<P> A study on the patterns of rater accuracy shows that the length of time that a rater has known the individual being evaluated has the most significant effect on the accuracy of a 360 - degree review . The study shows that subjects in the group "known for one to three years" are the most accurate, followed by those "known for less than one year," followed by those "known for three to five years" and the least accurate being those "known for more than five years ." The study concludes that the most accurate ratings come from those who have known the individual being reviewed long enough to get past the first impression, but not so long that they begin to generalize favorably . </P> <P> It has been suggested that multi-rater assessments often generate conflicting opinions and that there may be no way to determine whose feedback is accurate . Studies have also indicated that self - ratings are generally significantly higher than the ratings given from others . The motivations and biases of feedback providers must be taken into account . </P> <P> Several studies indicate that the use of 360 - degree feedback helps to improve employee performance because it helps the evaluated see different perspectives of their performance . In a 5 - year study, no improvement in overall rater scores was found between the 1st and 2nd year, but higher scores were noted between 2nd and 3rd and 3rd and 4th years . Reilly et al. (1996) found that performance increased between the 1st and 2nd administrations, and sustained this improvement 2 years later . Additional studies show that 360 - degree feedback may be predictive of future performance . </P> <P> Some authors maintain, however, that there are too many lurking variables related to 360 - degree evaluations to reliably generalize their effectiveness . Bracken et al. (2001b) and Bracken and Timmreck (2001) focus on process features that are likely to also have major effects on creating behavior change . Greguras and Robie (1998) tracked how the number of raters used in each particular category (direct report, peer, manager) affects the reliability of the feedback . Their research showed that direct reports are the least reliable and, therefore, more participation is required to produce a reliable result . Multiple pieces of research have demonstrated that the scale of responses can have a major effect on the results, and some response scales are better than others . Goldsmith and Underhill (2001) report the powerful influence of the evaluated individual following up with raters to discuss their results, which cannot be done when feedback is anonymous . Other potentially powerful factors affecting behavior change include how raters are selected, manager approval, instrument quality, rater training and orientation, participant training, supervisor training, coaching, integration with HR systems, and accountability . </P>

Who is involved in the review/appraisal process