Self versus superior assessment of social science research employees

Self-assessment of performance was compared to superior's assessment on a sample of 60 personnel research workers. It was hypothesized that norms of self-acceptance and relatively low defensiveness will characterize members of this sample as a result of their educational background in Psychology and related areas. Therefore the previously noted leniency effect in self-assessment will not be expressed. The subjects and their superiors (N=10) rated the subjects performance on a thirty-item behaviorally based scale as well as on a global performance assessment item. No significant differences between superior's and subordinates' ratings were found for any of the scale items. The results also suggest that subordinates' ratings were significantly more highly correlated with the importance they attributed to the performance items than superiors' ratings. There were also noted differences between superiors and subordinates in the relationships between the assessment of various performance areas and the global performance assessment. The results are discussed in terms of the need for exploring the characteristics of self-assessment in unique samples and the possible advantages of incorporating self-assessment into personnel evaluation systems.