Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Three possible determinants of subordinates' intended performance and affective reactions to simulated peer feedback received via superiors in an American context were examined. Valence of feedback, credibility of supervisor, and anonymity or identity of peer sources of feedback were manipulated in a 2 × 2 × 2 design. Subjects responded to two scenarios depicting a superior relating peer feedback to a subordinate. The results indicated that feedback valence had a strong effect on both dependent measures. Contrary to expectations, neither supervisor credibility nor anonymity of source interacted significantly with valence. Credibility and anonymity did significantly interact with each other when male and female subjects were separately analyzed.
Bloom et al. (Sat,) studied this question.