Performance appraisal: a selected chronological ...

LIBRARY OF THEUNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN

016.1114-

C73e

no. 5£0-573

CITY Pb'-^NNINr; ;.Nr)

lANDSCAh'E ARCHITtrV.'lit

C73^ Gk-

Jt ^r

.

121-

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY

Name

_2:jm^

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2010 with funding from

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

http://www.archive.org/details/performanceappra568elst

\u

Council of Planning Librarians exchange bibliography

May 1974 568

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL:A Selected Chronological Bibliography - 1948-1973

Dr. Richard S. Elster and Dr. Gerald L. MusgraveGraduate Faculty of Administrative Sciences

Naval Postgraduate School

Monterey, California

Mrs. Mary Vance, Editor

Post Office Box 229

Monticello, Illinois 61856

THE UBRARY OF THE

ti^^ 1974

UNIVtKbti I <i^ ILLinOlS

AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN

COUNCIL OF PLAMMG LIBRARIANS Exchange Bibliograpliy #568

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL;

A SELECTED CHROWOLCGICAL BIBLIOGR.^PHI

191^8-1973

by

Dr. Richard S. Elsterand

Dr. Gerald L. Mus grave

Graduate Faculty of Administrative Sciences

Naval Postgraduate SchoolMonterey, California

Selection and Evaluation of West Point Cadets. Educ .Psychol.

Measmt., 19U8, 8, 193-199, '.Eaier..).

Professional Standards and Training for College Personnel Workers

.

Educ. Psychol. Measmt., 191+8, b, l31-ii!?9, (Anderson^

American Institute of Accountants . Committee on Selection of

Personnel . Results of Achievement Tests Administered in

Schools of Business of Ninety-Nine Colleges and Universities .

New York: American Institute of Accounts, (.li37 W. i>9th St.),

19U8, 21p.

An Analysis of Bnplcyees ' Appraisal of Management . American

Psychologist, 1918, 3, 35(^-i (Dewey). ~

A Prediction of Law School Achievement From High School Rank ,

Reading Test Scores, Psychological Test Scores, and Average

Grade in Pre-Law Courses . J. Educ. Psychol., 19U8, 39,

237-2i|2, (Havens).

USAF Developments in the Selection and Classification of Fliers .

Milit. Surg., 19ii8, 102, U69-l;73, (Armstrong).

Attitudes to Work; A Field Study of Building Operatives .

Brit. J. Psychol., 19U8, 38, 107-13ii, (Davis).

The Reliability of Job Evaluation Rankings . J. Appl. Psychol.,

19U8, 32, 313-320, (Ash).

Men, Machines, & Productivity . Occup. Psychol., Land., 19i;8,

22, 190-196, (Bartlett) .

Validity of Personality and Interest Tests in Selection and

Placement Situations . Trans. Kans . Acad. Sci., 19a8, 51*

335-339, (Barnabus).

2. CPL Exchange Bibliography #568

Applying the Ccntrol Chart Method to Worker Evalôation andIncentive Plans , Personnel. 19Ub, 35. 20lx-210. (Atruzzi)

.

A Personnel Program That Failed. Personnel J., 19k9, 21

y

lOh-klk^ (Anon.).

Originality Ratings of Department Store Display DepartmentPerecnnel T J. Appl. Psychol., 19U9, 33 j 31-35, (Dougan,Schiff , & Welch)

.

The Validity of Physical Proficiency Tests in Predicting Aptitxîefor Service Ratings at the United States Military Academy .

Amer. Psychologist, 19U9, U, 300-, (Berry & Brogden)

.

Developing Executives for Business Leadership . Personnel, 19U9,25, 250-260, (Muller-Thym & Salvers on).

Developing an Employee Merit Rating Procedure . Personnel, 19li9,

25, 275-291, (Bittner).

A New Approach to Evaluating Personnel . Personnel, 19ii9, 26,3>U2, (Flanagan).

The Develoment of a Procedure for Evaluating Officers in theUnited States Air Force, Pittsburgh: American Institutefor Research, 19U«, v, 67p., (Prestcn)

.

The Effect Upon Appraisal Scores of Individual Differences inthe Ability of Superiors to Appraise Subordinates .

Personnel Psychol., 19U9, 2, 377, 3«2, (Ferguson).

Planning for a Successful Merit Rating Program . Personnel,My, 25, 365-369, (Hertz).

Reviex'fing and Appraising Supervisory Employees . Personnel.lÎTy, 25, 3«0-3BB, (Pollard)

.

Forced-Choice Performance Reports j A Modern Merit-Rating Method .

Personnel, 19ii9, 26, 205-212, (Richardson).

bl Critical Requirements: A Mer^T Approach to Bnploype Evaluation .

^" Personnel Psychol., 19U9, 2, U19-i|25, (Flanagan).

A Merit Rating Procedure Developed by and for the Raters .

Personnel, 1950, 26, 273-283, (Rundquist & Bittner).

Pf^rformance Ratings-What Next ? Publ. Personnel Rev., 1950, 11,119-125, (Bentley).

Rating Bnployee and Supervisory Performance; A Manual of Merit-Rating Techniques . New York: American Management Assoc.,iyi)0, 192p.-, (Dooher & Marquis )

.


Scale Items for Inclusion in Forced-Choic e Rating Forms .

iiraer. Psychologist/ 19^0, 5, 2B0-, TCampbell & Rundquist)

.

Estimation of the Reliability of Ratings . Amer. Psychologist,

1950, S^ 37I-, (Ebel).

Preliminary Career Guidance of Mewly Commissioned Air Force

Officers . Amer. Psychologist, 1950^ b> 201-, (Freeman).

The Performance Record; An Objective Merit-Rating; Procedure

for Industr;^'- . Amer. Psychologist, 1950^ 5? 331-332,

(Miller & Flanagan)

.

A Study of Combat Leadership in the Air Force by Means of a

Rating Scale; Group Differences . J. Psychology, 1950, 30,

229-239, (Roff).

Follow-up Validation of Forced-Choice Items of the Army Officer

Effici-ency Report . Amer. Psychologist, 1950, b, 359-,

(Rundquist, Winer & Fa Ik).

The Significance of Interpersonal Relationships in Job

Performance . Amer. Psychologist, 195'0, 5, 351-352, (West).

Snployee Self-Appraisal . Personnel J., 1950, 29, 13li-136, (Hall).

Establishing a Modern Merit System in Japan . Publ. Personnel

Rev., 1950, 11, 199-206, (Rosec).

\Vaj Merit Rating ? Personnel J., 1950, 29, 226-230 (Schmidt).

Standardization of 72U Ratings Scale Statements . Personnel

Psychol., 1950, 3, 205-316, (Uhrbrock)

.

The Rater's Guide . Personnel Psychol., 1950, 3, 361-365,

(Bayroll & Burke)

.

The Rank Comparison Rating Method . J. Appl. Psychol., 1950, 3U,

T7I-I77, (Bittner &,Rundquist).

A \\m Application of Forced-Choice Ratings. Personnel Psychol.,~ 1950737 U13-U2U, (Staugas & McQuitty)

.

Rating Employee Performance , (2nd ed.). University, Miss.:

Ip^TtSirT; (George).~

Rating Training and Experience . J. Appl. Psychol., 1950,

3U, 381-393, (Burke & Taylor)

.

Intercorrelations in Merit Rating Traits . J. Appl. Psychol.,

1950, 3U, 2UO-2U3, (Jurgensen)

.

Peviei-r Bnplqyee Rating . Bull. Industr. Psychol. Personnel Pract.,

1950, 6 (U), 3-15, (Buckloxi).

Overall Job Success as a Basis for Employee Ratings . J. Appl.

Psychol., 1950, 3U, 333-337, (Jurgensen).


Paired Comparison Ratings; 2 . The Reliability of Ratings Based

on Partiar Pairings . J . "Appl. Psychol., 1952, 36, Ibb-iy^,

'(McCormick & Roberts).

