AN INVESTIGATION OF USER ACCEPTANCE OF PEER EVALUATIONS1

Abstract

Peer evaluations show promise as valid, reliable measures of performance, but users' resistance to peer evaluations may limit their use. This study investigated employees' acceptance of the practice of peer ratings, and factors related to this acceptance. Subjects were 174 faculty of a university where faculty peer evaluations had been practiced for six years. Results indicated a relatively low degree of user acceptance of the practice of peer evaluations. Six factors of peer evaluations and their users were hypothesized as relating to user acceptance. Correlational and multiple regression analyses indicated strong support for the relationship between user acceptance and two factors: perceived friendship bias and perceived feedback value. Perceived validity of peer ratings, perceived effects on morale, and satisfaction with previous peer ratings were positively but not uniquely correlated with user acceptance. There was no evidence of a relation between previous peer ratings and user acceptance. These findings were discussed in terms of implications for policy changes which might increase user acceptance of peer evaluations.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 81 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.