Document Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Arts (MA)

Department

Psychology

Faculty/School

Faculty of Science

First Advisor

Mark Pancer

Advisor Role

Thesis Supervisor

Abstract

The study was designed to examine the impact of reciprocal evaluation, a factor which differentiates the relational aspect of peer and supervisor evaluation contexts, and level of performance on the accuracy of performance ratings. One hundred and thirty-six undergraduate students evaluated standardized solutions on an 'Organizational Problem Solving Task' which demonstrated either a poor or a satisfactory level of performance, under one of two rating conditions. In one rating condition, participants were told that they would simply evaluate another person's performance on the task (non-reciprocal rating condition). In the other rating condition, participants were informed that not only would they rate another person's performance on the task, but that they would also complete the task themselves and be rated on it by the person whose performance they just rated (reciprocal rating condition). As hypothesized, participants in reciprocal evaluation conditions rated performance as significantly more positive than those in non-reciprocal evaluation conditions. Furthermore, an evaluation condition by performance level interaction revealed that participants in reciprocal rating conditions provided significantly more positive ratings than those in non-reciprocal rating conditions when the performance they rated was poor. However, there was no significant difference between the ratings of those in reciprocal and non-reciprocal rating conditions when the performance they rated was satisfactory. The results are discussed in relation to the effect of level of performance and reciprocal evaluation on performance ratings.

Convocation Year

1995

Convocation Season

Fall

Download

Share

COinS