Behaviorally anchored rating scales vs. summated rating scales: Psychometric properties and susceptibility to rating bias

Angelo J. Kinicki, Brendan D. Bannister, Peter Hom, Angelo S. Denisi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Scopus citations

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)535-549
Number of pages15
JournalEducational and Psychological Measurement
Volume45
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1985

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Applied Psychology
  • Applied Mathematics
  • Education

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Behaviorally anchored rating scales vs. summated rating scales: Psychometric properties and susceptibility to rating bias'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this