Supervisors Don't Criticize Enough. Personnel J., 19^2, 31,

209-2 12 , (Lilley).

A Survqy of 103 Merit-Rating Plans . Personnel, 1952, 29,

289-291;, (Benjamin).~

Experimenting with Federal Efficiency Ratings; A Case Study .

J. Soc. Psychol., 1952, 36, 205-222, (VJeschler & Massarik)

.

Research on the Development of Shipboard Performance Measures.

Final Report. Part I. The Use of Practical Performance Tests

in the Measurement of Shipboard Performance of Enlisted Naval

Personnel. Los Angeles, California: Management & Marketing

Research Corp., 1952, (Contr. N8 onr 70001), lOOp.,

C'Jilson & Mackie).

Ten Year Follow-Up of One Thousand Aviators , USN., Sch. Aviat.,

Med. R"es. Rep., Proj. No. NM 001 0^.05-01, 1952, 7p.,

(Packard & Graybiel)

.

Analysis of an Officer Efficiency Report (VJD AGO Fom 67-1 ),~ Us Ing Huitiple Rat ers . Fersonnel Res. Br. Rep., 1952,

No. '8iiU, 31p., (U.S. Dept., AriT^r, AGO. PRE).

Development of the Enlisted Efficiency Report II. The Second

Experimental Form and the Official Form . Personnel Res

.

Br. Rep"., 1952, No." 8ai|, 31p., (US ARi-'IT AGO. PRP).

Studies of Officer Efficiency Report, IIP AGO Form 67-1 in Operation

I. Revalidation, January 19k9' Personnel Res. Br. Rep.,

1952, No. 791, U5p., (U.S. Dept. Army AGO PRB).

A Study of Officer Rating Methodology: The Overall Design of the

Study. Personnel Res . Br. Rep., 1951, No. 900, ItJp.,~

(U.ST Dept. Arn^r AGO, PRB).

Part II, Ratings Jlade by Identified & Anonymous Raters , 1952,Wo. 901, 21p.

Part III, Order of Rating & Validity of Rating , 1952, No. 902, l[ip.

Part IV, Effect of Forced-Choice Items on Validity of RatingScales . 1552, Mo. 903, 20p.

Part V, Validity & Reliability of Ratings by Single Raters &' Mult"J^le~Raters . 1952, No. 90k, 17p.

——

—

Part VI, Independence of Criterion Measures from PredictorVariables ^ 1952, No. 90U, 17p.

6. CPL Exchange Bibliograpl:^ #568

Part VIII, Validity of Tvto lypes of Rating Techniques; ForcedChoice Items and Rating Scales . 1952, No. 90?, 23p.

Part IX, Validity of Ratings by Hard and Easy Raters . 1952,Wo. 908, 17p.

Part X, Effect of the Selected Rater Characteristics on ValidityofRatings . 1952, No. 909, 20p.

A Comparison of the Valddity of Officer Ratings Rendered by Hardand Easy Raters . Personnel Res. Br. Rep., 1952, Ho. 971,12p., (U.S. Dept. Arncr AGO PRB).

Evaluating Research Personnel . OWR Res. Rev,, 1953, October, 13-18,(Flanagan & Atljnan)

.

The Conmunication of Merit Ratings : A Philosopty and a Method .

Personnel, 1953, 30, 88-98, (Covner)

.

The Development of a Forced Choice Supervisory Performance ReportWithin a Large Automotive Corporation. Dissertation Abstr.,

1953, 13, 3UO-3iil, (Mauk).

A Factor Analysis of Subordinate Evaluations of NoncommissionedOfficer Supervisors . USAF Hun. Resour. Res. Cent. Res. Bull.,

1953, No. 53-6, V, 30p . (Moore )

.

Factor Analytic Comparisons of Superior and Subordinate Ratingsof the Same HCO Supervisors , USAF Hum. Resour. Res. Cent.Tech. Rep., 1953, No. 53-21;, v., 17p., (Moore).

Evaluation Policies and Their Effects Upon Performance ;

A Psychological Interpretation . Personnel, 1953, 30,99-105, (Rodgers).

Appraising Performance of Exempt Personnel . Personnel J., 1953,32, 117-132, (Spooner).

The Relationship Between Rater Characteristics and Validityof Ratings . J. Appl. Psychol., 1953, 37, 278-280,(Schneider & Bayroff).

L'evalua.tion du Herite Personnel. (The Evaluation of PersonnelMerit), Travail et Methodes . 1953, Mp/65.17-22, (Chartier &Fuerstenthal)

.

A Study o_f_ a Merit Rating Scheme in a Factoiy . Occupat iona 1Psychology, Lord., 1953, 27, 57-68, (Davis)

.

Supervising People. (2nd. ed.). Nex^r York: Harper, 1953, x 23 3p.,(Halsey).

7. CPL Exchange Bibliography ^$6d

The Effect of Opportunity to Observe and Rater Status on the

Reliabilit:/ of Performance Ratinas . Personnel Psychol.,

1953 5 b, 57-63, (Klieger & Mosel).

Make Your Executive Merit Rating Realistic . Personnel, 1953

,

29, UaO-iiOi;, (Scheleh)

.

Worker's Attitudes Toward Merit Rating . Personnel Psychol.,

1953, 6, 159-172, (Van Zeist & Kerr).

A Factor Analysis of the PCS Paired-Comparison Evaluation System .

USAF Hum . Resour. Res. Cent. Tech. Rep., 1953, No. 53-10,

V, 9p., (Tupes, Borg, & Friedman).

The Mew Officer Efficiency Report . U. S. Amy Combat Forces J.,

1953, U(3), 3f3-UO, (Bergin).

Should Bnployees Rate Their Supervisors ? Personnel J., 1953,

32, 2^^2F7, (Lan^) .

""^

The Validity of Ratings of Several Levels of Supervisors .

Personnel Psychol., 1953, 6, U61-i;66, (Whitla & Tirrell)

.

The Impact of Interpersonal Relations on Ratings of Performance .

Publ. Personnel Rev., 1953, lU", 166-170, (Kallejian, Brown

& Ueschler)

.

Ratings of Candidates for Promotion by Co-lTorkers and Super -

~ visors. J. Appl. Psychol., 1953, 37^ 3U7-351, (Springer).

The Use of Forced-Choice Procedures in Industry. Psychol.~ Neiisltr. (KYU), 195ll, 5(U), 105-115, (Kipnis) .

Validity Ratings As Rating Techniques and Conditions. Personnel

Psychol., 195U, 7, 93-112, (Bayroff, Haggerty, & Rundquist)

.

An Objective Peer Evaluation Scale; Construction and Validity .

Educ. Psychol..lieasmt., 195U, lU, 332-3^1, (Holfman &Rohrer)

.

Psychological Appraisal of Executive Personnel. J. Personn.

Adm. Industr. Relat., 19514, 1, UU-59, (lewinski)

.

An Analysis of Peer Ratings; II Their Validity as Predictors

of Mlitary Aptitude and Other Measures in the Maval Officer

Candidate School . U.S. Bur. Hav. Personn. Tech. Bull., 195U,

Wo. 5U-10, iv, ap., (Suci & Vallance).

Service Ratings llon't Serve Tvto Masters . Publ. Personnel Rev.,

19TU, 15, 171-175, (Chopson).

HeiT Kind of Performance Reviex-j Emphasizes Executives ' Develop-

ment . P ers onnel J., 195U, 33, 131-133, (Johnson).

Quantitative Analysis of Verbal Evaluations . J. Appl. Psychol.,

195U, 3B, 293-296, (Newan).~

8. CPL Exchange Bibliograpl:^ #568

An Approach to Isolating Diraensions of Job Success . USAF Pers.,Train. Res. Cent. Res. Bull., 195U, No. 5U-59, 6p.,(McQuitty, I-Jrigley & Gaier)

.

