Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,080

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A META‐ANALYSIS OF SELF‐SUPERVISOR, SELF‐PEER, AND PEER‐SUPERVISOR RATINGS

HARRIS, MICHAEL M., SCHAUBROECK, JOHN·1988·Personnel Psychology
DOI 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb00631.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Reviews of self–supervisor, self–peer, and peer–supervisor ratings have generally concluded that there is at best a modest correlation between different rating sources. Nevertheless, there has been much inconsistency across studies. Accordingly, a meta‐analysis was conducted. The results indicated a relatively high correlation between peer and supervisor ratings (ρ= .62) but only a moderate correlation between self‐supervisor (ρ= .35) and self‐peer ratings (ρ= .36). While rating format (dimensional versus global) and rating scale (trait versus behavioral) had little impact as moderators, job type (managerial/professional versus blue‐collar/service) did seem to moderate self‐peer and self‐supervisor ratings.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb00631.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
HARRIS, M. M., & SCHAUBROECK, J.
Venue
Personnel Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1988-03
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
43-62
ISSN
  • 0031-5826 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-6570
DOI
10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb00631.x
OpenAlex
W2152983331
Cited by
1,080
References
3
FWCI
13.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.