Exploring the Concept of Acceptability as a Criterion for Evaluating Performance Measures.

This paper explores the construct of acceptability as a criterion for evaluating rater reactions to several different rating forms. Self and peer job performance ratings were completed by enlisted Air Force incumbents, in addition to the supervisors of those incumbents. Questionnaires were completed by participants to determine their perceptions of rating form acceptability and factors related to acceptability, including motivation to rate, job satisfaction, situational constraints and rater trust. Results indicated that motivation to rate, trust in others, and situational constraints were predictive of acceptability for both supervisors and job incumbents. In addition, there were differences in rating form acceptability by rating source and rating form. Overall, supervisors perceptions ere more favorable than incumbents, and the task-level rating form was significantly less acceptable to all rating sources, compared to the three other forms. Results are discussed in terms of the usefulness of acceptability as a criterion in applied research.