Relationships Between Length of Acquaintance and Nature of TraitRated and Agreement Between Raters . USAF Perscnn. Train.Res. Cent. Res. Bull., IPSU, No. 5l;-55, iv, 20p., (i'lays).

TJhy Do ¥e Use Situational Performance Tests ? Personnel Psychol.,

19FIII"" U6U-U69, (Fiske).

Characteristics of Raters ^Jhose Ratings Agree With ConcensusRatings . U.S.A., Personn. Res. Br. Note, 195U» No. 35, 8p.,(Dubin, Burke, Katz & Chesler).

Characteristics of Hard and Easy Raters . USA Personn. Br. Note,"195^, No. 36, 8p., (Dubin, Burke, Neel & Chesler).

Evaluating and Reporting Personnel Functions . Amer. Mgmt. Ass'n.,Pers"Sn". Ser., 195U/no. 160, 11-23, (French)

.

Reaction of General Officers to Officer Efficiency ReportingMethods . USA Personn. Res. Br. Rep., 195U, No. 1085, UCp.,(Dubin,' Katz, & Chesler).

Development of Officer Efficiency Report . DA Form 67-3, USAPersormTRes. Br. Rep., 195U, No. 1086, l8p., (Seeley &Chesler).

Field Tes t of Officer Efficiency Report . DA Form 67-3, USAPersonn. Res. Br. Rep., Note 195i^, No. 37, 5p., (Dubin,Burke, Katz & Chesler).

Characteristics of Raters Uhose Ratings Reflect Halo . USA Personn.Res . Br. Rep., Note, 195U, Wo. 37, 5p., (Dubin, Burke, Katz& Chesler)

.

Analysis of Item Types for Officer Efficiency Reporting . USAPers. Res. Br. Rep. Note, 195U, No. 38, 9p., (King, Uillemin,Klieger & Chesler).

T^Jhy Not Take the "Rating" Out of Performance Rating ? Publ.Personnel Rev., 1955, 16(1), 39-hU, (Hagerty).

Effects of Negatively Skewed Ratings on Motivations of the Rated .

Personnel Psychol., 1955, 8, 39-U7, (Glickman)

.

The Problem of Obtaining Negative Nominations in Peer Ratings.Pers onnel Psychol., 1955, 8, 61-63, (Webb).

Getting Better Results from Post-Appraisal Intervier-rs . Personnel19^5, 31, 5iil-^^0, (Hayden).

Appraising the Performance of Management Personnel: A Case Study.Personnel, 1955, 31, iiU2-U55, (Kellogg).

9, CPL Exchange Bibliography #568

Appraisal of Executive Performance; The "Achilles Heel" of

Mana^eraent Development . Personnel, 1955^ 31, l429-Ulil,

(Hahler & Frazier)

.

Performance Appraisal Interviews Communicate Both IJays .

Personnel J., 1955, 3U> 6-b, (M^er)

.

Observing People . Harv. Bus. Rev., 195$, 33, 90-100, (Pure ell)

.

Formal Staff Reporting and Rating Systems . Personn. Pract.

Bull., Melbourne, 1955, ll/ 50-5^), ^Caine)

.

Rating of Leadership Potential at the U. S. Naval Academy and

Subsequent Office Performance J. Appl. Psychol., 1955, 39,

I9I1-I99, (Ricciuti).

Non-Teclinical Factors in Supervisors' Ratings of Job Performance .

Personnel Psychol., 1955, «, 201-217, (Hausman & Stripp;

.

The Applicability of Projective Techniques to Personnel Appraisal .

Personnel Psychol., 1955, 0, 235-21x3, (Brower)

.

Bnplqyee Attitudes and Qnployee Performance . Psychol. Bull.,

1955, 52, 396-i|2U, (Brayfield & Crockett).

Item Weights in Emplqyee Rating Scales . J. Appl. Psychol.,

1955, 39, 305-367, (Jurgensen).

Comparison of Supervisor, Co-¥orker, and Self-Ratings of VAF Job

Performance . USi\F Pers. Train. Res. Cent. Res. Bull., 1955,Ko. AFPTRC-TN-55-25, v., 25p., (Berkeley).

Correlates of Leadership Ratings in the Air Force ReserveOfficers Training Corps at the University of Kentucl<y .

Dissertation Abstr., 1955, 15, 2102, (flartin)

.

Changing Attitudes Toward a Merit Rating System. PersonnelPsychol., 1955, «, U29-UUa, (Zander & Gyr)

.

An Investigation of the "Halo Effect" and overall evaluation in

Supervisory Ratings . George Washington Univ., Bull., 1955,

55(2), 3«-U5, (Hausman)

.

Bnplcyees "Rate" Department Chief . Personnel J., 1956, 3h,

3UO-3U1, (Meyer).

To Get Loyal Cooperation, Make Workers Feel They Belong .

Personnel J., 1956, 3U, U17-i|18, (Moore).

An Approach to Employee Evaluationt The Field Revievr . Publ.Personnel Rev., 1956, 17, 13-16, (Sharp & IJhite)

.

Hgj Top-Rated Supervisors Differ From the Lower-Rated . Pers onne

1

J., 195(3, 3i;, 331-335, (Tamapol & Tarnapol)

.

10. CPL Exchange Bibliograp}^ #568

A Factor Analytic Descripticn of the Performance of EnlistedPersonnel"! USN Bur. Naval Pers . Tech. Bull., 1956, Ko. 56-1,viii, 37p.5 (Bare).

Biiployee Appraisal; VJhat the Supervisor Shculd Khcnr & Do .

Pasadena, California: California Inst, of Technology,

1957, l5p., (Fisher).

Reducing Leniency in Merit Ratings . Personnel Psych., 1956, 9,

359-369, (Bass).

Appraisal and Inventory in Management Development . J. Educ. Social,1956, 30, 2-11, (Cisn^).

iSysfunctional Consequences of Performance Measurements . Adm.~ Sci. Quart., 1956, 1, 2iiO-2ii7, (Ridgevjay)

.

Relation of Format and Administration to the Characteristics of

Graphic Rating Scales . (Personnel Psychol., 1956, 9, 181-206,(Taylor & Hastman)

.

Developing a Yardstick of Supervisory Performance . Personnel,1957, 33, 371-378, (Huttner & Katzell).

Seniority and Criterion Measures of Job Proficiency . J. Appl.Psychol., 1957, 111, 5a-60, (Jay & Copes).

Appraising Professional Personnel; One Company's Experience .

Personnel, 1957, 33, kh2-h51, (Gray).

The Evaluation Interview; Predicting Job Performance inBusiness and Industry . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1958,xii, ^d«p., (Fear).

Some New Directions in Personnel Appraisal. Personnel, 1957,3hy ii5-50, (Best).

Stability of Rating Scale Statements . Personnel Psychol., 1957,10, 305-309, (Prien & Campbell)

.

Bnplcyee Evaluation; A Review of Current Methods and a SuggestedHew Approach . Publ. Personnel. Ass'n. Personnel Rep.,195/, i^o. 571, 39p., (Batson).

A Mote on the Relationship of the Interaction Potential Inventory-to Peer Ratings of Leadership and Other Naval Aviation CadetCriteria . USN Sch. Avia. Med. Proj. Rep., 1957, Proj . No.NMIII02II, Sub. k. Rep. No. 21, 3p., (Brehman).

Testing the Validity of an Evaluation Program . Personnel, 1957,3k, U), 78-81, (Buchanan).

Deriving a Composite Score from Several Measures of the SameAttribute ! Educ. Psychol. Measmt., 1957, 17, h23-k3U,(.Dunnette & Hoggatt)

.

11. CPL Exchange Bibliography ff^6Q

The Reliability of Peer Nominations under Various Conditions of

Administration . J. Appl. Psychol. ^ 1957> W, 85-90,

(Hollander)

.

How hi Companies Measure Their Executives . Personnel J., 1957,

36, 97-100, (Litterer)'.

