Abstract
In two studies of 360° judgments, it was shown that congruence measured in terms of intercorrelations between ratings by different people (congruence‐r) and in terms of the discrepancy between those ratings (congruence‐d) were empirically independent of each other. Congruence‐r was greatest, and congruence‐d was smallest, between judgments made by a target person and his or her supervisor, rather than by subordinates or peers; the differential observability of rated behaviors predicted congruence‐r but not congruence‐d. Variations in both forms of congruence were found to arise from the source of a judgment, and from a target person's age, gender, cognitive ability, and certain personality attributes. Over‐ and under‐rating associated with a personality or another third factor was shown to derive from substantially different correlations between such a factor and the two separate judgments under consideration.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
