Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Study of Validity of Ratings
View through CrossRef
As part of research on validation of the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule, this study indicates that in addition to the traditional well-known constant errors in ratings explored by numerous investigators, there is an error, which along with many other possible errors, may influence rating systems. This specific error, which may be called “projection error,” is a tendency to rate others high (or low) on the traits on which raters themselves are high (or low). It was hypothesized that the 20 male raters' own traits as measured by personality scales are more predictive of the ratings they assign to others than of their own self-ratings on the same traits. Analysis indicated that the relationship between the Edwards scales and the mean rater's ratings could not be considered a function of chance. Most variables of the Edwards schedule were more predictive of the mean rater's ratings than of the self-ratings and of the mean peer-ratings, without denying the predictability of the latter two for some traits. The study also showed that neither self-ratings nor mean peer-ratings were superior with respect to the number and the size of the correlation coefficients.
Title: Study of Validity of Ratings
Description:
As part of research on validation of the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule, this study indicates that in addition to the traditional well-known constant errors in ratings explored by numerous investigators, there is an error, which along with many other possible errors, may influence rating systems.
This specific error, which may be called “projection error,” is a tendency to rate others high (or low) on the traits on which raters themselves are high (or low).
It was hypothesized that the 20 male raters' own traits as measured by personality scales are more predictive of the ratings they assign to others than of their own self-ratings on the same traits.
Analysis indicated that the relationship between the Edwards scales and the mean rater's ratings could not be considered a function of chance.
Most variables of the Edwards schedule were more predictive of the mean rater's ratings than of the self-ratings and of the mean peer-ratings, without denying the predictability of the latter two for some traits.
The study also showed that neither self-ratings nor mean peer-ratings were superior with respect to the number and the size of the correlation coefficients.
Related Results
Consistency of perceiving odors: Inter- and Intra- Individual Differences in Odor Similarity Ratings
Consistency of perceiving odors: Inter- and Intra- Individual Differences in Odor Similarity Ratings
This study conducted odor pair similarity ratings twice and used the replicability of the ratings, as indicated by the correlation coefficients between the two sets of ratings, to ...
Student Ratings and Instructor Self-ratings and Their Relationship to Student Achievement
Student Ratings and Instructor Self-ratings and Their Relationship to Student Achievement
Self-ratings and student ratings of 17 instructors who served as teaching assistants in a large introductory psychology course for two consecutive semesters were compared with stud...
Are file review-based SAVRY ratings of violence risk reliable?
Are file review-based SAVRY ratings of violence risk reliable?
Since its publication a decade ago, the Structured Assessment for Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) has gained acceptance as a strong predictor of future violence in adolescent popula...
Nudge and bias in subjective ratings? The role of icon sets in determining ratings of icon characteristics
Nudge and bias in subjective ratings? The role of icon sets in determining ratings of icon characteristics
AbstractSubjective ratings have been central to the evaluation of icon characteristics. The current study examined biases in ratings in relation to the context in which icons are p...
Predictors of subjective ratings of stressor severity: the effects of current mood and neuroticism
Predictors of subjective ratings of stressor severity: the effects of current mood and neuroticism
AbstractRespondent‐based or subjective, ratings of stressor severity are posited to be influenced by systematic biases related to current mood and trait neuroticism which may confo...
Do Likert-type items yield interval-scaled measurements of subjective agreement? An empirical test of individual-level response structures
Do Likert-type items yield interval-scaled measurements of subjective agreement? An empirical test of individual-level response structures
Numeric ratings of agreement (also known as Likert-scales) are one of the most common assessment tools in psychology. However, little is known about the measurement theoretic prope...
Do Likert-type items yield interval-scaled measurements of subjective agreement? An empirical test of individual-level response structures
Do Likert-type items yield interval-scaled measurements of subjective agreement? An empirical test of individual-level response structures
Numeric ratings of agreement (also known as Likert-scales) are one of the most common assessment tools in psychology. However, little is known about the measurement theoretic prope...
Criterion validity, construct validity, and factor analysis: An introductory overview
Criterion validity, construct validity, and factor analysis: An introductory overview
This is the fourth and last article in the series on translation, adaptation, or development of a rating scale and its psychometric testing. The focus of this article is on criteri...

