Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 633

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

ON THE INTERCHANGEABILITY OF OBJECTIVE AND SUBJECTIVE MEASURES OF EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE: A META‐ANALYSIS

BOMMER, WILLIAM H., JOHNSON, JONATHAN L., RICH, GREGORY A., PODSAKOFF, PHILIP M., MACKENZIE, SCOTT B.·1995·Personnel Psychology
DOI 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01772.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A meta‐analysis of studies containing both objective and subjective ratings of employee performance resulted in a corrected mean correlation of .389. This value, although significantly greater than zero, indicates that objective and subjective performance measures should not be used interchangeably. Moreover, in no moderator subgroup examined did the correlation suggest convergent validity. After discussing issues related to resolving the previous anomalies of primary and meta‐analytic results, a secondary analysis suggested that objective and subjective measures of the same construct at the same level may be used inter‐changeably. The secondary analysis, however, was based on a very limited sample. Future research should address the appropriate dimensionality of employee performance.

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.1744-6570.1995.tb01772.x

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 69

  1. 10.1177/105960118200700410 · DOI
  2. 10.1037/h0035413 · DOI
  3. 10.1007/BF01013759 · doi:10.1007/bf01013759
  4. Avila RA, 1988, Unraveling criteria for assessing the performance of salespeople: A causal analysis, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 8, 45
  5. 10.1037/h0020587 · doi:10.1037/h0020587
  6. 10.1037/0021-9010.78.5.715 · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.5.715 · Paper page
  7. 10.1037/h0037125 · DOI
  8. 10.1016/0148-2963(82)90039-X · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1993.tb00522.x · DOI
  10. Campbell JP, 1990, Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 687
  11. 10.1037/h0023418 · doi:10.1037/h0023418
  12. Cotham JC, 1969, Using personal history information in retail salesman selection, Journal of Retailing, 45, 31
  13. 10.2307/3151659 · doi:10.2307/3151659
  14. Day NE, 1993, Performance in salespeople–The impact of age, Journal of Managerial Issues, 2, 254
  15. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1990.tb00680.x · DOI
  16. 10.5465/AME.1995.9503133473 · DOI
  17. 10.1002/job.4030140304 · DOI
  18. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb00636.x · DOI
  19. 10.1037/0021-9010.66.2.127 · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.66.2.127 · Paper page
  20. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1977.tb02319.x · DOI
  21. 10.1037/0021-9010.76.5.690 · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.76.5.690 · Paper page
  22. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1951.tb00977.x · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1951.tb00977.x
  23. Hartigan JA, 1989, Fairness in employment testing: Validity generalization, minoriy issues, and the General Aptitude Test Battery
  24. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1986.tb00596.x · DOI
  25. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb02405.x · DOI
  26. 10.2307/256279 · DOI
  27. 10.1037/0021-9010.72.2.204 · DOI
  28. 10.1016/0749-5978(87)90010-0 · DOI
  29. Hunter JE, 1990, Methods of meta‐analysis
  30. Hunter JE, 1990, Individual differences in output variability as a function of job complexity, Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 28, 10.1037/0021-9010.75.1.28 · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.75.1.28 · Paper page
  31. 10.2307/255997 · DOI
  32. 10.2307/255378 · DOI · Paper page
  33. 10.2307/256119 · DOI
  34. 10.1037/h0048612 · doi:10.1037/h0048612
  35. 10.1037/h0060660 · DOI
  36. 10.1002/job.4030140708 · DOI
  37. 10.1037/h0053563 · DOI
  38. 10.1002/job.4030100106 · DOI
  39. 10.1177/0092070393213006 · doi:10.1177/0092070393213006
  40. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1966.tb02430.x · DOI
  41. 10.2307/1252058 · doi:10.2307/1252058 · Paper page
  42. 10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.171 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1037/0021-9010.74.1.11 · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.1.11 · Paper page
  44. McNemar Q., 1969, Psychological statistics
  45. 10.1037/0021-9010.74.3.424 · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.3.424 · Paper page
  46. 10.1037/0021-9010.77.6.879 · DOI
  47. 10.1037/0021-9010.67.2.209 · DOI
  48. Muckler FA, 1992, Selecting performance measures: “Objective” versus “subjective” measurement, Human Factors, 34, 441, 10.1177/001872089203400406 · DOI
  49. Murphy KR, 1991, Performance appraisal
  50. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb00642.x · DOI
  51. 10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.679 · DOI · Paper page
  52. 10.1037/0021-9010.77.2.115 · DOI
  53. Pfeffer J., 1981, Power in organizations
  54. 10.2307/3152222 · DOI · Paper page
  55. 10.1037/0021-9010.72.4.615 · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.72.4.615 · Paper page
  56. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1953.tb01027.x · DOI
  57. 10.1037/0021-9010.73.3.482 · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.73.3.482 · Paper page
  58. 10.1111/1467-8721.ep10768758 · DOI · Paper page
  59. 10.1037/h0044267 · DOI
  60. Stauffer JM, 1994, Meta Dos: Psychometric meta‐analysis program [computer program]
  61. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00696.x · DOI · Paper page
  62. 1958, Personnel Psychology, 11, 501
  63. 1958, Personnel Psychology, 11, 121
  64. 1958, Personnel Psychology, 11, 583
  65. 1958, Personnel Psychology, 11, 587
  66. ViswesvaranC SchmidtFL OnesDS. (1994 April).Examining the validity of supervisory ratings of job performance using linear composites. Paper presented at the Ninth Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology Nashville TN.
  67. 10.2307/3150621 · DOI
  68. 10.1037/0021-9010.75.3.315 · DOI · Paper page
  69. 10.2307/256830 · DOI

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
BOMMER, W. H., JOHNSON, J. L., RICH, G. A., PODSAKOFF, P. M., & MACKENZIE, S. B.
Venue
Personnel Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1995-09
Volume
48
Issue
3
Pages
587-605
ISSN
  • 0031-5826 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-6570
DOI
10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01772.x
OpenAlex
W2090978119
Cited by
633
References
1
FWCI
21.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 4115 d)

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.