Comparing Selfand Supervisor Evaluations

Abstract

Studies comparing selfand supervisor evaluations ofperformance during medical training have generally indicated a lack of congruence between the two sets ofratings. A possible explanation is that supervisors may make evaluations on the basis of an overall impression whereas self-evaluations are more sensitive to differences between performance in different areas. Supportfor this explanation was indicated by consistently higher correlations among supervisor ratings of 13 performance areas for first year residents. Support was also indicated by separate factor analyses of supervisor and self-ratings of the 13 areas, in that two factors were identified for supervisors whereas there were three for self-ratings. It was concluded that the data supported the notion that self-ratings were more discriminating than supervisors'in evaluating resident performance across a number ofperformance areas.