The Appraisal Interview. Objectives, Methods and Skills .

^/v New York; Wiley, 1958/xi, 2U6p., (MaierJ.

Relationships Between Behavior Trait Ratings By Peers and Later

Officer Performance of USAF Officer Candidate School

Graduates . USAF Personnel Train. Res. Cent. Res. Rep., 1957,

No. 57-125, vi, 3Up. (Tupes).

Performance Analysis . Advance Mgmt., 1958, 23(1), 2li-2l;,

(EdwardsTli

-' Three Types of Appraisal Interview . Personnel, 1958, 3hi 27-ilO,

(Maier).

IJhatever Became of Merit Rating? Personnel, 1958, 3U, 8-18,

(Anon . ) .~~

Current Trends in Appraisal and Development . Personnel, 1958,

3ii, 51-58, (BrOTjn & Larson)

.

Selecting Supervisors IJith Peer Ratings . Personnel Psychol.,

195a, 11, 25-35, (Weitz).~"

Re-examination of Performance Appraisal . Advance Mgmt., 23(7),

19-20, (Blake) I

"

The Evaluation Interviews Predicting Job Performance in Businessand Indust^ New York: McGraw-Hill, 1958, xii, 2btip.,

"

"(Fear )

.

A Nex'T Approach to Executive Appraisal . Personnel, 1958, 3Ss 8-II;,

(ilachaver & Erickson)

.

"

The Mechanics of Group Appraisal . Personnel, 1958, 3h) 36-U3,(Rowland) '.

"

Appraisals: A Valid Management Selection Tool ? Personnel, 1958,

35, 63-66, (Mandell).

Can Appraisal Counseling be Taught ? Personnel, 1958, 35, 2U-30,(Hoppock )

.

Rating Scale Content; II Effect of Rating on Individual Scales .

Personnel Psychol., 1958, ii, 519-533, (Taylor, Barrett,Parker St Martens) .

Six Merit Rating Systems . Personnel J., 1959, 37, 288-291,(Tiffin) .

12. GPL Exchange Bibliographer #568

Stability/ of Preference Indices in Forced-Choice Rating ScaleSystems Engng. Industrial Psychol., 1959, 1, 13U-137, (Buel)

.

Rating Scale Content; III Relationship Between Supervisory-and-Self-Ratings. Personnel Psychol., 1959, 12, U9-63,"(Parker, Taylor, Barrett & Martens).

The Error -Correction Talk . Personnel. J., 1959 (Sep), 38,13U-136, (llagee).

The Use of Critical Incidents in A Forced-Choice Scale .

J. Appl. Psychol., 1959 (Aug), ii3, 269-270, (Kay).

Self-Percept ions of First-Level Supervisors Compared withUpper -Management Personnel and with Operative Line Workers .

J. Appl. Psychol., 1959 (Jan), h3, 183-186, (Porter).

Supervisory Climate and Performance Ratings; An Exploratory"~ Stu^. "Personnel Psychol., 1959, 12, kS3-hbii, (Taylor,

Parker, Martens, & Ford).

Supervisory Ratings and Attitudes . J. Appl. Psychol., I960, hh,339-3i;0, (Jensen & Morris).

Staff Reporting; A Hew Look at the Halo Effect . Personnel Pract.,Bull., I960, 16(U), 29-33, (Bucklow).

The Use of Interim Measures of Performance and SuppressionVariables in Appraising Bnployee Potential. J. Gen. Psychol.,I9b0 (Jan), 62, 19-23, (Kellner)

.

/ In Defense of Performance Appraisal. Harv. Bus. Rev., I960,3F, ai-a?, (Hayfield).

"

An Evaluative and Diagnostic Forced-Choice Rating Scale forPolTcemen J Dissertation Abstr., I960, 21, 236, (Stander)

.

Relationships Among Criteria of Job Performance . J. Appl.Psychol., I960, itU, 195-202, (Seashore, Indils &Georgopoulos )

.

Dimensions of Foreman Performance; A Factor Analysis of CriterionMeasures J. Appl. Psychol., I960, hh, 216-223, (Turner).

Predicting Ratings of Sales Success with Objective PerformanceInformatiolT: J. Appl. Psychol., I960, hh, 398-ii03, (Kirchner )

.

The Work Study Approach to Management Performance Appraisals .

Personnel Mgmt., I960, i42, 90-98, (Daffern)

.

Pitfalls in Performance Appraisal . Personnel J., I960, 39,05-bb, (Litterer).

How to Appraise Executive Performance . Harv. Bus. Rev., I960,38 (1), 63-70, (Patton).


Some Determinants of Supervisory Esteem. Personnel Psychol.,

19507I37I77-39I, (Kipnis)

.

Staff Evaluations; A Key to More Effective Performance. J.

Rih^IliU7"l960, 26(i|), 19-22, 3T-38, (wSife).

Predicting Performance Evaluations . Personnel Psych., I96O, 13

j

li"i"5-U"Iid~ (Campbell, Prien, & Brailey)

.

E?cperimental Procedures and Techniques for Evaluating Supervisory

Performance . Personnel' Administration, 1961, 2ii(,3Tru-10j

(Speroff ) .

'

The "It'_s_Your Business" Approach to Ratings. Personnel Psychol.,

""JSUTTlh, 183-191, (Ward). '"

Meed for iichievement and Risk Preferences as They Relate to

Attitudes Toward Rex-rard Systems and Performance Appraisal in

an Industrial Setting. J. Appl. Psychol., I96l, hb, 2Sl-2Sb,

"(Meyer & Walker) . "

Development of an Executive Appraisal Form. Personnel Pract.

~TulT., Melbourne, 1961, 17(2)/ 27^3^7 (MacNaughton)

.

SPAMOCOl-I; Span of Control. II Effect on Reliability of Free

and Forced Distributions in Rating . Hum RRO res. Memo.,

l95T7Sub^task Spanocon, Tast ii-28, 9p., (Cannon & Olson).

A Study of Factors Relating to the Effectiveness of a Performance

Appraisal Program. Personnel Psychol., 1961, Ihkk)

s

291-298, (Meyer & Walker)

.

Rater Accuracy as a General Ability. J. Appl. Psychol., 1962,

U6, 191-193, (Mullins & Force).

Staff Appraisal; A Case Study . Personnel Pract. Bull., 1962,~ 18(2), 33 -U2, (Pawuin).

Let Them Know ! Personnel Psychol., 1962, 15(2), 179-186,

(Huttner & O'Malley)

.

Differences Between Better and Less -Effective Supervisors in

Appraisal of Subordinates . Personnel Psychol., 1962,

15 (3) ,"295-302, (Kirchner & Reisberg)

.

A Note on Alternatiye_ Methods of Scoring a Forced-Choice Form .

Personnel Psychol., 1962, 15(3)~ 315-317, (Waters & Wherry) .

Mew Findings on Appraisal; How Managers Feel about Performance

Appraisal . Personnel, May-J\ine 1962, (Clingenpeel)

.

Performance Appraisal. Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1962,

(Harper & Whisler)

.

Personal Growth Through Performance Appraisal . Management Record,

National Industrial Conference Board, New York, July-August

1962, (Habbe).

lU. CPL Exchange Bibliography #568

Praise Reappraised . Harv. Bus. Rev., I963, lil(5), 6I-66, (Farson)

.

Performance Appraisals; Effects on Onplgyees and Their Performance .

Foundation for Research on Human Behavior, University ofMichigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, I963

.

Positive Program for Performance Appraisal . Harv. Bus. Rev.,1963, kl{t), 153-166, (Kindall £: G^a )

.

Performance Appraisals ; Formal vs . Informal . Personnel J.,T9^37^2\h), lbU-l«7, (Kirk).

Preliminary Validation Report on the Purdue Basic OralComraunication Evaluation Form. Personnel J., 1963, U2(U),191-193, (Pace & Simons).

