Three formats (I, behavioral expectation scales; II, checklist; and III, graphic rating), each with an underlying behavioral expectation frame of reference, were compared for their variations in performance evaluation results. In addition, the effect of different scoring systems, for the same set of data, on the evaluation results were examined. Students (I, N = 50; II, N = 48; and III, N = 43) evaluated an instructor on forms which were developed by utilizing data generated in the Harari and Zedeck (1973) study. Results indicated that conclusions with respect to performance evaluation can be a function of response format or scoring system. Implications of these results with respect to their effect on the traditional response biases of halo and leniency are offered along with methods, for their assessment.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes