Nature and consequences of halo error: a critical analysis
Article Abstract:
The definition of haloerror that dominated researchers' thinking for most of this century implied that (a) halo error was common; (b) it was a rate error, with true and illusorycomponents; (c) it led to inflated correlations among rating dimensions and wasdue to the influence of a general evaluation on specific judgments; and (d) it had negative consequences and should be avoided or removed. We review research showing that all of the major elements of this conception of halo are either wrong or problematic. Because of unresolved confounds of true and illusory haloand the often unclear consequences of halo errors, we suggest a moratorium on the use of halo indices as dependent measures in applied research. We suggest specific directions for future research on halo that take into account the context in which judgments are formed and ratings are obtained and that more clearly distinguish between actual halo errors and the apparent halo effect. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)
Publication Name: Journal of Applied Psychology
Subject: Social sciences
ISSN: 0021-9010
Year: 1993
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
A meta-analysis of interrater and internal consistency reliability of selection interviews
Article Abstract:
A meta-analysis of 111 interrater reliability coefficients and 49 coefficient alphas from selection interviews was conducted. Moderators of interrater reliability included study design, interviewer training, and 3 dimensions of interview structure (standardization of questions, of response evaluation, and of combining multiple ratings). Interactions showed that standardizing questions had a stronger moderating effect on reliability when coefficients were from separate (rather than panel) interviews, and multiple ratings were useful when combined mechanically (there was no evidence of usefulness when combined subjectively). Average correlations (derived from alphas) between ratings were moderated by standardization of questions and number of ratings made. Upper limits of validity were estimated to be .67 for highly structured interviews and .34 for unstructured interviews. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)
Publication Name: Journal of Applied Psychology
Subject: Social sciences
ISSN: 0021-9010
Year: 1995
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Art as an autopoietic sub-system of modern society: a critical analysis of the concepts of art and autopoietic systems in Luhmann's late production
- Abstracts: Exploratory study of individual assessment practices: interrater reliability and judgments of assessor effectiveness
- Abstracts: Goal importance, self-focus, and the goal-setting process. Investigation of the construct validity of a self-report measure of goal commitment
- Abstracts: Age differences in information processing: understanding deficits in young and elderly consumers. Age differences in product categorization
- Abstracts: Individual and group goals when workers are interdependent: effects on task strategies and performance. Effects of valence, expectancies, and goal-performance discrepancies in single and multiple goal environments