No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Same as it ever was: A clarification on the sources of predictable variance in job performance ratings
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 August 2024
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
![Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'](https://static.cambridge.org/content/id/urn%3Acambridge.org%3Aid%3Aarticle%3AS175494262400021X/resource/name/firstPage-pdf-S175494262400021Xa.jpg)
- Type
- Commentaries
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology
References
Foster, J., Steel, P., Harms, P., O’Neill, T., & Wood, D. (2024). Selection tests work better than we think they do, and have for years. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 17.Google Scholar
Hoffman, B. J., & Woehr, D. J. (2009). Disentangling the meaning of multisource performance rating source and dimension factors. Personnel Psychology, 62(4), 735–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, D. J., Michaelides, G., Dewberry, C., Schwencke, B., & Toms, S. (2020). The implications of unconfounding multisource performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(3), 312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lance, C. E., Hoffman, B. J., Gentry, W. A., & Baranik, L. E. (2008). Rater source factors represent important subcomponents of the criterion construct space, not rater bias. Human Resource Management Review, 18(4), 223–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Speer, A. B., Delacruz, A. Y., Wegmeyer, L. J., & Perrotta, J. (2023). Meta-analytical estimates of interrater reliability for direct supervisor performance ratings: Optimism under optimal measurement designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 109(3), 456–467. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001146
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhou, Y., Shen, W., Beatty, A. S., & Sackett, P. R. (2024). An updated meta-analysis of the interrater reliability of supervisory performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 109, 949–970. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001174
CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed