job_performance_scale

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

job_performance_scale [2013/12/30 21:25] (current)
filination created
Line 1: Line 1:
 +====== Job performance self-rating scale ======
  
 +I only use this measure as a complement to real objective measures. Top journals for not stand for this measure as a sole indicator.
 +
 +Described in my thesis :
 +<​blockquote>​
 +Job Performance. Job performance will include two measures - objective and self-reported job performance. [...] To complement the objective measure, participants will also be asked to indicate their own performance by indicating their own approval rate, number of tasks and to rate performance on a job performance scale (Pruden & Reese, 1972) regarding their MTurk work, subjectively comparing themselves to other workers on MTurk on quality, meeting expectations and speed (from 1 = Below Average - Below 25% ; 2 = About Average – Better than 25% ; 3 = Above Average – Better than 50% ; 4 = Near the top – Better than 75% ; 5 = The best - Better than 90%). Several studies have shown support for self assessments and self rating as a reliable measure of objective performance (Anderson, Warner, & Spencer, 1984 ; Fox & Dinur, 1988).
 +</​blockquote>​
 +
 +Some use the following scale :
 +<​blockquote>​
 +(1 = Bottom 40% ; 2 = Average ; 3 = Upper 40% ; 4 = Top 20% ; 5 = Top 10% ; 6 = Top 5%)
 +</​blockquote>​
 +
 +===== The scale =====
 +
 +Ran the following on MTurk for workers to evaluate themselves.
 +<​blockquote>​
 +How would you rate your work compared to others in terms of :
 +  - Quality of the end result
 +  - Meeting expectations in the task
 +  - Speed
 +  - Value per money paid
 +</​blockquote>​
  • job_performance_scale.txt
  • Last modified: 2013/12/30 21:25
  • by filination