No abstract

This study investigates the effects of rater personality (Conscientiousness and Agreeableness), rating format (graphic rating scale vs. behavioral checklist), and the rating social context (face-to-face feedback vs. no face-to-face feedback) on rating elevation of performance ratings. As predicted, raters high on Agreeableness showed more elevated ratings than those low on Agreeableness when they expected to have the face-to-face feedback meeting. Furthermore, rating format moderated the relationship between Agreeableness and rating elevation, such that raters high on Agreeableness provided less elevated ratings when using the behavioral checklist than the graphic rating scale, whereas raters low on Agreeableness showed little difference in elevation across different rating formats. Results also suggest that the interactive effects of rater personality, rating format, and social context may depend on the performance level of the ratee. The implications of these findings will be discussed.

We report 2 studies that examine how promotional candidates use verbal and nonverbal impression management (IM) tactics across several structured assessment center exercises that differ in the competency demands they place on candidates. Based on the competency-demand hypothesis (Shoda, Mischel, & Wright, 1993a, 1993b, it was predicted that IM use would occur most frequently and have the strongest effects on assessor evaluations in exercises that place greater demands on candidates' interpersonal skills than in exercises that depend primarily on technical skills. In both studies, IM tactics were generally used more frequently and there was more variability in IM use for those exercises requiring candidates to display interpersonal competencies (i.e., the role-plays and mock presentation) relative to the exercise that did not (i.e., the tactical exercise). The relationship between IM use and assessor evaluations was also influenced by the competencies assessed by the exercises, and IM use related to both interpersonal and noninterpersonal ratings of performance.

No abstract

No abstract