On the choice of scales for task analysis.

Abstract

101 incumbents of 25 service jobs rated their respective tasks on relative time spent, difficulty of learning, criticality, and overall importance. Although scale convergence varied as a function of job title, task criticality and importance ratings were similar and presented low to moderate levels of convergence with both time-spent and difficulty-of-learning ratings. Different composites of task importance were compared. All composites and the overall judgments of importance wer moderately correlated with each other and showed similar levels of interrater agreement. Several conclusions regarding the choice of scales and the use of composites in task analysis are drawn