arbiter
JournalsAccount

Comparing Ratee Reactions to the Relative Percentile Method and the Graphic Rating Scale

Kabir N. Daljeet et al.

Journal of Personnel Psychology2025https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000371article
AJG 2ABDC B
Weight
0.37

Abstract

Abstract: We examined how reactions to the Relative Percentile Method (RPM, a social comparative method) and the Graphic Rating Scale (GRS, an absolute performance rating method) influenced ratee feedback reactions, including perceptions of accuracy, fairness, clarity, self-awareness, and their intentions to use the feedback. We recruited 311 participants online and randomly assigned them to receive either social-comparative or absolute performance feedback in an exercise where they were asked to take on the role of an employee receiving feedback. Participants acting as ratees who received social-comparative feedback via the RPM reported significantly greater self-awareness and intention to use the feedback than ratees who received absolute feedback via the GRS. The implications and future directions are discussed.

1 citation

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000371

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{kabir2025,
  title        = {{Comparing Ratee Reactions to the Relative Percentile Method and the Graphic Rating Scale}},
  author       = {Kabir N. Daljeet et al.},
  journal      = {Journal of Personnel Psychology},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000371},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Comparing Ratee Reactions to the Relative Percentile Method and the Graphic Rating Scale

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.