TY - JOUR
T1 - Behaviorally anchored rating scales vs. summated rating scales
T2 - Psychometric properties and susceptibility to rating bias
AU - Kinicki, Angelo J.
AU - Bannister, Brendan D.
AU - Hom, Peter
AU - Denisi, Angelo S.
PY - 1985/9
Y1 - 1985/9
N2 - Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales developed according to Bernardin, LaShells, Smith, and Alvarez's (1976) optimal procedure was compared with a carefully constructed summated rating scale. Using both scales, 727 undergraduates rated 32 instructors. Psychometric comparisons indicated that BARS had less halo error, more leniency error, and lower interrater reliablity than the alternative format. The two formats did not differ in ratee discrimination and susceptibility to rating bias due to rater characteristics. Finally, the formats contained convergent and discriminant validity.
AB - Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales developed according to Bernardin, LaShells, Smith, and Alvarez's (1976) optimal procedure was compared with a carefully constructed summated rating scale. Using both scales, 727 undergraduates rated 32 instructors. Psychometric comparisons indicated that BARS had less halo error, more leniency error, and lower interrater reliablity than the alternative format. The two formats did not differ in ratee discrimination and susceptibility to rating bias due to rater characteristics. Finally, the formats contained convergent and discriminant validity.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84973816385&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84973816385&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/001316448504500310
DO - 10.1177/001316448504500310
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84973816385
SN - 0013-1644
VL - 45
SP - 535
EP - 549
JO - Educational and Psychological Measurement
JF - Educational and Psychological Measurement
IS - 3
ER -