Peer and Subordinate Performance Appraisal Measurement Equivalence
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response theory (IRT) were applied to determine the extent to which peer and subordinate ratings of managers on a team-building skill dimension are directly comparable. Simultaneous CFA in the 2 groups of raters suggested that the 2 sets of ratings are cal...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of applied psychology 1998-10, Vol.83 (5), p.693-702 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 702 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 693 |
| container_title | Journal of applied psychology |
| container_volume | 83 |
| creator | Maurer, Todd J Raju, Nambury S Collins, William C |
| description | Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response theory (IRT) were applied to determine the extent to which peer and subordinate ratings of managers on a team-building skill dimension are directly comparable. Simultaneous CFA in the 2 groups of raters suggested that the 2 sets of ratings are calibrated equivalently, and polytomous IRT methods led to similar conclusions. The results were replicated in independent samples of raters. These are encouraging results for practitioners or researchers who compare ratings from these 2 groups. In addition to presenting the empirical findings from the study and illustrating how CFA and IRT methods of testing measurement equivalence compare, the article shows the unique types of information about performance appraisals that IRT and CFA can provide to researchers and practitioners, with implications for future research. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1037/0021-9010.83.5.693 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_57706392</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>38650590</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a447t-557298da9f063b87655e8f8e5122c4c4c76cdc2faa1dbd929a09a99e274244723</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0U1r3DAQBmBRGug26R_IybQlN280kvV13C5pG0hIIM1ZzMpjcPDaXskO7L-PloQECm3QQQieeUHzMnYKfAlcmnPOBZSO56eVS7XUTn5gC3DSlWBV9ZEtXsEn9jmlB86hko4v2I9bolhgXxd382aIddvjRMUtxWaIW-wDFatxjNgm7IprwjRH2lI_FRe7uX3EjrI4YUcNdom-vNzH7P7nxZ_17_Lq5tflenVVYlWZqVTKCGdrdA3XcmONVopsY0mBEKHKx-hQB9EgQr2pnXDIHTpHwlQiBwh5zM6ec8c47GZKk9-2KVDXYU_DnLwyJie796G0WnHleIZf_4IPwxz7_Amv834kcAX_QwKkq8Bok9G3fyHQsgLQ2hyUeFYhDilFavwY2y3GvQfuDz36Q03-UJO30iufe8xD31-iMQXsmphbadPrpMjbAcvfGI7ox7QPGKc2dJQ8jt1b2hND66YS</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>614331051</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Peer and Subordinate Performance Appraisal Measurement Equivalence</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><creator>Maurer, Todd J ; Raju, Nambury S ; Collins, William C</creator><creatorcontrib>Maurer, Todd J ; Raju, Nambury S ; Collins, William C</creatorcontrib><description>Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response theory (IRT) were applied to determine the extent to which peer and subordinate ratings of managers on a team-building skill dimension are directly comparable. Simultaneous CFA in the 2 groups of raters suggested that the 2 sets of ratings are calibrated equivalently, and polytomous IRT methods led to similar conclusions. The results were replicated in independent samples of raters. These are encouraging results for practitioners or researchers who compare ratings from these 2 groups. In addition to presenting the empirical findings from the study and illustrating how CFA and IRT methods of testing measurement equivalence compare, the article shows the unique types of information about performance appraisals that IRT and CFA can provide to researchers and practitioners, with implications for future research.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-9010</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-1854</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.83.5.693</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JAPGBP</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington, DC: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Comparison ; Employee Skills ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Human ; Individual performance ; Management Personnel ; Managers ; Measurement ; Occupational psychology ; Peer Evaluation ; Peer groups ; Peers ; Performance appraisal ; Personnel Evaluation ; Professional Competence ; Psychology ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Psychometrics ; Rating Scales ; Ratings & rankings ; Subordinates ; Supervisor Employee Interaction ; Team building ; Teams ; Teamwork ; U.S.A</subject><ispartof>Journal of applied psychology, 1998-10, Vol.83 (5), p.693-702</ispartof><rights>1998 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>1998 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Oct 1998</rights><rights>1998, American Psychological Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a447t-557298da9f063b87655e8f8e5122c4c4c76cdc2faa1dbd929a09a99e274244723</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27846,27901,27902,30976,30977</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=2424180$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Maurer, Todd J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raju, Nambury S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Collins, William C</creatorcontrib><title>Peer and Subordinate Performance Appraisal Measurement Equivalence</title><title>Journal of applied psychology</title><description>Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response theory (IRT) were applied to determine the extent to which peer and subordinate ratings of managers on a team-building skill dimension are directly comparable. Simultaneous CFA in the 2 groups of raters suggested that the 2 sets of ratings are calibrated equivalently, and polytomous IRT methods led to similar conclusions. The results were replicated in independent samples of raters. These are encouraging results for practitioners or researchers who compare ratings from these 2 groups. In addition to presenting the empirical findings from the study and illustrating how CFA and IRT methods of testing measurement equivalence compare, the article shows the unique types of information about performance appraisals that IRT and CFA can provide to researchers and practitioners, with implications for future research.