Rater’s Intention Towards Appraising Accurately
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2014.0015Keywords:
performance appraisal accuracyAbstract
The aim of this article is to stimulate thoughts and
introduce new prospects to the study of performance
appraisal accuracy, especially in the raters’ perspective.
It focuses on a relatively understudied aspect
of performance appraisal which is raters’ intention
towards appraising accurately. In order to understand
the application of this aspect, this paper attempts
to develop a conceptual framework based
on hypotheses of the direct and indirect factors that
predict the raters’ intention to appraise accurately.
It is hypothesized that the raters’ experience in appraising,
raters’ perceived purposes of appraisal,
and raters’ perceived information adequacy for appraising
will predict the raters’ intention towards
appraising accurately by influencing the raters’ attitude
towards appraising accurately, raters’ perceived
subjective norms towards appraising accurately, and
raters’ perceived behavioral control towards appraising
accurately.
Keywords: performance appraisal accuracy, behavioral
intentions, attitudes, perceived subjective norms,
perceived behavioral control, background factors
References
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of
planned behavior. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckman (Eds.),
Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39).
Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-
Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy,
locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 665-683.
Ajzen, I., & Driver, B. L. (1992). Contingent value
measurement: On the nature and meaning of willingness to pay. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1, 297-316.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior
relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84(5), 888-918.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of
attitudes on behavior. In D. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson,
& M. P. Zanna, The Handbook of Attitudes (pp. 173-
. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Albarracin, D., Johnson, B. T., Fishbein, M., &
Muellerleile, P. A. (2001). Theories of reasoned action
and planned behavior as models of condom use: A
meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 142-161.
Anderson, N., Payne, T., Ferguson, E., & Smith, T. (1994).
Assessor decision making information processing and
assessor decision strategies in a British Assessment Centre. Personnel Review, 23(1), 52-62.
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the
theory of planned behavior: A meta-analytic review.
British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-499.
Balzer, W. K. (1986). Biases in the recording of performance-related information: The effects of initial
impression and centrality of the appraisal task.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37,
-347.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory
of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-
Banks, C., & Murphy, K. (1985). Toward narrowing the
research-practice gap in performance appraisal.
Personnel Psychology, 38, 335-345.
Berkshire, H., & Highland, R. (1953). Forced-choice
performance rating: A methodological study. Personnel
Psychology, 6, 355-378.
Bernardin, H. J., & Pence, E. C. (1980). Effects of rater
training: Creating new response sets and decreasing
accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65(1), 60-66.
Bernardin, H. J., & Villanova, P. (1986). Performance
appraisal. In E. A. Locke, Generalizing from laboratory to
field settings (pp. 43-62). Lexington, MA: Lexington
Books.
Bernardin, H. J., & Villanova, P. (2005). Research streams
in rater self-efficacy. Group and Organization Management, 30, 61-88.
Bernardin, H. J., Cooke, D. K., & Villanova, P. (2000).
Conscientiousness and agreeableness as predictors of
rating leniency. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(2), 232-
Bernardin, H. J., La Shells, M. B., Smith, P. C., & Alvares,
K. M. (1976). Behavioral expectation scales: Effects of
development procedures and formats. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 61(1), 75-79.
Borman, W. C. (1977). Consistency of rating accuracy and
rating errors in the judgment of human performance.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 20, 238-
Bretz, R. D., Milkovich, G. T., & Read, W. (1992). The
current state of performance appraisal research and
practice: Concerns, directions, and implications.
Journal of Management, 18(2), 321-352.
Brewer, N., & Wells, G. L. (2006). The confidence–
accuracy relationship in eyewitness identification:
Effects of lineup instructions, foil similarity, and
target-absent base rates. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 12(1), 11-30.
Cardy, R. L., & Dobbins, G. H. (1986). Affect and
appraisal accuracy: Liking as an integral dimension in
evaluating performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,
(4), 672-678.
Cardy, R. L., & Dobbins, G. H. (1994). Performance
appraisal: Alternative perspective. Cincinnati, OH: SouthWestern.
Charmine, E. J., & Hartel, A. (1993). Rating format
research revisited: Format effectiveness and acceptability of rater characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology,
(2), 221-227.
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A
focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the
concept of norms to reduce littering in public places.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1015-1026.
Cleveland, J. N., & Murphy, K. (1992). Analyzing performance appraisal as goal-directed behavior. In G.
Ferris, & K. Rowland, Research in Personnel and Human
Resources Management (pp. 121-185). Greenwich, CT:
JAI Press.
Cleveland, J. N., Murphy, K. R., & Williams, R. E. (1989).
Multiple uses of performance appraisal: Prevalence
and correlates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(1), 130-
Crocker, J. (1981). Judgment of covariation by social
perceivers. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 272-292.
Day, D. V., & Sulsky, L. M. (1995). Effects of frame-ofreference training and information configuration on
memory organization and rating accuracy. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 80(1), 158-167.
Decotiis, T., & Petit, A. (1978). The performance appraisal process: A model and some testable propositions. Academy of Management Review, 3, 635-646.
DeNisi, A. S. (2011). Managing performance to change
behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management 31(4), 262-276.
DeNisi, A. S., & Peters, L. H. (1996). Organization of
information in memory and the performance appraisal process: Evidence from the field. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 81(6), 717-737.
DeNisi, A. S., Cafferty, T. P., & Meglino, B. M. (1984). A
cognitive view of the performance appraisal process: A
model and research propositions. Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance, 33, 360-396.
Feldman, J. M. (1981). Beyond attribution theory: Cognitive processes in performance appraisal. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 66(2), 127-148.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing
behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York:
Psychology Press.
Folger, R., Konovsky, M. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1992). A
due process metaphor for performance appraisal.
Research in Organizational Behavior, 14, 129-177.
Fried, Y., Levi, A. S., Ben-David, H. A., Tiegs, R., &
Avital, N. (2000). Rater positive and negative mood
predispositions as predictors of performance ratings of
ratees in simulated and real organizational settings:
Evidence from U. S. and Israeli samples. Journal of
Occupational And Organizational Psychology, 73, 373-378.
Gibbons, F. X., Gerrard, M., Blanton, H., & Russell, D.
W. (1998). Reasoned action and social reaction:
Willingness and intention as independent predictors
of health risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
, 1164-1180.
Gibbons, F. X., Gerrard, M., Cleveland, M. J., Wills, T.
A., & Brody, G. (2004). Perceived discrimination and
substance use in African American parents and their
children: A panel study. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 86, 517-529.
Godin, G., & Kok, G. (1996). The theory of planned
behavior: A review of its applications to health-related
behaviors. American Journal of Health Promotion, 11, 87-
Gordon, M. E. (1972). An examination of the relationship between the accuracy and favorability of ratings.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 56, 49-53.
Guion, R. M. (1961). Criterion measurement and personnel judgments. Personnel Psychology, 14, 141-149.
Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L., & Biddle, S. J.
(2002). A meta-analytic review of the theories of
reasoned action and planned behavior in physical
activity: Predictive validity and the contribution of
additional variables. Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 24, 3-32.
Harris, M. (1994). Rater motivation in the performance
appraisal context: A theoretical framework. Journal of
Management, 20(4), 737-756.
Ilgen, D. R., & Feldman, J. M. (1983). Performance
appraisal: A process focus. In L. L. Cummings, & B.
M. Staw, Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 5, pp.
-197). Greenwich: JAI Press.
Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in
organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 349-
Jawahar, I. M., & Williams, C. R. (1997). Where all the
children are above average: The performance appraisal purpose effect. Personnel Psychology, 50, 905-925.
Jiing-Lih, F., Werbel, J., & Bedeian, A. (1988). An empirical investigation of self-appraisal-based performance
evaluation. Personnel Psychology, 41(1), 141-156.
Judge, T. A., & Ferris, G. R. (1993). Social context of
performance evaluation decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 80-105.
