A LONGITUDINAL EXAMINATION OF RATER AND RATEE EFFECTS IN PERFORMANCE RATINGS

The consistency and loci of leniency, halo, and range restriction effects in performance ratings were investigated in a longitudinal study. Ratings were provided by approximately 90 supervisors in a metropolitan police department, who rated approximately 350 police‐rank subordinates on five occasions over a three and one‐half year period. Rating effects were computed separately as rater‐and ratee‐based statistics, and intercorrelated among the five rating periods. The nature of the data set made it possible to hold either raters or ratees constant for each analysis, thus permitting inferences regarding the sources of reliable variance in effects as due to raters or ratees. It was concluded that reliable variance in mean ratings is partly attributable to ratees, but mainly introduced by raters. Reliable halo variance is attributable to raters, and range restriction is a product of stable group performance variability within intact ratee groups. Implications of these results for future rating process research are discussed.