Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Rating Source (rating + source)
Selected AbstractsDISENTANGLING THE MEANING OF MULTISOURCE PERFORMANCE RATING SOURCE AND DIMENSION FACTORSPERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 4 2009BRIAN J. HOFFMAN We extend multisource performance rating (MSPR) construct validity research by examining the pattern of relationships between factor analytically derived MSPR rating source and performance dimension factors and externally measured constructs (e.g., assessment center dimensions, personality constructs, and intelligence). The pattern of relationships among MSPR dimensions and external constructs provides modest construct validity evidence for the MSPR dimensions. In addition, MSPR source factors were differentially correlated with externally measured constructs, suggesting that MSPR source effects represent substantively meaningful source specific variance, as opposed to bias. These findings are discussed in the context of managerial skill diagnosis and the efficacy of collecting performance data from multiple sources. [source] Three method factors explaining the low correlations between assessment center dimension ratings and scores on personality inventories,EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY, Issue 2 2004Nanja J. Kolk In general, correlations between assessment centre (AC) ratings and personality inventories are low. In this paper, we examine three method factors that may be responsible for these low correlations: differences in (i) rating source (other versus self), (ii) rating domain (general versus specific), and (iii) rating format (multi- versus single item). This study tests whether these three factors diminish correlations between AC exercise ratings and external indicators of similar dimensions. Ratings of personality and performance were combined in an analytical framework following a 2,×,2,×,2 (source, domain, format) completely crossed, within subjects design. Results showed partial support for the influence of each of the three method factors. Implications for future research are discussed. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] DISENTANGLING THE MEANING OF MULTISOURCE PERFORMANCE RATING SOURCE AND DIMENSION FACTORSPERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 4 2009BRIAN J. HOFFMAN We extend multisource performance rating (MSPR) construct validity research by examining the pattern of relationships between factor analytically derived MSPR rating source and performance dimension factors and externally measured constructs (e.g., assessment center dimensions, personality constructs, and intelligence). The pattern of relationships among MSPR dimensions and external constructs provides modest construct validity evidence for the MSPR dimensions. In addition, MSPR source factors were differentially correlated with externally measured constructs, suggesting that MSPR source effects represent substantively meaningful source specific variance, as opposed to bias. These findings are discussed in the context of managerial skill diagnosis and the efficacy of collecting performance data from multiple sources. [source] Anabolic steroid users' attitudes towards physiciansADDICTION, Issue 9 2004Harrison G. Pope ABSTRACT Aims To assess anabolic-androgenic steroid (AAS) users' trust in the knowledge and advice of physicians. Design Interviews of AAS users and non-users. Setting Research offices. Participants Eighty weight-lifters (43 AAS users, 37 non-users) recruited by advertisement in Massachusetts and Florida, USA. Measurements Personal interviews and questionnaire responses, including subjects' ratings of physicians' knowledge regarding various health- and drug-related topics. AAS users also rated their level of trust in various sources of information about AAS. Findings Both groups of subjects gave physicians high ratings on knowledge about general health, cigarette smoking, alcohol, and conventional illicit drugs, but gave physicians markedly and significantly lower ratings on knowledge about AAS. When rating sources of information on AAS, users scored physicians as no more reliable than their friends, Internet sites, or the person(s) who sold them the steroids. Forty percent of users trusted information on AAS from their drug dealers at least as much as information from any physician that they had seen, and 56% had never revealed their AAS use to any physician. Conclusion AAS users show little trust in physicians' knowledge about AAS, and often do not disclose their AAS use to physicians. These attitudes compromise physicians' ability to educate or treat AAS users. Physicians can respond to these problems by learning more about AAS and by maintaining a high index of suspicion when evaluating athletic male patients. [source] What Is Important on the Job?JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 1 2010Differences Across Gender, Job Level, Perspective The importance ratings of job competency dimensions on a 360-degree feedback instrument were examined. We hypothesized that men (incumbents and bosses) would rate agentic behaviors higher in importance than would women, and that women (incumbents and bosses) would rate communal behaviors higher in importance than would men. Differences were found for men and women across rating sources and across job level (organizational position). The present findings suggest that men and women incumbents view different factors as important for their jobs and that people in higher level jobs place more importance on agentic behaviors than do those in lower level positions, and people in lower level jobs place more importance on communal behaviors than do those in higher level positions. [source] | ||||||||||