...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Applied Psychology >Differential Validity for Cognitive Ability Tests in Employment and Educational Settings: Not Much More Than Range Restriction?
【24h】

Differential Validity for Cognitive Ability Tests in Employment and Educational Settings: Not Much More Than Range Restriction?

机译：就业和教育环境下的认知能力测验的差异有效性：限制范围不多吗？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The concept of differential validity suggests that cognitive ability tests are associated with varying levels of validity across ethnic groups, such that validity is lower in certain ethnic subgroups than in others. A recent meta-analysis has revived the viability of this concept. Unfortunately, data were not available in this meta-analysis to correct for range restriction within ethnic groups. We reviewed the differential validity literature and conducted 4 studies. In Study 1,we empirically demonstrated that using a cognitive ability test with a common cutoff decreases variance in test scores of Black subgroup samples more than in White samples. In Study 2,we developed a simulation that examined the effects of range restriction on estimates of differential validity. Results demonstrated that different levels of range restriction for subgroups can explain the apparent observed differential validity results in employment and educational settings (but not military settings) when no differential validity exists in the population. In Study 3,we conducted a simulation in which we examined how one corrects for range restriction affects the accuracy of these corrections. Results suggest that the correction approach using a common range restriction ratio for various subgroups may create or perpetuate the illusion of differential validity and that corrections are most accurate when done within each subgroup. Finally, in Study 4, we conducted a simulation in which we assumed differential validity in the population. We found that range restriction artificially increased the size of observed differential validity estimates when the validity of cognitive ability tests was assumed to be higher among Whites. Overall, we suggest that the concept of differential validity may be largely artifactual and current data are not definitive enough to suggest such effects exist.
机译：差异效度的概念表明，认知能力测验与不同种族的效度水平相关，因此某些种族亚组的效度低于其他种族。最近的荟萃分析已恢复了该概念的可行性。不幸的是，在该荟萃分析中没有数据可用于校正种族范围内的范围限制。我们回顾了差异效度文献并进行了4项研究。在研究1中，我们凭经验证明，使用具有共同截止值的认知能力测验，与白色样本相比，减少了黑人亚组样本的测试得分方差。在研究2中，我们开发了一个模拟，用于检查范围限制对差异有效性估计值的影响。结果表明，当人群中不存在差异效度时，亚组范围限制的不同水平可以解释在就业和教育环境（而非军事环境）中观察到的明显差异效度结果。在研究3中，我们进行了模拟，其中我们检查了范围限制的校正如何影响这些校正的准确性。结果表明，对各个亚组使用通用范围限制比的校正方法可能会产生或永久保留差异有效性的假象，并且在每个亚组内进行校正时，校正都是最准确的。最后，在研究4中，我们进行了模拟，其中我们假设了总体中的差异有效性。我们发现，当假设白人的认知能力测试的有效性较高时，范围限制会人为地增加观察到的差异有效性估计的大小。总的来说，我们认为差异有效性的概念可能主要是人为因素，而当前数据还不足以表明存在这种效应。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号