Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory

Atilla YELBOĞA (Ankara Üniversitesi, Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Uygulama Merkezi, Ankara, Türkiye)
Eğitim ve Bilim
2 1
Yıl: 2012 Cilt: 37 Sayı: 163 Sayfa Aralığı: 157 - 164 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory

Öz:
Bu makale, iş performansı ölçeklerinde güvenirliğin değerlendirilmesinde Genellenebilirlik Kuramı’nın kullanılmasına bir giriş niteliğindedir. Genellenebilirlik Kuramı, eğitim bilimleri ve psikolojide sıklıkla kullanılan bir kuramdır. Temelde, Genellenebilirlik Kuramı birden fazla hata kaynağını aynı anda göz önüne alarak güvenirliği değerlendirir. Özellikle de birden fazla değerlendiricinin bulunduğu ölçme durumlarında kullanımı tercih edilmektedir. İş performansı ölçümünde birden fazla hata kaynağının değerlendirilmesi için Genellenebilirlik Kuramı uygun bir yöntemdir. Bu çalışmada, iş performansında ölçme hatalarının değerlendirilmesi için Genellenebilirlik Kuramı’nın ilkeleri uygulanarak sonuçları tartışılmıştır.
Anahtar Kelime: genellenebilirlik kuramı iş performansı güvenirlilik

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları

Genellenebilirlik Kuramı’na göre iş performansı ölçeklerinde güvenilirlik

Öz:
This article introduces the application of Generalizability Theory in assessing the reliability of job performance ratings. Generalizability Theory is frequently used in educational sciences and psychology. Basically, Generalizability Theory can be used to assess reliability in the presence of multiple sources of error. Also, it can be used to assess reliability in the presence of different types of sources of error. In this study, the application of Generalizability Theory in measurement involving multiple raters is considered in particular. Generalizability Theory seems like an ideal theory for examining multiple sources of error in job performance measurement. With this study, principles of Generalizability Theory are used in determining measurement errors that occur while evaluating job performance.
Anahtar Kelime: dependability generalizability theory job performance

