This study investigated the effects of perceived purpose for rating and training type on the following dependent variables-accuracy (measured m two ways), leniency/ seventy, and illusory halo. The purpose factor comprised three levels, (a) a hiring purpose, (b) a feedback purpose, and (c) a research-only purpose The training factor comprised four levels, (a) rater error (RE) training, (b) frame-of-reference (FOR) training (Bernardin & Buckley, 1981), (c) the combination of both methods (CM), and (d) no training With both factors crossed, 164 undergraduate subjects were randomly assigned to one of 12 conditions and viewed videotapes of lectures given by bogus graduate assistants. Heterogeneity of variance made it necessary to apply a conservative analytical strategy described by Winer (1971) After application of this method, we found that training significantly affected two measures of accuracy and halo such that a training condition that contained an FOR component did better than RE or no training (p < .05) The conservativeness of the Winer strategy made effects for the purpose factor on "correlation accuracy," leniency/seventy, and halo only tentative (p < . 10) and dissipated the one interaction effect of the two factors on "distance accuracy" (p < .10). Discussion centers on (a) a comparison of the results with those of Zedeck and Cascio ( 1982), (b) potential reasons for the heteroscedasticity, and (c) implications for development of student evaluations of university instructors 147

No abstract

We use levels-of-processing theory and social facilitation theory to explain the effect of training format and group size on distance and correlation accuracy, leniency-severity, halo, retention of training and pretraining information, and subject arousal. The training factor included frame-of-reference (FOR) training, information only (INFO) training, and no training (NOT). Group size was n = 1, n = 6, and n = 12, respectively. A total of 108 subjects, randomly assigned to one of nine Training × Group Size conditions, viewed and rated videotaped lectures. Results indicated that FOR training effected improved retention of training information, improved distance accuracy, and less halo over INFO training or no training (p < .05). Group size significantly affected the retention of pretraining information but not the retention of training information. Discussion centers on the components of FOR training responsible for improved rating accuracy and error, the relation between rating knowledge and rating accuracy, and implications for future research.

No abstract

No abstract