Developing a Single Forced-Choice Performance Evaluation Key forSeveral Professional Groups . Personnel Psychol., 1963, 16(2),i5Y-161, (Hwrell).

A Not e on Appraising Coimselors -in-Training . J. Clin. Psychol.,1963, h, pp. 30b-310, (Bear & Odbert).

The Development and Validation for Forced-Choice PerformanceReports for Agents and Chairmen of the Ohio CooperativeE;:tens ion' Service . Dissert. Abstr., 1963, 23(y), 2977, (Hudson).

The Fate of Role Stereotypes in Two Performance Appraisal Situations .

Personnel Psychol., 1963, 16(3), 269-260, (Hanson, Morton, &P^athaus )

.

Performance Appraisals; Effects on Emplcyees and Their Performance .

Ann Arbor, Michigan; Foundation for Research on HumanBehavior, I963, ii, 6iip., (Zander).

Bibliography on Maintenance Personnel Performance Measiirement

.

US.1F A>1RL Memo., 1963, No. P-U5, iv, 19p., (Askren)

.

Effects of Confidentiality on Performance Ratings of ProfessionalHealth Personnel . Personnel Psychol.. 1963, 16(2^), 3»5-393.(Creswell)'.

Maturity of Self-Perception in Relation to Managerial Success .

Personnel Psychol., 1962;, 17(1), kl-k^, (Ghiselli)

.

Recall of Critical Incidents . PRS Rep., No. 61i-2, I5p.,(Mayeske & Glickinan)";

Writing Work Evaluation Reports: Chore or Challenge ? Amer. J. ofOccup. Therapy, 196ii, 1«(2), 63-65, (overs).

Some Determinants of Supervisory and Peer Ratings . Dissert.Abstr., 196U, 2U(12), ^^26, (Bass).


Relationships Between Job Difficulty, Ehplcyee's Attitude Toward

His J ob, and Supervisoiy Ratings of the anplcyee Effectiveness

.

jT^pTTPirchol., 195Ii/i;8(5), 320~32lI7Tsvetlik, Prien &

Barrett)

.

Supervisor Esteem and Personnel Evaluations. J. Appl. Psychol.,

19"53I7~W(2l7 106-109, (i^felson) .

An Industrial Use of Peer Ratiia&s . J. Appl. Psychol., 1961;,

ITS (TO, 211-2TX, (Roadman).

Measure Executive Performance Iffithout Guesswork . Bus ines s

Management, December 196ii,~ (Hackemann)

.

Development of a Counselling Form for Use by Supervising Officers .

USiLF PRL TDR,*Wo. 6U-12, 2ap., (Ffuchter & James) .

A Uord Picture Checklist for Officer Effectivenejs_Reports

.

USAE PPi TO No. 6U-30, (McKendry & Linds"^

.

Source of Rater Bias in Forced-Distribution Performance Ratings.

Dissert. Ibstr., 196U, 2^(^773703, iKlores )

.

Peer Rating Stability in Changing Groups . USA PRO Tech. Res.

Note, 196ir, No. 1U2, 13p., (Medland & Olans)

.

Feasibility of Distinguishing Supervis or's Policies in Evaluation

of Subordinates by Using Ratings of Simulated Job Inci^robents .

US/lF PRL TR No. 6U-25, 13 Ip., (Naylor Sc iJheriy) .

l»lhat_Can_ Critical Incidents Tell Management ? PRS No. 61;-5,

i7p. , (Kayeske, Harmon, & Glickman) .

5°2ij:2L of "Halo" in Factor Analysis of a Supervisory Behavior

^^I^^SIL' Personnel Psychol., lsWr'^7 (3

)

, 3o5-318 ,(Ritti)

.

On Ihcreas uig the Sensitivity of Measure of Performance .

Er~gonomics, 19611,' ^8(1),' 69-76, (PoultonJI

Perfoiwnj;e Aj)praisal and Psychological Distance . J. Appl.

Psychol., '1965, U9(l), 1|8-5U, (Tothaus", Morton & Hanson).

A Fact or Analysis of Ratings . Nederlands Tydschrift voor de

Psy'chologie, 195F7ToT2), 95-100, (DelJolff).

Appraisalsj Ileasurement^ Assessment and Prediction . Adv. Mgmt.

J ourn .'7' 19"H5, 30 (3") , 90-914, ( Jensen)

."

A Preliminar:^'- Investigation of Rater Differenc es in Officer

Effectiveness Reports . USAF PRL TR No. ^-13, 9p.,(Tupies £c Kaplan)

.

Effects of Threat in a Performance Appraisal Interview . J. Appl.

Psychol., ~1965, U9(5), 311-317, (Kay & Meyer).

16, CPL Exchange bibliography #568

Counseling and Bnplcyee Development . Personnel Admin., 1965,2^(5) > 32-35, (Leonard).

Problem Situations in Performance Counseling . Personnel, 1965,ii2(5), 16-22, (Michael).

The Assessment of Instructors . Occup. Psychol., 1965, 39(1),/i5-55, (Martin).

What to do About Performance Appraisal. iJYC: American Ifenageraent

Ass'n., 1965, 223p., (Kellogg).

The Self-Rating as a Measure of Bnployee Satisfactoriness .

Occup. Pshchol., 1965, 39(2), 103-113, (Pin&Auld).

A New Merit Rating Method; Its Development and Use in Industry .

Finland's Institute of Technology: Scientific Researches,1965, No. 20, I51ip., (Blanz).

Relationships Betx-reen Supervisory and Subordinate Ratings forTechnical Pers onneTI J. Indust. Psychol., 1965 30), 57-60

,

(Kirchner).

Simplification of BTtplcyee Appraisal Programs . J. Indust.Psychol., "r9"65, 3(U), ai-90, (Carron).

Split Roles in Performance Appraisal . Harv. Bus. Rev., 1965,It3(l), 123-129, (Meyer, Kay & French)

.

ySAF Officer Evaluation System Survey; Attitudes and Experience .

US.^IF PRL Tech. Rep., 1965, No. 65-17, v, 75p., (Kaplan &Alvard)

.

Performance Rating . Science Research Associates, Chicago, 1966,(Barrett)

.

Strengthening Employee Performance Evaluation. Public PersonnelAssociation, Chicago, Illinois, 1966, (Coop)

.

Nursing Evaluation; The Problem and the Process; The CriticalIncident Teclmique . NYC; Macmillan. 1966. xii. 22ap.,(i'ivars & Gosnell)

.

Pei-formance Rating . Chicago, Illinois: Science Research Assoc.Inc., 19667Tx, I66p., (Barrett).

Relationship BetxTeen Ratings Assigned to Supervisors and TheirHidings 01 Subordinates . Psychological Reports, 1966, ia(l)

,

1587(femano, Poxiell & Martin).

Participation and the Appraisal System . Human Relations, 1966,19(1), 3-20", (ijrench, Kay & Meyer).

Why Goal Oriented Performance Reviex-rs Succeed and Fail. PersonnelV J., 196b, k^{t), 335-311, (Hughes).

17. CPL Exchange Bibliography #5^8

A rorT.rard Step in Performance Evaluation . Journal of Marketing,

1966, 30{3), 26-32, (Easton)

.

Dimensions of Peer and Supervisor Ratings in a Military Setting.

USW MJRU Rep., 1966, No. 66-1, S'p', (Nelson & Berry).

Reference Groups in Man-to-Man Performance Rating . Personnel

Psychol., 1966, 19(2), 115-1U2, (Ross). ~

Supervisory Characteristics and Attitudes Toward Performance

Appraisals^ Personnel Psychol., 1966, 19(2), liil-lUJ,

(Greenfeld & Weissenberg)

.

Bnployee Appraisal ^sterns in Australian Industry; Policies and

Operations" Personnel Pract. Bull., 1966, 22(1), i>2|-61,

(McCaiman)

.

Effect of Instructions and Item Tone on Reactions to Forced -

Choice PairsT Personnel Psychol., 1966, 19(3), 297-300,

IjFaters) ~.

