This study investigated several factors that could influence the accuracy and reliability of job evaluation ratings. Two of these factors were training and amount of information. The subjects rated a series of 23 jobs on various dimensions. The results indicate that training had little effect on job ratings. Amount of information, however, had a consistent effect on the results. Subjects who were presented with greater amounts of information were generally more reliable and accurate. Procedures proposed by Cronbach (1955) and Jackson (1972) were used to measure accuracy. In addition, three rating biases (halo, leniency, and restriction of range) were conceptualized and operationalized in terms of accuracy. The results did vary somewhat depending on the measure being used. Implications concerning the study of accuracy are discussed.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:RICE/oai:scholarship.rice.edu:1911/15903 |
| Date | January 1985 |
| Creators | HAHN, DAVID C. |
| Source Sets | Rice University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis, Text |
| Format | application/pdf |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds