Peer and Supervisory Ratings of Research Scientists.

Abstract

A sample of 103 government research scientists was used to compare two performance evaluation systems currently used in a Federal agency for its research personnel. The two systems, supervisory ratings and peer ratings, were compared in terms of their respective reliability and validity. The results showed the peer ratings to be more stable over time and to relate more highly to scientific 'productivity' than do the supervisory ratings. Also, productivity was found to be significantly related to occupational levels resulting from peer evaluations. A discussion of these results and possible explanations for the differences between the two evaluation processes are given along with other considerations for organizations that contemplate alternate evaluation processes similar to peer ratings. (Author)

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Sep 01, 1979
Accession Number
ADA074842

Entities

People

  • Delbert M. Nebeker
  • Gary D. Kissler

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Human Systems

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Air Force
  • Air Force Facilities
  • Applied Psychology
  • Business Administration
  • Civilian Personnel
  • Employment
  • Group Processes (Social Psychology)
  • Human Resources
  • Job Satisfaction
  • Management Personnel
  • Materials
  • Military Personnel
  • Military Research
  • Peer Groups
  • Personnel Management
  • Psychology
  • Training

Fields of Study

  • Psychology

Readers

  • Instructional Design and Training Evaluation.
  • Organizational Psychology.