Short Version of Self-Assessment Scale of Job Performance

  • Érika Guimarães Soares de Azevedo Andrade Universidade Salgado de Oliveira (Universo) (Brasil)
  • Fabiana Queiroga Centro Universitário de Brasília
  • Felipe Valentini Universidade São Francisco (USF) (Brasil)
Keywords: Job performance, Self-evaluation of performance, Response bias


This paper aims to reduce the job performance self-assessment scale as well as control the response and acquiescence bias using vignettes anchors and inverted items. For the reduction of the scale, the original scale database was used, composed of 20 items divided into two factors: task and context. For the reduction, the 10 items with higher factor loads and thresholds were chosen. The reduced scale was estimated by a general factor and two specific dimensions: task and context, representing a bifactor model, with adequate adjustment indicators (RMSEA = 0.05; TLI = 0.98). To control response bias and acquiescence, a second study was carried out, in which the responses were recoded and factor analyses were performed in order to make a comparison of the results with and without the use of the vignettes and inverted items. The results indicated that the vignettes improved the factorial loads, however, the inverted items did not perform better than the vignettes.


Download data is not yet available.


Bing, M. N., Davison, H. K., Minor, I., Novicevic, M. M., & Frink, D. D. (2011). The prediction of task and contextual performance by political skill: A meta-analysis and moderator test [Article]. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(2), 563-577.

Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10(2), 99-109.

Bowling, N. A., Khazon, S., Meyer, R. D., & Burrus, C. J. (2015). Situational Strength as a Moderator of the Relationship Between Job Satisfaction and Job Performance: A Meta-Analytic Examina-tion. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30, 89-104.

Brandão, H. P., Borges-Andrade, J. E., & Guimarães, T. d. A. (2012). Desempenho organizacional e suas relações com competências gerenciais, suporte organizacional e treinamento [Organizational performance and its relations with management competencies, organizational support and training]. Revista de Administração (São Paulo), 47, 523-539.

Byrne, B. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with mplus: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Taylor & Francis.

Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 687-732). Consulting Psychologists Press.

Campbell, J. P. (2012). Behavior, performance, and effectiveness in the twenty-first century. In S. W. J. Kozlowski (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 159-194). Oxford University Press.

Campbell, J. P., & Wiernik, B. M. (2015). The Modeling and Assessment of Work Performance. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 47-74.

Coelho Junior, F. A., & Borges-Andrade, J. E. (2011). Efeitos de variáveis individuais e contextuais sobre desempenho individual no trabalho [Effects of individual and contextual variables on individual job performance]. Estudos de Psicologia (Natal), 16, 111-120.

Danner, D., Aichholzer, J., & Rammstedt, B. (2015). Acquiescence in personality questionnaires: Relevance, domain specificity, and stability. Journal of Research in Personality, 57, 119-130.

Edwards, B. D., Bell, S. T., Arthur, W., & Decuir, A. D. (2008). Relationships between facets of job satisfaction and task and contextual performance. Applied Psychology-an International Review-Psychologie Appliquee-Revue Internationale, 57, 441-465.

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424-453.

Huang, W.-R., & Su, C.-H. (2016). The mediating role of job satisfaction in the relationship between job training satisfaction and turnover intentions. Industrial and Commercial Training, 48(1), 42-52.

Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Klein, K. J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions. (pp. 3-90). Jossey-Bass.

Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Coffman, D. L. (2006). Random intercept item factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 11(4), 344-362.

Obeidat Shatha, M., Mitchell, R., & Bray, M. (2016). The link between high performance work practices and organizational performance: Empirically validating the conceptualization of HPWP according to the AMO model. Employee Relations, 38(4), 578-595.

Paula, A. P. V. d., & Queiroga, F. (2015). Satisfação no trabalho e clima organizacional: a relação com autoavaliações de desempenho [Job satisfaction and organizational climate; the relation with performance self-assessment]. Revista Psicologia Organizações e Trabalho, 15, 362-373.

Primi, R., da Silva, I. C. R., Rodrigues, P., Muniz, M., & Almeida, L. S. (2013). The use of the bi-factor model to test the uni-dimensionality of a battery of reasoning tests. Psicothema, 25(1), 115-122.

Primi, R., Zanon, C., Santos, D., Fruyt, F. D., & John, O. P. (2016). Anchoring Vignettes: Can They Make Adolescent Self-Reports of Social-Emotional Skills More Reliable, Discriminant, and Criterion-Valid? European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 32(1), 39-51.

Queiroga, F. (2009). Seleção de pessoas e desempenho no trabalho: Um estudo sobre a validade preditiva dos testes de conhecimentos [Staff selection and job performance: A study on the predictive validity of knowledge tests] [Doutorado Tese, Unb]. Brasília.

Queiroga, F., Borges-Andrade, J. E., & Coelho Junior, F. A. (2015). Desempenho no trabalho: Escala de avaliação geral por meio de autopercepções [Job performance: General assessment scale through self-perceptions]. In K. Puente-Palacios & A. d. L. A. Peixoto (Eds.), Ferramentas de diagnóstico para organizações e trabalho: Um olhar a partir da psicologia [Diagnostic tools for organizations and work: A psychological perspective]. Artmed Editora.

Rammstedt, B., & Farmer, R. F. (2013). The Impact of Acquiescence on the Evaluation of Personality Structure. Psychological assessment, 25(4), 1137-1145.

Sonnentag, S., & Frese, M. (2002). Performance concepts and performance theory. In S. Sonnentag (Ed.), Psychological management of Individual performance. Wiley.

Soto, C. J., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2008). The developmental psychometrics of big five self-reports: Acquiescence, factor structure, coherence, and differentiation from ages 10 to 20. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 718-737.

Ten Berge, J. M. F. (1999). A legitimate case of component analysis of ipsative measures, and partialling the mean as an alternative to ipsatization. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 34(1), 89-102.

Valentini, F., & Damásio, B. F. (2016). Variância Média Extraída e Confiabilidade Composta: Indicadores de Precisão [Average Variance Extracted and Composite Reliability: Reliabili-ty Coefficients]. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa [Psychology: Theory and Research], 32, 1-7.

Warr, P., & Nielsen, K. (2018). Wellbeing and work performance. In E. Diener, S. Oishi, & L. Tay (Eds.), Handbook of well-being. DEF Publishers.

How to Cite
Andrade, Érika G. S. de A., Queiroga, F., & Valentini, F. (2020). Short Version of Self-Assessment Scale of Job Performance. Anales De Psicología / Annals of Psychology, 36(3), 543-552.
Social and Organizational Psychology