Multisource Performance Ratings: Measurement Equivalence Across Gender

dc.contributor.advisor Frame, Mark en_US Elkins, Jacqueline Brooke en_US
dc.contributor.committeemember Hein, Michael en_US
dc.contributor.committeemember Jin, Ying en_US
dc.contributor.department Psychology en_US 2015-06-12T19:06:14Z 2015-06-12T19:06:14Z 2015-05-19 en_US
dc.description.abstract Organizations often use 360 degree feedback to provide employees insight into their performance from multiple perspectives. However, for the feedback to be effective at modifying job behaviors, the feedback must be based on true differences in the individual's performance and not based on differences in raters' conceptualizations of the behavior constructs. To determine if the comparison of ratings across gender and rating source dyads is even appropriate, the purpose of this study was to determine to what degree there is measurement equivalence across gender (female, male) and rating source (self, direct report) dyads in 360 degree ratings of corporate leaders. The findings of this study reveal that the 360 degree rating instrument is not directly comparable across rating groups (gender and rating source) because measurement variance indicated that the instrument is not measuring the same underlying construct. en_US M.A. en_US
dc.publisher Middle Tennessee State University en_US
dc.subject 360 Degree Feedback en_US
dc.subject 360 Degree Ratings en_US
dc.subject Gender en_US
dc.subject Measurement Equivalence en_US
dc.subject Multisource Performance Rating en_US
dc.subject.umi Psychology en_US
dc.thesis.degreegrantor Middle Tennessee State University en_US
dc.thesis.degreelevel Masters en_US
dc.title Multisource Performance Ratings: Measurement Equivalence Across Gender en_US
dc.type Thesis en_US
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
604.5 KB
Adobe Portable Document Format