Reflections Before the Interviei'j . Personnel J., 1966, h$(.9)

,

5U1-SU3, (Woland)

.

The Influence of the Supervisor's Requirements on Ratings .

Pers onnel Psychol., 1966, 19(il), 3Yb-387, (Barrett).

A Note on Supervisor Ratings . Personnel Psychol., 1966, 19{h)s

U23-U26, (Berry, Nelson & McNally)

.

Rater Bias in Forced-Distribution Performance Ratings . Personnel

Psychol., 1966, 19(U), U11-U21, (Klores).

A Reviex>r of Merit Rating Methods . Indian Psychological RevieX'T,

1966, 3 (1)~ 21-32, (Chatterjee & Mukherjee).

Motivation; Key to Successful Performance Counseling . Personnel

J., 1966, U5(2), 90-9ii, (Frohlich).

Concept of Soldier's Efficiency . P^chological Researches, 1966,

1(1-2), 15-23, (Jain),

Bnployee Appraisal Systems in Australian Industry; Methods of

Appraisal . Personnel Pract. Bull., 1966, 22(3), U^-Sb^

'(McCaiman)

.

The Relationship Between Supervisory and Self -Appraisals of

Executive Performance . Dissert. Abstr., 196?, 27(7-B),

2533, (Thornton).

A Guide for Discussing Performance Appraisal . Personnel J.,

1967, U6 (3), 150-152, (Leskovec).

18. CPL Exchange Bibliography #$68

Statement Scaling Study for Ih Rating Characteristics of theCommander's Evaluation Report . U. S. Army EnlistedEvaluation Center Technical Research Study, 196?, No. 89,22p., (Bodi).

Performance Appraisal; A New Look. Personnel Admin., 196?,30(.2), 3-5, 16-lB, (Huse).

Why Don't Ihplayees Speak Up ? Personnel Admin., 1967, 30(3),ia-2U, (Vogel).

Parkinson's Law as a Goal Setting Phenomenon . OrganizationalBehavior & Human Performance, 1967, 2(3), 258-275,(Bryan & Locke)

.

The Relation Between Effectiveness Ratings and SelectedCharacteristics of the Rating lyads . USAF PRL TechnicalReport, 1967, No. 67-18, 25p., (Quinn).

Job Performance of Young Workers in Relation to School Back-ground; A Pilot Approach . Dissert. Abstr.. 1967, 27C12 -A )

,

u033, (Beagstrom).

The i'lultitrait-Multirater Approach to Measuring Managerial JobPerformance^ J. Appl. Psych., 1967, 51(57 Pt. 1), 369-381,(LawlerJ^

Role Definition and Performance Appraisal in Management . Dissert.Abstr., 1967, 27(12-B), li^^8, (Strong)

.

The Assessment of Individual Performance in Small AntarcticGroups; II. Ratings on the Leary Interpersonal Checklist .

Australian Mlitaiy Forces Res. Rep., 1967, No. 9-67, ii,9p., (Owens) .

The Assessment of the Efficiency of Air Force Officers . AustralianPsychologist, 1967, 2(1), (Want).

Congruence of Staff Nurses' Self-Rating of Performance WithSupervisor's Patln&s^ Nursing Research, 1967, 16(1^),368-371, (Rosen)"".

Certain Social Psychological Aspects of Supervisory PerformanceQuantification in Lare.e Work Organizations. Dissert. Abstr.,196"/, 2B(2-A), 813-BlE, (Balk).

Performance Assessment Based on an Empirically Derived TaskTaxononw . Human Factors, 1967, 9(U), 3U9-366, (Fleishman).

Nurse Performance Description; Criteria, Predictors, andCorrelates , Dissert. Abstr.. 1967. 28n-B), 962-96^. (l^er).

Selected Determinates of Retail Appliance Salesman's Performance .

Dissert. Abstr., 1967, 2«(5-A), 1562, (Gotha;n)..


Performance Appraisals; The Relation Between Ratings and

Selected Gharact'eristics of the Rating I>y-ads . Dissert.

AbitT., 1967, 25C5-B), 2172-2173, (Quixin)

.

Development of Performance Evaluative Measures; Personnel

Psychophysics; The Relationship Between Structure of

Intellect Scale Values and Job Complexity . Wayne

,

Pennsylvania: Applied Psychological Services, 1967,

V, 31p.3 (Pfeiffer & Siegel)

.

Absolute Scaling of Job Performance . J. Appl. Psychol., 1968,

52 (U), 313-318, (Siegel, Schultz, Fischl, & Lanterman)

.

The Officer Effectiveness Report as a Performance Measure; A

Research Review. USAF' AFHRL Technical Report, lyoO,

No. 68-113, 21p., (Sturiale)

.

The Supervisor's Bnployee Appraisal Heuristics The Contribution

of Selected Measures of Emplgyee Attitude, intelligence and

Personality . Dissert. Abstr., 1968, 28(ll-A), ii321, U-Jelsch)

Assessing the Performance of Key Managers. Personnel, Jan-Feb.

1968, (Hughes).

New Context of Personnel Appraisal . Harv. Bus. Rev., 1968

(Nov), U6(6), lii-29, (Sloan & Johnson)

.

A Systems Analytic Approach to Assessment of Human Reliability.

U. S. Naval Submarine Medical Center Memo. Report, 1968,

68-15, 1-13, (Weybow & Kins^)

.

Comparing Prediction of Job Performance Ratings from Trait

Ratings for Aircraft Mechanics and Administrative Airmen .

US.'^F AFHRL Technical Report, October 1968, b8-10«, (IJiley

& Cagi-rin)

.

Validity of Reference Ratings from Previous Bnplqyers . Personnel

Psychol., 1968, 21(3), 389-393, (Brovining) ."

Development of Performance Evaluative Measures; Personnel

Psychophysics; Terminal Threshold and Signal Detection

Theoretic Applications to Performance Assessment . Wayne

,

Pennsylvania; Applied Psychological Services, 1968, v,

52p., (Siegel, Fischl, & Pfeiffer)

.

A Study of Individual Differences in Repetitive Task Performance .

Dissert. Abstr., 196b, 29(2-B), 800-bOl, (Taylor).

Performance Appraisal Based on Self-Review. Personnel PsychoL,

1968, 21(l4), U21-U30, (Bassett & Meyer)

.

Stereotyped Patterns in Air Force Officer Performance Factor

"Ratings . US.'\F PRL Technical Report, 1968, No. 6ti-6,

22p., (Sturiale )

.


Analysis of Performance Criteria and Comparison of a Priori andBnpirically-Derived Keys for a Forced-Choice Scoring .

Personnel Psychol., 1966, 21(U), 505-513, (Prien & Kult)

.

The Relationship Between Supervisory and Self-Appraisals of

Executive Performance. Personnel Psychol., 1966, 21(U),

UU1-U55, (Thornton).

Scientific Observation in l^ork Evaluation * Amer. J. of

Occupational Therapy, 1966, 22(6), 530-533, (Overs).

Analyzing Supervisor Ratings of Performance of Job Type Members .

Proceedings of the 77th Annual Convention of the AmericanPsychological Assoc, 1969, U(pt. 2), 703-70U, (VJil^).

Effect Upon Supervisor and Subordinate Behavior of a Third Partyl.rho is Present During the Performance Appraisal Discussion .

Proceedings of the 77th Annual Convention of the AmericanPsychological Assoc, 1969, i;(pt. 2), 595-596, (Gershman).

Job Profiles, Performance Evaluation and Career Programs .

Personnel J., 1969, U8(7), 513-522, (Prather) .

Counseling of Employees by Work Supervisors; Concepts, Attitudes ,

and Practices in a TfJhite-Collar Organization . J . CounselingPsychology, 1969, 16(1) ,"81-86, (Hunt & Lichtman)

.

