A meta-analytic comparison of self-reported and other-reported organizational citizenship behavior

Authors

  • Nichelle C. Carpenter,

    Corresponding author
    1. School of Labor and Employment Relations, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois, U.S.A.
    • Correspondence to: Nichelle C. Carpenter, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, School of Labor and Employment Relations, and Department of Psychology, School of Labor and Employment Relations Building, MC-504, 504 E. Armory Avenue, Champaign, IL 61820, U.S.A. E-mail: ncc7@illinois.edu

    Search for more papers by this author
  • Christopher M. Berry,

    1. Department of Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, U.S.A.
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Lawrence Houston

    1. Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
    Search for more papers by this author

Summary

Given the common use of self-ratings and other-ratings (e.g., supervisor or coworker) of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), the purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the extent to which these rating sources provide comparable information. The current study's results provided three important lines of evidence supporting the use and construct-related validity of self-rated OCB. The meta-analysis of mean differences demonstrated that the mean difference in OCB ratings is actually quite small between self- and other-raters. Importantly, the difference between self- and other-raters was influenced by neither the response scale (i.e., agreement vs. frequency) nor the use of antithetical/reverse-worded items on OCB scales. The meta-analysis of correlations showed that self- and other-ratings are moderately correlated but that self–other convergence is higher when antithetical items are not used and when agreement response scales are used. In addition, self-ratings and supervisor-ratings showed significantly more convergence than self-ratings and coworker-ratings. Finally, an evaluation of self-rated and other-rated OCB nomological networks showed that although self-rated and other-rated OCBs have similar patterns of relationships with common correlates, other-rated OCB generally contributed negligible incremental variance to correlates and only contributed appreciable incremental variance to other-rated behavioral variables (e.g., task performance and counterproductive work behavior). Implications and future research directions are discussed, particularly regarding the need to establish a nomological network for other-rated OCB. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Ancillary