Related Experiment Videos
Are performance appraisal ratings from different rating sources comparable?
1Department of Psychology, Auburn University, Alabama 36849-5214, USA. facteauj@mail.auburn.edu
The Journal of Applied Psychology
|June 8, 2001
Summary
This study confirms a multisource performance appraisal tool is reliable across self, peer, supervisor, and subordinate raters. Findings support direct comparison of ratings from different sources, enhancing performance appraisal research and practice.
Area of Science:
- Organizational Psychology
- Psychometrics
Background:
- Multisource performance appraisals offer comprehensive employee evaluations.
- Ensuring measurement invariance across rater groups is crucial for valid comparisons.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess the measurement invariance of a multisource performance appraisal instrument.
- To determine if the instrument functions consistently across self, peer, supervisor, and subordinate raters.
Main Methods:
- Multiple-groups confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
- Item response theory (IRT) techniques were employed to test for invariance.
Main Results:
- CFA results indicated strong measurement invariance across all rater groups.
- IRT analysis revealed minimal, trivial differential item functioning for only 3 items.
Conclusions:
- The performance appraisal instrument demonstrates invariance across diverse rater sources.
- Results validate the direct comparison of ratings from different perspectives.
- Findings inform the interpretation of between-source rating discrepancies in research and practice.