Prediction of Job Performance from Assessment Reports; Use of a

Modified Q-sort Technique to Expand Predictor and CriterionVariance. J. Appl. Pgychol., 1969, 53(6), U39-UU5, (DeNelsky& McKeey.

Personality Correlates of Supervisory Ratings . Personnel Psychol.,1969, 22 (U), U63-U67, (Graham & Calendo)

.

The Identification of Executive Potential (Sears Roebuck)

.

Personnel J., 1969, U6(ll), 666-872, (Guyton).

Rorschach Assessment of Business Executives. AustralianPsychologist, 1969, U, 171-17U, (Webb).

Relationship of the Conponents of an Assessment Center toManagement Success . J. Appl. Psychol., 1969, 53(5), 3U8-352,'(V.''ollovrick & McNamara) .

Attitudes of Professional Appraisers Toward Aesthetics andAppraisal Activities . J. Appl. Psychol., 1969, 53(6),531-535, (Wright & Lemly).

Some Issues in Performance Appraisal . Personnel Admin.,1969 (Jan), 32(1), 27-30, (Dayal)

.

Bias in Performance Appraisal. Personnel Admin., 1969 (Jan),

32(1), U0-U3, (Quinn).


Characteristics of Effective Bnplcyee Performance Review and

Development JntervieTJS . Personnel Psychol., 1969, 22(3),

291^05, (Burke & Wilcox)

.

The Development of Job Performance Criterion for Evaluating

Pulp^^ôod Producers in the Southeastern United States .

Atlanta, Georgia: Amer. Pulpx^ôod Assoc, Harvesting

Research Project, 1969, (Latham).

Design and Fleet Trial of an Automated Performance Evaluation Form

for Chief Petty Officers . USN Personnel Research Activxty

Report7"l969, Wo. SSR 69-25, U5p., (Robertson).

A Study of Rater and Ratee Characteristics . Dissert. Abstr.,

jp5p--3Q^^3-j^2li5i; (Wight").~

An Examination of the Conditions VJhich Affect the Accuracy _of

Ratings. Dissert. Abstr., 1969, 30(^^.Ûh9-2UbWJGordon) .

Methods of Managing Superior-Subordinate Conflicts Their

Effectiveness and C onsequences. Canadian J . of Behavxorai

Science, 1970, 2(2)," 12U-135, '(Burke)

.

Saproving the Validity of a Fnrr.ed-Choice Reference Check wojji

Selected Rater and Job Moderators . Proceedings o^ ;^he Annual

Convention of the American Psychological Assoc, 1970,

5(pt. 2), 577-578. (Nash & Carroll).

Modificati on of the Forced-Choice Method as a Criterion of Job

ProfTciencyl J.Appl. Psychol., 1970, 5U(3)j 228-233 ,

(Obradovic )

.

A Concept of Counseling f'^r Mn'^^p,*^-^^ ^T^d Work Supervisors."~

Professional Psychology, 1970, 1(3), ^38-^112, (Hunt )

.

The Effect of the Correctness of the BehaviorÔbserved on the

Accuracy of Ratings. Organizational Behavior and Human

Performance, 1970, 5(U), 366-377, (Gordon).

Trait Validity of Airline Stei<rardess Performance Ratings

.

J. Appl. Psychol., "1970, 5U(U), 3U7-352r (Lipe) •

Assessment Center; Identifying Tomorrows ' Managers . Personnel,

1970rU7j I7-2F, CByham & Pent'ecost)

.

Relationships Between Follow-Up Evaluations and Information

Developed in a Management AssessmentCenter . Proceedings

of the Annual Convention of the American Psychological

Assoc, 1970, 5(2), 565-566, (Carleton).

The Problem of Motivation in Management Development. Personnel

3^7197^ (Oct), U9(10), a37-8l42, (Dhir;.

22. CPL Exchange Bibliographer #568

Will Management Assessment Centers Insure Selection of the SaneOld Types ? Proceedings of the Annual Convention of theAm'erican Psychological Assoc, 1970, 5(pt. 2), 569-570,(Dodd).

Validation of the Internal Characteristics of an IndustrialAssessment Center Program Using the Multitrait -Multi-MethodMatrix Approach. Dissert. Abstr. International. 1970 (Hov),31(5-B), 30U3-30hli, (Donaldson).

Multiple Assessment Procedures in Identifying and DevelopingManagerial Talent. University of Minnesota Technical Report,Aug. 1970, UOOO, (Dunnette)

.

Personal Selection and Job Placement of the Disadvantaged ;

Problems ; Issues, and Suggestions . University of MinnesotaTechnical Report, Aug. 1970, 1|001, (Dunnette)

.

An Approach to Standardizing Human Performance Assessment .

Hum. RRO Professional Paper, 1970 (Oct), Mo. 26-70, 9p.,(Bigel)

.

Assessing Corporate Talent; A K^- to Managerial Manpower Planning.ITiley Co., Weif York, 1970, (Finkle & Jones),

Evaluation of Behavior Predictions from Projective Tests givenin a Management Assessment Center . Proceedings of the AnnualConvention of the Assoc, of American Psychologists, 1970,5(pt. 2), 567-568, (Finl^).

The Development of Role Consensus and its Effect on Evaluationof Performance and Satisfaction ^^^ithin the Management Dyad .

Dissert. Abstr. International, 1970 (Aug), 31-(2-A), 51iij(Green)

.

Putting Judgment Back into Decisions; Appraising Performance .

Harv. Bus. Rev., 1970 (March), U8, 57-67, (Greiner).

The Prediction of Managerial Performance; A Previer^r . Studiesm Personnel Psychol., 1970 (April), 2(1), h-2b, (Korraan)

.

Management Selection; Buddy Nominations Revisted . PersonnelPsychol., 1970, 23(3), 377-391, (Mayf ield) .

The Relative Importance of Ten Aspects of Executive Ability .

Studies in Personnel Psychol., 1970 (April), 2, hh-hl y (Noe).

Assessment Center for Spotting Future Managers . Harv. Bus. Rev.,1970 (Ju^7), W, 150-160, (Payham).

Evaluation of Three Criteria of Management Performance . J. ofIndus. Psychol., 1970 (i^Iarch), 5, 18-28, (Ronan).

23. CPL Exchange Bibliograpl^sr #568

The Effectiveness of Aptitude Tests in the Selection of Postmen .

~ StudieTln Personnel Psychol., 1970~TOct), 2(2), 65-73~

(Sajiiuel)

.

Performance /.ppraisal; A Means or an ^. Training & Development

J'.7 1970 (iiarcTO, 2U, 52-53, (Scharinger)

.

Performance Appraisal ; ^^Mana^rs Beware. Harv. Bus. Rev.,

1976"(Jan-1^TT4H7Îl9-i'57r"(Thoinps on)

.

Bias Effect on Validity and ReliabiJlty of a Rating Scale.

Heasurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 1970, 3T2), 70-75,

(Bitter).

The Effects of the Supervisor's Race Upon Hi s_Perfpmance_ Ratings

î^_y}^Joup Interact i on in a Simulated Organization

.

Dissert, .'.bstr., i970~TNovy, 3 1 (F-Bl > 3oWTTRichards )

.

Early Identification of Managerial Potentia.1 by Means of

Assessment Centers, idlanta Economic Review, 1971 (Dec),

21,'3T-3^" (Blumenfeld) .

Efficiency of Psychological Methods forJ?ersonnel_Sejêctjx)n_în^

KLectronics ]jidustr/ . Revue Roumain'e des Sciences Sociales -

Serie'de Psychol. (French). 1971, l5, 137-li|8, (Botez,

Mamalj. & f 'eintraub)

.

The Assessment Center as an Aid in Management Development.

Training and Development J., 1971 (.DecT7"237"T0^22, (Byham)

.

Development^ of Career Motivational Prediction and Selection

Procedures. IJSW iWERL Technical Report7~1971 (Jan)

,

ITo". 71-9, (Culclasure).

