Models of Job Performance Ratings: An Examination of Ratee Race, Ratee Gender, and Rater Level Effects
Publication Type
Journal Article
Publication Date
1-1996
Abstract
This research extends the work of Hunter (1983) and Borman, White, Pulakos, and Oppler (1991) on models of supervisory performance ratings. A rating model that included measures of cognitive ability, practical intelligence, job knowledge, task proficiency, achievement orientation, and performance ratings was proposed and evaluated. A major purpose of this research was to evaluate the fit of the proposed model for different race and gender subgroups as well as for peer and supervisor raters. The models were tested on a sample of 456 professionals in a large government agency. Overall, results of the LISREL analyses showed no statistically significant differences in the fit of the model for the different race or gender subgroups examined. Significant differences in the fit of the model and variance accounted for in the peer versus supervisor groups were observed.
Keywords
supervisors, performance appraisals
Discipline
Industrial and Organizational Psychology
Research Areas
Psychology
Publication
Human Performance
Volume
9
Issue
2
First Page
103
Last Page
119
ISSN
0895-9285
Identifier
10.1207/s15327043hup0902_1
Publisher
Taylor and Francis
Citation
PULAKOS, Elaine, SCHMITT, Neal, & CHAN, David.(1996). Models of Job Performance Ratings: An Examination of Ratee Race, Ratee Gender, and Rater Level Effects. Human Performance, 9(2), 103-119.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/234
Additional URL
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup0902_1