Construct validity of multi-source performance ratings: An examination of the relationship of self-, supervisor-, and peer-ratings with cognitive and personality measures

E.A.J. van Hooft, H. van der Flier, M.R. Minne

    Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    153 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Although more and more organizations prefer using multi-source performance ratings or 360° feedback over traditional performance appraisals, researchers have been rather skeptical regarding the reliability and validity of such ratings. The present study examined the validity of self-, supervisor-, and peer-ratings of 195 employees in a Dutch public organization, using scores on an In-Basket exercise, an intelligence test, and a personality questionnaire as external criterion measures. Interrater agreement ranged from .28 to .38. Variance in the ratings was explained by both method and content factors. Support for the external construct validity was rather weak. Supervisor-ratings were not found to be superior to self- and peer-ratings in predicting the scores on the external measures. © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)67-81
    JournalInternational Journal of Selection and Assessment
    Volume14
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2006

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Construct validity of multi-source performance ratings: An examination of the relationship of self-, supervisor-, and peer-ratings with cognitive and personality measures'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this