Abstract
dc:description.abstractThe O*NET was built to replace the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) and form a highly accessible, on-line (through the World Wide Web), common language occupational information center (Dye & Silver, 1999). This study tested the relevance of the self-rating choice and unconventional BARS format to be used by the O*NET system for occupational ratings. In addition, a new rating scale format named NBADS, was tested for improved ratings. Fifty three Incumbent raters in two occupations (Graduate teaching assistants and Secretaries) and 87 laypeople raters who have never worked in these occupations, rated 21 item-pairs (Importance and Level type questions) picked randomly from the 52 items on the original O*NET Ability questionnaire. Participants rated each of the 21 item-pairs three times, with the Level question being presented in the O*NET BARS, a Likert GRS and the NBADS formats; The importance type question was always rated using a 1-5 Likert scale. Hypothesis 1a was supported, showing a significant leniency bias across formats for self-ratings. Hypothesis 1b was mostly supported, failing to show significant leniency, elevation error or interrater agreement improvement over laypeople ratings; only the overall-error measure showed a significant improvement for incumbent raters. Hypothesis 2 was not supported, failing to show that the GRS format had any improvement on leniency, accuracy or interrater agreement over the O*NET BARS format. Hypothesis 3a was supported, showing significant leniency reduction, accuracy error reduction and higher interrater agreement using the NBADS format over the GRS format. In a similar sense, hypothesis 3b was partially supported, showing reduction in leniency effect and higher agreement using the NBADS format over the O*NET BARS format. Finally, hypothesis 4 was mostly supported, showing hardly any significant differences in the ratings of the Importance type question across the three format sessions, strengthening the idea that no other interfering variables have caused the format sessions' differences. Implications of the results are discussed.
Degree
thesis:*- Name thesis:degree_name
- Master of Science
- Level thesis:degree_level
- masters
- Discipline thesis:degree_discipline
- Psychology
- Department dc:contributor.department
- Psychology
- Grantor dc:publisher
- Virginia Tech
- Year dc:date.issued
- 2001
Author and committee
dc:creator, dc:contributor.*- Author dc:creator
-
- Hollander, Eran
- Chair dc:contributor.committeechair
-
- Harvey, Robert J.
- Committee members dc:contributor.committeemember
-
- Mollins, Murrie
- Donovan, John J.
Subjects
dc:subject × 8Rights
dc:rights- Statement dc:rights
-
- In Copyright
- Licence dc:rights.uri
Identifiers
dc:identifier.*- Dc Identifier Other
- etd-12072001-155214
- OAI identifier oai:identifier
- oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/35997