Jurgensen, C. E. (1950). Intercorrelations in merit rating
traits. Journal of Applied Psychology, 34, 240-243.
Kautonen, T., van Gelderen, M., & Tornikoski, E. (2011).
Predicting entrepreneurial behaviour: A test of the
Theory of Planned Behavior. Applied Economics, 45(6),
-707.
Klimoski, R., & Inks, L. (1990). Accountability forces in
performance appraisal. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 45(2), 194.
Kondrasuk, J. N., Crowell, E., Dillon, K., Kilzer, S., &
Teeley, J. (2008). Appraising performance appraisal:
The problems. Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference 2008 (pp. 228-245). Chicago, Illinois,
USA: The Association on Employment Practices and
Principles (AEPP). Retrieved from www.aepp.net
Lam, S. K., & Schaubroeck, J. (1999). Total quality
management and performance appraisal: An experimental study of process versus results and group versus
individual approaches. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 20(4), 445-457.
Landy, F. J., & Farr, J. L. (1980). Performance rating.
Psychological Bulletin, 87(1), 72-107.
Latham, G. P., & Wexley, K. N. (1994). Increasing productivity through performance appraisal (2nd ed.). New York:
Addison-Wesley.
Latham, G. P., Wexley, K. N., & Pursell, E. D. (1975).
Training managers to minimize rating errors in the
observation of behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology,
(5), 550-555.
Lefkowitz, S. W. (2000). The role interpersonal affective
regard in supervisory performance ratings: A literature
review and proposed causal model. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(1), 67-85.
Levy, P. E., & Williams, J. R. (2004). The social context
of performance appraisal: A review and framework for
the future. Journal of Management, 30(6), 881-905.
Liou, Y. M. (2007). Patterns of physical activity and
obesity indices among white-collar men in Taiwan.
Journal of Nursing Research, 15(2), 138-145.
Liu, X., & Dong, K. (2012). Development of the civil
servants’ performance appraisal system in China:
Challenges and improvements. Review of Public
Personnel Administration, 32(2), 149-168.
Longenecker, C. O., Sims, H. P., & Gioia, D. A. (1987).
Behind the mask: The politics of employee appraisal.
Academy of Management Executive, 1(3), 183-193.
March, J. C., & March, J. G. (1978). Performance sampling in social matches. Administrative Science Quarterly,
, 434-453.
Meyer, H. H., Kay, E., & French, J. R. (1965). Split roles
in performance appraisal. Harvard Business Review, 43,
-129.
Miller, C. E., & Thornton, C. L. (2006). How accurate
are your performance appraisals? Public Personnel
Management, 35(2), 153-162.
Murphy, K. R. (2008). Explaining the weak relationship
between job performance and ratings of job performance. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 148-
Murphy, K. R., & Balzer, W. K. (1989). Rater errors and
rating accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 619-
Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. (1995). Understanding
performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based
perspectives. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Murphy, K. R., Balzer, W. K., Lockhart, M., & Eisenman,
E. (1985). Effects of previous performance on evaluations of present performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 70, 72-84.
Murphy, K. R., Cleveland, J. N., Skattebo, A. L., &
Kinney, T. B. (2004). Raters who pursue different goals
give different ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology,
(1), 158-164.
Narcisse, S., & Harcourt, M. (2008). Employee fairness
perceptions of performance appraisal: A Saint Lucian
case study. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 19(6), 1152-1169.
O’Donnell, J. M. (1990). The effect of performance
appraisal purpose: Training on rating errors and
accuracy. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 1(2),
-177.
O’Reilly, C. A., & Anderson, J. C. (1980). Trust and the
communication of performance appraisal information:
The effect of feedback on performance and job
satisfaction. Human Communication Research, 6(4), 290-
Prussia, G. E., Anderson, J. S., & Manz, C. C. (1998). Selfleadership and performance outcomes: The mediating
influence of self-efficacy. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 19(5), 523-538.