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Comparison</subject><subject>Employee Skills</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Individual performance</subject><subject>Management Personnel</subject><subject>Managers</subject><subject>Measurement</subject><subject>Occupational psychology</subject><subject>Peer Evaluation</subject><subject>Peer groups</subject><subject>Peers</subject><subject>Performance appraisal</subject><subject>Personnel Evaluation</subject><subject>Professional Competence</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Rating Scales</subject><subject>Ratings & rankings</subject><subject>Subordinates</subject><subject>Supervisor Employee Interaction</subject><subject>Team building</subject><subject>Teams</subject><subject>Teamwork</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><issn>0021-9010</issn><issn>1939-1854</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0U1r3DAQBmBRGug26R_IybQlN280kvV13C5pG0hIIM1ZzMpjcPDaXskO7L-PloQECm3QQQieeUHzMnYKfAlcmnPOBZSO56eVS7XUTn5gC3DSlWBV9ZEtXsEn9jmlB86hko4v2I9bolhgXxd382aIddvjRMUtxWaIW-wDFatxjNgm7IprwjRH2lI_FRe7uX3EjrI4YUcNdom-vNzH7P7nxZ_17_Lq5tflenVVYlWZqVTKCGdrdA3XcmONVopsY0mBEKHKx-hQB9EgQr2pnXDIHTpHwlQiBwh5zM6ec8c47GZKk9-2KVDXYU_DnLwyJie796G0WnHleIZf_4IPwxz7_Amv834kcAX_QwKkq8Bok9G3fyHQsgLQ2hyUeFYhDilFavwY2y3GvQfuDz36Q03-UJO30iufe8xD31-iMQXsmphbadPrpMjbAcvfGI7ox7QPGKc2dJQ8jt1b2hND66YS</recordid><startdate>19981001</startdate><enddate>19981001</enddate><creator>Maurer, Todd J</creator><creator>Raju, Nambury S</creator><creator>Collins, William C</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><general>American Psychological Association, etc</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>EOLOZ</scope><scope>FKUCP</scope><scope>IOIBA</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19981001</creationdate><title>Peer and Subordinate Performance Appraisal Measurement Equivalence</title><author>Maurer, Todd J ; Raju, Nambury S ; Collins, William C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a447t-557298da9f063b87655e8f8e5122c4c4c76cdc2faa1dbd929a09a99e274244723</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Comparison</topic><topic>Employee Skills</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Individual performance</topic><topic>Management Personnel</topic><topic>Managers</topic><topic>Measurement</topic><topic>Occupational psychology</topic><topic>Peer Evaluation</topic><topic>Peer groups</topic><topic>Peers</topic><topic>Performance appraisal</topic><topic>Personnel Evaluation</topic><topic>Professional Competence</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Rating Scales</topic><topic>Ratings & rankings</topic><topic>Subordinates</topic><topic>Supervisor Employee Interaction</topic><topic>Team building</topic><topic>Teams</topic><topic>Teamwork</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Maurer, Todd J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raju, Nambury S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Collins, William C</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 01</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 04</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 29</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><jtitle>Journal of applied psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Maurer, Todd J</au><au>Raju, Nambury S</au><au>Collins, William C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Peer and Subordinate Performance Appraisal Measurement Equivalence</atitle><jtitle>Journal of applied psychology</jtitle><date>1998-10-01</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>83</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>693</spage><epage>702</epage><pages>693-702</pages><issn>0021-9010</issn><eissn>1939-1854</eissn><coden>JAPGBP</coden><abstract>Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response theory (IRT) were applied to determine the extent to which peer and subordinate ratings of managers on a team-building skill dimension are directly comparable. Simultaneous CFA in the 2 groups of raters suggested that the 2 sets of ratings are calibrated equivalently, and polytomous IRT methods led to similar conclusions. The results were replicated in independent samples of raters. These are encouraging results for practitioners or researchers who compare ratings from these 2 groups. In addition to presenting the empirical findings from the study and illustrating how CFA and IRT methods of testing measurement equivalence compare, the article shows the unique types of information about performance appraisals that IRT and CFA can provide to researchers and practitioners, with implications for future research.</abstract><cop>Washington, DC</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><doi>10.1037/0021-9010.83.5.693</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0021-9010 |
| ispartof | Journal of applied psychology, 1998-10, Vol.83 (5), p.693-702 |
| issn | 0021-9010 1939-1854 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_57706392 |
| source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); Business Source Complete; EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES; Periodicals Index Online |
| subjects | Biological and medical sciences Comparison Employee Skills Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Human Individual performance Management Personnel Managers Measurement Occupational psychology Peer Evaluation Peer groups Peers Performance appraisal Personnel Evaluation Professional Competence Psychology Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Psychometrics Rating Scales Ratings & rankings Subordinates Supervisor Employee Interaction Team building Teams Teamwork U.S.A |
| title | Peer and Subordinate Performance Appraisal Measurement Equivalence |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T00%3A05%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Peer%20and%20Subordinate%20Performance%20Appraisal%20Measurement%20Equivalence&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20applied%20psychology&rft.au=Maurer,%20Todd%20J&rft.date=1998-10-01&rft.volume=83&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=693&rft.epage=702&rft.pages=693-702&rft.issn=0021-9010&rft.eissn=1939-1854&rft.coden=JAPGBP&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/0021-9010.83.5.693&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E38650590%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=614331051&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |