This study employed a quasiexperimental control group design in a university setting to test the effect of a rater-training program on reducing social style bias in intragroup peer evaluations after controlling for ability based on GPA. Comparison of rating scores of the test group to the control group indicated minimal social style rating bias in the test group, whereas significant bias was exhibited in the control group. Implications for college instructors who use peer evaluations for grading in team projects are discussed.
Antonioni, D., & Park, J. (2001). The effects of personality similarity on peer ratings of contextual work behaviors. Personnel Psychology , 54, 331-360.
2.
Barkley, E.F., Cross, K.P., & Major, C.H. (2005). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
3.
Bolton, R., & Bolton, D.G. (1996). People styles at work: Making bad relationships good and good relationships better. New York: Amacon - American Management Association.
4.
Brooks, C.M., & Ammons, J.L. (2003). Free riding in group projects and the effects of timing, frequency, and specificity of criteria on peer assessments. Journal of Education for Business, 78, 268-272.
5.
Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin .
6.
Farh, J., Cannella, A.A., & Bedeian, A.G. (1991). Peer ratings: The impact of purpose on rating quality and user acceptance. Group & Organization Studies , 16, 367-386.
7.
Greenan, K., Humphreys, P., & McIlveen, H. (1997). Developing transferable personal skills: Part of the graduate toolkit. Education & Training, 39, 71-78.
8.
Gueldenzoph, L.E., & May, G.L. (2002). Collaborative peer evaluation: Best practices for group member assessments. Business Communication Quarterly , 65(1), 9-20.
9.
Heslin, P.A. (2005). Conceptualizing and evaluating career success . Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(2), 113-127.
10.
Johnson, C.B., & Smith, F.I. (1997). Assessment of a complex peer evaluation instrument for team learning and group processes. Accounting Education , 2, 21-41.
11.
Kane, J.S., & Lawler, E.E. (1978). Methods of peer assessment. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 555-586.
Leimbach, M. (1991). Research use of the Social style Profile. Edina, MN: Wilson Learning Research and Development .
14.
May, G.L., & Gueldenzoph, L.E. (2006). The impact of social style on peer evaluation ratings in project teams. Journal of Business Communication, 43, 4-20.
15.
Merrill, D.W., & Reid, R.H. (1999). Personal styles and effective performance. New York: CRC Press.
16.
Merva, M. (2003). Grades as incentives: A quantitative assessment with implications for study abroad programs. Journal of Studies in International Education, 7, 149-156.
17.
Mitchell, J.V., Jr. (1992). Interrelationships and predictive efficacy for indices of intrinsic, extrinsic, and self-assessed motivation for learning. Journal of Research and Development in Education , 25, 149-155.
18.
Smith, D.E. (1986). Training programs for performance appraisal: A review. Academy of Management Review, 11, 22-40.
19.
Tracom (1991). The social style profile-Technical report: Development, reliability and validity. Denver, CO: Author.
20.
Waldman, D.A., & Avolio, B.J. (1991). Race effects in performance evaluations: Controlling for ability, education, and experience. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 897-901.
21.
Ward, M.A. (2005). An empirical assessment of peer review reliability: The ipsitive instrument paradox. Journal of Education for Business, 81, 35-40.
22.
Wilson Learning. (1990, January). The statistical adequacy of the social style profile. Edina, MN: Author .
23.
Woehr, D.J., & Huffcutt, A.L. (1994). Rater training for performance appraisal: A quantitative review. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 4, 189-216.