Roberson, Q. M., & Stewart, M. M. (2006). Understanding the motivational effects of procedural and informational justice in feedback processes. British Journal of
Psychology, 97(3), 281-298.
Roberts, G. E. (1992). Linkages between performance
appraisal system effectiveness and rater and ratee
acceptance: Evidence from a Survey of Mun
Administration, 12(3), 19-41.
Roberts, G. E. (1998). Perspectives on enduring and
emerging issues in performance appraisal. Public and
Personnel Management, 27(3), 301-319.
Selvarajan, T. T., & Cloninger, P. A. (2011). Can performance appraisals motivate employees to improve
performance? A Mexican study. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 1-22.
Sheeran, P., & Taylor, S. (1999). Predicting intentions to
use condoms: A meta-analysis and comparison of the
theories of reasoned action and planned behavior.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 1624-1675.
Sheppard, B. H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. R. (1988).
The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past
research with recommendations for modifications and
future research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 325-
Sinclair, R. C. (1988). Mood, categorization breadth, and
performance appraisal: The effects of order of information acquisition and affective state on halo,
accuracy, information retrieval, and evaluations.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
(1), 22-46.
Smith, P. C., & Kendall, L. M. (1963). Retranslations of
expectations: An approach to the construction of
unambiguous anchors for rating scales. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 47(2), 149-155.
Spence, J. R., & Keeping, L. M. (2010). The impact of
non-performance information on ratings of job
performance: A policy-capturing approach. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 31, 587-608.
Spence, J. R., & Keeping, L. M. (2011). Conscious rating
distortion in performance appraisal: A
review,commentary, and proposed framework for
research. Human Resource Management Review, 21, 85-
Spence, J. R., & Keeping, L. M. (2013). The road to
performance ratings is paved with intentions: A
framework for understanding managers’ intentions
when rating employee performance. Organizational
Psychology Review, 3(4), 360-383.
Spicer, D. P., & Rusli Ahmad. (2006). Cognitive processing models in performance appraisal: Evidence from
the Malaysian education system. Human Resource
Management Journal, 16(2), 214-230.
Struthers, C. W., Weiner, B., & Allred, K. (1998). Effects
if causal attributions on personnel decisions: A social
motivation perspective. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 20(2), 155-166.
Sulsky, L. M., & Balzer, W. K. (1988). Meaning and
measurement of performance rating accuracy: Some
methodological and theoretical concerns. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 73(3), 497-506.
Taylor, M. S., Tracy, K. B., Renard, M. K., Harrison, J. K.,
& Carroll, S. J. (1995). Due process in performance
appraisal: A quasi-experiment in procedural justice.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 459-523.
Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 25-29.
Tsui, A. S., & Barry, B. (1986). Interpersonal affect and
rating errors. The Academy of Management Journal,
(3), 586-599.
Tziner, A., & Murphy, K. R. (1999). Additional evidence
of attitudinal influences in performance appraisal.
Journal of Business and Psychology, 13, 407-419.
Villanova, P., Bernardin, J., Dahmus, S., & Sims, R.
(1993). Rater leniency and performance appraisal
discomfort. Educational and Psychological Measurement,
, 789-799.
Warshaw, P. R., & Davis, F. D. (1985). Disentangling
behavioral intention and behavioral expectation.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 213-228.
Whisler, T. (1958). Performance appraisal and the
organization man. Journal of Business, 31, 19-27.
Wong, K. F., & Kwong, Y. Y. (2007). Effects of rater goals
on rating patterns: Evidence from an experimental
field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 577-585.
Youngcourt, S. S., Leiva, P. I., & Jones, R. G. (2007).
Perceived purposes of performance appraisal: Correlates of individual- and position-focused purposes on
attitudinal outcomes. Human Resource Development
Quarterly, 18(3), 315-343.
Zedeck, S., & Cascio, W. F. (1982). Performance appraisal
decisions as a function of rater training and pu
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 MUHAMAD ALI EMBI, LOW KAH CHOON
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license.
