Procedures in employment psychology

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 173623112X

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-112923

Document type:: Monograph

Author:: Bingham, Walter Van Dyke http://d-nb.info/gnd/123042593; Freyd, Max

Title:: Procedures in employment psychology

Place of publication:: Chicago & New York

Publisher:: Shaw

Year of publication:: 1926

Scope:: XI, 269 S

Digitisation:: 2020

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Monograph

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: X. Rating scales (concluded)

Collection:: Economics Books

RATING SCALES BES month, and a lack of such change indicates a weakness in the scale. If a judge rates a person the same on successive occasions it may be an indication that he has learned noth- ing new about the subject’s personality in the interval; or that he did find reason to vary his estimate, but wished to avoid detection of his initial misjudgment; or, again, it may mean that the scale afforded him no adequate means of expressing an altered judgment. Agreement between raters, as shown by correlation of their ratings as well as by similarity of means and disper- sion of ratings assigned to the same group of workers, is probably a better criterion of the value of a rating method than agreement between the ratings made by a single judge at different times. If the former agreement exists, it is an indication that the scale calls attention to universally noted characteristics and makes them the basis for the rating, pro- vided the judges have had equal opportunity to judge the subject, and no judges are included toward whom the sub- ject would display an exceptional attitude. The data from which Hayes and Paterson draw their conclusions are rat- ings by foremen on their workmen. No matter how closely foremen agree in rating their subordinates, a different story might be told if the subordinates were rated by their wives and their fellow-workers. Agreement among raters is to be expected only if they bear the same social and industrial relationship to the subjects. Such agreement may be con- sidered a good indication of the relative worth of a rating method. The practical difficulty most often encountered is in finding two or more judges who know the men well enough to rate them accurately. A fourth way of determining the relative merit of a rating method has to do with the normality of the distribution of ratings. This method is based on the assumption that the distribution of accurate measures of any ability in a large sampling of the general population takes the form of the normal probability curve. The fact that ratings on an ¥3z

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Procedures in employment psychology

Monograph

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation