Abstract
Reviews 55 studies in which self-evaluations of ability were compared with measures of performance to show a low mean validity coefficient (mean r = .29) with high variability (SD = .25). A meta-analysis by the procedures of J. E. Hunter et al (1982) calculated sample-size weighted estimates of –- r and SDr and estimated the appropriate adjustments of these values for sampling error and unreliability. Among person variables, high intelligence, high achievement status, and internal locus of control were associated with more accurate evaluations. Much of the variability in the validity coefficients (R = .64) could be accounted for by 9 specific conditions of measurement, notably (a) the rater's expectation that the self-evaluation would be compared with criterion measures, (b) the rater's previous experience with self-evaluation, (c) instructions guaranteeing anonymity of the self-evaluation, and (d) self-evaluation instructions emphasizing comparison with others. It is hypothesized that conditions increasing self-awareness would increase the validity of self-evaluation.
View more >>