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları
Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Atılgan, H., & Tezbaşaran, A. A. (2005). An investigation on consistency G and Phi coefficients obtained by generalizability theory alternative decision study for scenarios and actual cases. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 18, 28-40.
  • Bergee, M. J. (2007). Performer, rater, occasion and sequence as sources of variability in music performance assessment. Journal of Research in Music Education , 55(4), 344-358.
  • Brennan, R. L. (1992). Elements of generalizability theory. Iowa City, IA: American College Testing.
  • Brennan, R. L. (2000). Performance assessment from the perspectives of generalizability theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 339-353.
  • Brennan, R. L. (2001). Generalizability theory. New York/Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  • Campbell, J. P., Gasser, M. B., & Oswald, F. L. (1996). The substantive nature of job performance variability. In K. R. Murphy (Ed.), Individual differences and behavior in organizations, 258-299. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Cascio, W. F. (1991). Applied psychology in personnel management (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Clauser, B. E., Clyman, S. G., & Swanson, D. B. (1999). Components of rater error in a complex performance assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 29-45.
  • Cleveland, J. N., Murphy, K. R., & Williams, R. E. (1989). Multiple uses of performance appraisal: Prevalence and correlates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 130-135.
  • Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
  • Cronbach, L. J., Rajaratnam, N., & Gleser, B. (1963). Theory of generalizability: A liberalization of reliability theory. British Journal of Statistical Pscyhology, 16, 137-163.
  • Cronbach, L., Gleser, G. C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements. New York: Wiley.
  • Greguras, G. J., & Robie, C. (1998). A new look at within source interrater reliability of 360 degree feedback ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 960-968.
  • Kan, A. (2007). Effect of using a scoring guide on essay scores: Generalizability theory. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 105, 891-905
  • Kieffer, K. M. (1999). Why generalizability theory is essential and classical test theory is often in adequate. In B. Thompson (Ed.), Advances in social science methodology, 5, 149-170.Greenwich, CT: JAI.
  • Kraiger, K., & Teachout, M. S. (1990). Generalizability theory as construct related evidence of the validity of job performance ratings. Human Performance , 3, 19-35.
  • Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  • Morris, S. B., & Lobsenz, R. (2003). Evaluating personnel selection systems. In J. E. Edwards, J. C.
  • Scott, & N. S. Raju (Eds.), The human resources program-evaluation handbook (pp. 109-129). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational and goal based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Murphy, K. R., & DeShon, R. (2000a). Interrater correlations do not estimate the reliability of job performance ratings. Personnel Psychology, 53, 873-900.
  • Murphy, K. R., & DeShon, R. (2000b). Progress in psychometrics: Can industrial and organizational psychology catch up? Personnel Psychology, 53, 913-924.
  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill.
  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1992). Causal modeling of processes determining job performance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 89-92.
  • Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1996). Measurement error in psychological research: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1, 199-223.
  • Schmidt, F. L., Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2000). Reliability is not validity and validity is not reliability. Personnel Psychology, 53, 901-912.
  • Shavelson, R. J., & Webb, N. M. (1991). Generalizability theory: A primer. Newburry Park CA: Sage.
  • Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2005). Job performance: Assessment issues in personnel selection. In A. Evers, N. Anderson, & O. Voskuijl (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of personnel selection (pp. 354-375). United Kingdom: Blackwell.
  • Viswesvaran, C., Ones, D. S., & Schmidt, F. L. (2002). The moderating influence of job performance dimensions on convergence of supervisory and peer ratings of job performance: uconfounding construct-level convergence and rating difficulty. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 345-354.
  • Viswesvaran, C., Schmidt, F. L., & Ones, D. S. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 557-574.
  • Webb, N. M., Shavelson, R. J., Kim, K. S., & Chen, Z. (1989). Reliability (generalizability) of job performance measurements: Navy machinist mates. Journal of Military Psychology, 1, 91-110.
  • Yelboğa, A. (2003). The examination of the psychometric qualities of the scale developed for the performance evaluation in the management of human resources, Unpublished master thesis. Ankara University.
  • Yelboğa, A. ve Tavşancıl, E. (2010). The examination of reliability according to classical test and generalizability on a job performance scale. Educational Science: Theory & Practice. 10(3),1825-1854.
APA YELBOĞA A (2012). Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory. , 157 - 164.
Chicago YELBOĞA Atilla Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory. (2012): 157 - 164.
MLA YELBOĞA Atilla Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory. , 2012, ss.157 - 164.
AMA YELBOĞA A Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory. . 2012; 157 - 164.
Vancouver YELBOĞA A Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory. . 2012; 157 - 164.
IEEE YELBOĞA A "Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory." , ss.157 - 164, 2012.
ISNAD YELBOĞA, Atilla. "Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory". (2012), 157-164.
APA YELBOĞA A (2012). Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory. Eğitim ve Bilim, 37(163), 157 - 164.
Chicago YELBOĞA Atilla Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory. Eğitim ve Bilim 37, no.163 (2012): 157 - 164.
MLA YELBOĞA Atilla Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory. Eğitim ve Bilim, vol.37, no.163, 2012, ss.157 - 164.
AMA YELBOĞA A Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory. Eğitim ve Bilim. 2012; 37(163): 157 - 164.
Vancouver YELBOĞA A Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory. Eğitim ve Bilim. 2012; 37(163): 157 - 164.
IEEE YELBOĞA A "Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory." Eğitim ve Bilim, 37, ss.157 - 164, 2012.
ISNAD YELBOĞA, Atilla. "Dependability of job performance ratings according to Generalizability Theory". Eğitim ve Bilim 37/163 (2012), 157-164.
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
22-04-2024 17:10

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları