy. After controlling relevant variables, they found that appraisal process facets explained variance in contextual performance and perceived accuracy beyond that accounted for by the system facets. However, when the order of entry for the process and system variable sets was reversed, only for perceived appraisal accuracy, as hypothesized, did the system facets account for variance beyond that explained by the appraisal process facets.

Evidence from 2 samples of Air Force mechanics supported the hypothesis that contextual performance affects employees' career advancement and rewards over time. Results of hierarchical regressions controlling for experience showed task performance and contextual performance each predicted systemic rewards. Each facet explained separate variance in promotability ratings over 2 years. In both samples, contextual performance explained separate variance in informal rewards but task performance did not. Task performance explained incremental variance in career advancement 1 year later but contextual performance did not. Analyses using correlations corrected for unreliability suggest these results cannot be attributed to measurement error. Contextual performance still explained separate variance in informal rewards, and task performance explained distinct variance in career advancement a year later.

Recent theoretical developments have enabled the empirical study of trust for specific referents in organizations. The authors conducted a 14-month field study of employee trust for top management. A 9-month quasi-experiment found that the implementation of a more acceptable performance appraisal system increased trust for top management. The 3 proposed factors of trustworthiness (ability, benevolence, and integrity) mediated the relationship between perceptions of the appraisal system and trust.

We investigated the effects of purpose of appraisal and individual differences in stereotypes of women on the evaluations of male and female ratees in two studies. In Study 1, 52 female and 51 male undergraduate students with traditional or nontraditional stereotypes of women evaluated written vignettes of either male or female ratees. Raters were informed that their evaluations would be used for scale development (experimental purposes) or for merit pay and promotion decisions (administrative decisions). Analyses revealed that female ratees were evaluated less accurately by raters with traditional stereotypes of women than by raters with nontraditional stereotypes of women. Such differences occurred, however, only when appraisals were made for administrative decisions. In Study 2, 810 raters with traditional or nontraditional stereotypes of women evaluated the teaching effectiveness of eight male and six female professors. Analyses indicated that women were evaluated more favorably by raters with nontraditional stereotypes of women then by raters with traditional stereotypes of women. Implications of the findings for sex differences in appraisal, future research, and organizational effectiveness are discussed. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

A laboratory study of performance appraisal delay and distortion (a) investigated the effects of rater gender, performance level, and feedback requirement, and (b) defined feedback delay as the separate components of appraisal delay and feedback session scheduling delay. Subjects were 64 university business students who had at least 6 months of supervisory experience. Female raters delayed longer when conducting performance appraisals and when scheduling feedback sessions with subordinates, and more positively distorted ratings than did male raters. Moderately low performers were evaluated and scheduled for feedback sessions later, and were evaluated with more positive distortion then were moderately high performers. When required to provide feedback, raters delayed longer appraising performance and distorted ratings more positively. Significant interactions suggest that when feedback is required, female raters may delay appraisals, delay scheduling feedback sessions, and more positively distort their ratings of performance, particularly when rating low performers. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

The present research examined the effects of knowledge of a ratee's prior performance on evaluations of present performance. In three separate studies, subjects received knowledge of either good or poor prior performances and then viewed and rated a videotape depicting average performance. In Study 1, some subjects received knowledge of the ratee's prior performance by directly viewing videotapes of good or poor ratee behavior, whereas others only reviewed written performance ratings completed by those subjects who had actually viewed the ratee. A contrast effect occurred when knowledge of prior performance was obtained by observing ratee behavior, but an assimilation effect occurred when knowledge of prior performance was obtained by reviewing performance ratings. In study 2, subjects viewed videotapes of good or poor performances prior to viewing an average performance by the same ratee. However, the separate ratee performances were observed over a more realistic time interval than that used in Study 1 (3 weeks vs. 1 h). No significant contrast effects were observed. In Study 3, subjects reviewed written ratings of prior performances before viewing an average videotape. Subjects who reviewed extremely good (or poor) prior performance ratings provided more extreme ratings of the 'average' performance than did subjects who reviewed less extreme ratings. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

We examined a number of gaps and weaknesses in the rater error-accuracy literature and drew some conclusions about the usefulness of this line of inquiry, given the current nature of the measures and the current state of our theories. We argued that in prior work in this area, particularly with respect to the question of halo error, the implication of alternative measures of halo or accuracy has not been considered in sufficient detail. We demonstrate that, conceptually, variance and correlational forms of halo and accuracy may yield identical, corresponding, or widely divergent results. Empirical evidence is then used to illustrate how results that appear counterintuitive, as have been reported in other studies, can often be explained as a necessary outcome, given the construction of the halo and accuracy measures. Finally, we offer a direct test of the notion that halo can be controlled statistically. We find that even when halo has been shown to have the expected effect on accuracy, statistically controlling for this influence does not improve rating validity. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

An analysis of 1,474 job positions previously described in studies performed by other researchers indicates that mean job experience is between two and three years, that job experience varies substantially from job to job, and that job experience can have a significant effect on job knowledge, which in turn affects supervisory performance ratings. Job experience is also demonstrated to have a substantial, though indirect, effect on work sample performance. This analysis suggests that supervisory ratings are more often based on assessments of workers' job knowledge than on supervisors' sampling of work performed.

Often, performance appraisals are made on the basis of information remembered from previous encounters. How does information originally encountered for one decision appear when used for a later one? Videotaped episodes involving carpenters at work were shown to subjects who later had to use their memory of the tapes to develop employee evaluations. The experiment showed that the pattern of information presentation and nature of previous decisions can affect later views of the information and the ratings that result.

Recent models of performance evaluation view the process as an informational interchange, with two essential inputs: the feedback message, and the source of the feedback. However, there may be differences in attitudes between participants in an evaluation that could influence the effects of feedback. An experiment found that varying and discrepant explanations between source and recipient, as well as the perceived credibility of the source, could affect initial reactions to evaluation feedback.

How do people react to formal performance evaluation feedback? How do people react to being told they are 'satisfactory'? Employees of two federal agencies were tested over 30 months about this question. The study found that employees who were judged satisfactory showed a drop in organizational commitment. This suggests potentially negative effects of comparative employee evaluation schemes. Moreover, employees who received higher ratings from formalized personnel review systems evidenced no change in commitment to the organization. The research also discusses the accuracy of self-administered appraisal rating systems.

An analysis of 40 samples is made to determine correlation between age and job performance. The samples were split into three groups, based upon how they were evaluated: supervisory ratings, peer ratings and individual productivity. On productivity ratings, performance improved with age, yet supervisory ratings declined slightly with age. There were other unexplained variances among the evaluation methods. The study also found correlations between professional and nonprofessional jobs. Performance ratings were most positive for professionals.

A study of 62 students enrolled in an organizational behavior class, conducted as a two-by-two factorial experiment, indicates that self-appraisals are more lenient when conducted for grading purposes as opposed to research purposes, and that self-appraisals conducted with foreknowledge of later validation methods are less lenient than those conducted with low expectation of subsequent validation processes.