Execut ive Performance Apprais al; An_Ap2licatioi^^ Non-Metric

Ifalt i-Dimensional Scaling . Proceedings of the AcadeR^r of

1-Ianagament, 1971 (Aiig), 75-80, (Egan).

Selection_ and^Jlvaluation Procedure^ for Operating; Room Personnel.

JV Appl. P'sychol., 197TlJ^TlTrr^^^^-^^»^°^^^°^ ^

Brennan)

.

L Theoretical_ I lodel^ of_Career Sub i_dentj.ty_JDevel^pmît^

Oi^_rriâ_tTonal_Sej^ Behavior & Human

Performance," 1971 (Jan)", 6(1), 60-76, (Hall).

Assessment Center (Southern Bell) . Administrative Management,

r97lTOct)7"32, 67-68, (JeUcs).

Owens, Illinois Lon^|4j>udina 1_ Study_£f_ Manager Performance

.

Catalog of Selected' Documents in Psychol., 1971, 1, 26-27,

(Kavanagh)

.

2U. CPL Exchange bibliograpty j^'SdS

Appraising; Managers as Hanagers . McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York,1971, (Knoontz)

.

Use of lianagers ' Peer Ratings to Predict Executive Success .

Proceedings of the Annual Convention of the AmericanPsychol. Assoc, 1971, 6(pt. 2), k^S-h^^, (Kraut).

Validating the Selection of Deputy Marshals * Proceedings of theAnnual Convention of the American Psychol. Assoc, 1971,6(pt. 1), 131-132, (Leiren, Kiker & Phelan)

.

Assessment Centers, A Flexible Program for Supervisors.Personnel, 1971, UO, 35-UO, (McConnell)

.

Prediction of Job Success and Emplqyee Satisfaction forExecutives "and Foremen . Training & Development J., 1971"(Oct), "25, 2a-36, (Slocum & Hand).

Performance Appraisal of Mon-Self Directed Personnel . PersonnelJ., 1971 (July), 50(7), 521-527, (Wallace).

'IJhere They Make Believe They 're the Boss" (Assessment Centers ).""^

Business lêek, 1971 CAugust), 3U-35.~~

Porter Hetworks in the Appraisal Process . Harv. Bus. Rev., 1971(May), U9, 101-109, (IrJhite & Barnes).

Superior-Subordinate Similarity, Performance Evaluation, and JobSa^tis faction . Dissert. Abstr., 1971 (Jan). 31(7-E). h3iiO,(Hubi?77~~~

Modification of Forced-Choice Format for Use in Personnel§gigc"'îo" and Appraisal . Psychological Reports, 1971,(Feb), 20(1), lOb-110, (Wash).

Factors Related to Hctt Superiors Establish Goals and Revier-T

Performance for Their Subordinates . Proceedings of theAnnual Convention of the American Psychol. Assoc, 1971,6(pt. 2), k91-h9Q, (Carrol, Cintron, & Tosi).

Negro_j^ miite Differences in Validity of Employment and TrainingSelection Procedures: Summary of Research Evidence. J. Appl.PsycTSl., 1972 (Feb), 56(1), 33-39, (Boehm)

.

M°ZJLgggP.l^P> ôr Personnel Selection. J. Appl. Psychol., 1972,(Feb), ^6(1), UO-lil^, (Campion).

Future iianar.ers ; Spot Them Fast, Challenge Them Often (Univac ).Iron Age, June 15, 1972, 209-223, (Cathey)

.

Reference Guide to the Assessment Center Program . Catalog ofSelected Documents in Psychol., 1972, 2, 85, (Cohen).

2$. GPL Exchange Bibliography #568

The Effect of Flexibility - Rip;idity and Age on Adaptability in

Job Performance . Industrial Gerontologj-, 1912, No. 13?

105-121/ (Croim) .

Leaders of Tomorrow; Their Identification and Development .

Personnel J., 1972, 51, 662-666, (Ginsburg & Silverman)

.

Supervisory Selection Program for Disadvantapêd or 14inority

ETi£lqy;ees. Training & Development TT, 1972 (Jan), ZO, 22-27,

"(Jafiee, Cohen, & Cherry).

Hard Look at Management Assessment Centers and The ir Future^.

Resource"!., 1972 U'lay), 51, 317-326, (Kraut).

Validity of an Operational Management Assessment Program . J. Appl.

Psychol., 1972 (April), ^ 12ii-129, (lût & Scott).

Uneasy Look at Performance Appraisal - Reprint of Sawe 1957

Article. ISFT. Bus. Rev., 1972 (Sept.j, 3o, 133-130rvMcGregor)

Assessment Center Performance and Management Progres s^. Studies in

Personnel P^chol., 1972, U, 7-12, (Moses).

Identification and Development of Tomorrot-T's Managers . Personnel

J., 1972 (Jan), 51(1), U6-U9, (Muse).

Make Performance Appraisal Relevant . Harv. Bus. Rev., 1972

(Jan), 50, 61-67, (Oberg)

.

Rating in Performance Appraisal; A Bibliography . Australian Arn^

Psychol. Research Unit Research Report, 1972 (March), ii(72),

(0 'Gorman)

.

Assessinent_Center; Breakthrough in Management Appraisal and

Development . Personnel J., 1972 (April), !?l, '^^J^-ôi,

(t>levin).

Pick Them Young - Then Push (Westinghouse Personnel Appraisal

ProgramT. IndustrylJeek, 1972, 17i|, 37-Ul, (fhon^son).

Performance Standards for Managers . Personnel J., 1972 (Jan),

5irir. 2T=3Tnônder).

Criterion Models and Construct Validity for Criteria. Psychol.

Bull., 1973", 80 CO, 75-8J.

The Development and Evaluation of BehavioralXy Based Rating

Scales . J, Appl. Psychol., 1973, 57Tl)7l5-22, (Campbell,

Bunnette, Arvey, & Hellervilc).

Relationship Between Measures of Effort and Job Performance.

J. Appl. Psychol., 1973, 57(1), h9-Sh, (IJilliams & '

Seller)

.

26. GPL Exchange Bibliograplry #568

Implic it Personality Theory . Psychol. Bull., 1973, 79(5)>29h-309, (Schneider).

I'Jhat is lyp ical of Assessment Centers ? Personnel, 1973 (July),

"To, 50-57, (Bender).

Perforraance Apprais a 1 ; A Critique and an Alternative . Bus ines

s

Horizons, 1973'TJune), iS773-y, (Conant).

Hot-r Can Appraisal of Managers be Made Effective ? SAi4 AdvancedManagement J., 1973 (April), 3^, 11-21, (Koontz).

Sizing Up Assessment Centers Personnel Management, 1973~TOct), 5, 36-38, (McConnell)

.

Leader Orientation, Leader Behavior Group Effectiveness andSituational Favorability ; An Bnpirical Extension of theContigency Model . Organizational Behavior and HumanPerformance, 1973 (April), 9(2), 226-2U55 (Michaelsen)

.

Identification Systems; The Key to Effective Manporrer Planning(Government Wide Executive Dep"artment Guidelines; AssessmentCenter). Personnel J., 1973 (June), 52, J43U-UI1I, (Pomarleau)

.

Performance Revietr - A Mixed Bag . Harv. Bus. Rev., 1973 (July),5l7""67T77THieder)

.

Assessment Centers - Further Assessment Needed ? Personnel J.,1973 (March), 52, 172-179, (V/ilson & Tatge)

.

COUl^lCIL OF PLAWNBIG LIBRARIANS ~ Exchange Bibliography #560

PERFORl'LlNCE APPR/iISAL: A SELECTED CHRONOLOGICAL BLBLICGRAPHT

19U8-1973

Additional copies available from;

Council of Plannijig LibrariansPost Office Box 229Monticello, Illinois, 6I856

for $2.50.

Performance appraisal: a selected chronological ...

Documents

Transcript of Performance appraisal: a selected chronological ...