Peer Ratings: The impact of purpose on rating quality and user acceptance

Jiing Lih Farh, Albert A. Cannella, Arthur G. Bedeian

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

56 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Using a quasi-experimental design, the effects of purpose (evaluative vs. developmental) on both peer-rating quality and user acceptance were examined. Subjects were 65 undergraduates divided into 11 project groups. Six groups conducted peer ratings for evaluative (i.e., grading) purposes, whereas the remaining 5 did so for the purpose of providing developmental feedback. Peer ratings conducted for evaluative purposes tended to contain greater halo and to be more lenient, less differentiating, less reliable, and less valid than those performed for developmental purposes. User acceptance as measured by recommendation for future use was more favorable under the developmental than the evaluative conditions. These results suggest that the quality of peer ratings and user acceptance are highly susceptible to the influence of rating contexts and that peer ratings are more useful for developmental than for evaluative purposes. Implications of these results for future peer-appraisal practices and research are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)367-386
Number of pages20
JournalGroup and Organization Management
Volume16
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 1991
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Peer Group
Research Design
Research
User acceptance
Rating
Peers
Acceptance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
  • Applied Psychology
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Peer Ratings : The impact of purpose on rating quality and user acceptance. / Farh, Jiing Lih; Cannella, Albert A.; Bedeian, Arthur G.

In: Group and Organization Management, Vol. 16, No. 4, 1991, p. 367-386.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Farh, Jiing Lih ; Cannella, Albert A. ; Bedeian, Arthur G. / Peer Ratings : The impact of purpose on rating quality and user acceptance. In: Group and Organization Management. 1991 ; Vol. 16, No. 4. pp. 367-386.
@article{7ad7b954bc92425f9518939621ea0d90,
title = "Peer Ratings: The impact of purpose on rating quality and user acceptance",
abstract = "Using a quasi-experimental design, the effects of purpose (evaluative vs. developmental) on both peer-rating quality and user acceptance were examined. Subjects were 65 undergraduates divided into 11 project groups. Six groups conducted peer ratings for evaluative (i.e., grading) purposes, whereas the remaining 5 did so for the purpose of providing developmental feedback. Peer ratings conducted for evaluative purposes tended to contain greater halo and to be more lenient, less differentiating, less reliable, and less valid than those performed for developmental purposes. User acceptance as measured by recommendation for future use was more favorable under the developmental than the evaluative conditions. These results suggest that the quality of peer ratings and user acceptance are highly susceptible to the influence of rating contexts and that peer ratings are more useful for developmental than for evaluative purposes. Implications of these results for future peer-appraisal practices and research are discussed.",
author = "Farh, {Jiing Lih} and Cannella, {Albert A.} and Bedeian, {Arthur G.}",
year = "1991",
doi = "10.1177/105960119101600403",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "367--386",
journal = "Group and Organization Management",
issn = "1059-6011",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Peer Ratings

T2 - The impact of purpose on rating quality and user acceptance

AU - Farh, Jiing Lih

AU - Cannella, Albert A.

AU - Bedeian, Arthur G.

PY - 1991

Y1 - 1991

N2 - Using a quasi-experimental design, the effects of purpose (evaluative vs. developmental) on both peer-rating quality and user acceptance were examined. Subjects were 65 undergraduates divided into 11 project groups. Six groups conducted peer ratings for evaluative (i.e., grading) purposes, whereas the remaining 5 did so for the purpose of providing developmental feedback. Peer ratings conducted for evaluative purposes tended to contain greater halo and to be more lenient, less differentiating, less reliable, and less valid than those performed for developmental purposes. User acceptance as measured by recommendation for future use was more favorable under the developmental than the evaluative conditions. These results suggest that the quality of peer ratings and user acceptance are highly susceptible to the influence of rating contexts and that peer ratings are more useful for developmental than for evaluative purposes. Implications of these results for future peer-appraisal practices and research are discussed.

AB - Using a quasi-experimental design, the effects of purpose (evaluative vs. developmental) on both peer-rating quality and user acceptance were examined. Subjects were 65 undergraduates divided into 11 project groups. Six groups conducted peer ratings for evaluative (i.e., grading) purposes, whereas the remaining 5 did so for the purpose of providing developmental feedback. Peer ratings conducted for evaluative purposes tended to contain greater halo and to be more lenient, less differentiating, less reliable, and less valid than those performed for developmental purposes. User acceptance as measured by recommendation for future use was more favorable under the developmental than the evaluative conditions. These results suggest that the quality of peer ratings and user acceptance are highly susceptible to the influence of rating contexts and that peer ratings are more useful for developmental than for evaluative purposes. Implications of these results for future peer-appraisal practices and research are discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84973784151&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84973784151&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/105960119101600403

DO - 10.1177/105960119101600403

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84973784151

VL - 16

SP - 367

EP - 386

JO - Group and Organization Management

JF - Group and Organization Management

SN - 1059-6011

IS - 4

ER -