Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps Selection System Validation

Cowan, Douglas K.; Barrett, Linda E.; Wegner, Toni G.

doi:10.21236/ada218494

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is, however, interesting to note that the largest sample within this analysis was for 212,238 applicants taking the Armed Forces Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) and the d was 1.19. It is also important to note that tests such as the ASVAB (and the Armed Forces Qualification Test score derived from it) were developed with a great deal of psychometric rigor (e.g., Berger, Gupta, & Berger, 1990;Caretta & Ree, 1997;Cowen, Barrett, & Wegner, 1989;Jensen, 1980;Skinner & Ree, 1987), and they were designed for the purpose of selecting employees (as opposed to selecting college students). As such, this test provides important insights into the magnitude of Black-White differences for selection.…”

Section: Black-white Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethnic Group Differences in Cognitive Ability in Employment and Educational Settings: A Meta‐analysis

Roth¹,

BeVier

Bobko³

et al. 2001

Personnel Psychology

306

332

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cognitive ability levels of different ethnic groups have interested psychologists for over a century. Many narrative reviews of the empirical literature in the area focus on the Black-White differences, and the reviews conclude that the mean difference in cognitive ability (9) is approximately 1 standard deviation; that is, the generally accepted effect size is about 1.0. We conduct a meta-analytic review that suggests that the one standard deviation effect size accurately summarizes Black-White differences for college application tests (e.g., SAT) and overall analyses of tests of g for job applicants in corporate settings. However, the 1 standard deviation summary of group differences fails to capture many of the complexities in estimating ethnic group differences in employment settings. For example, our results indicate that job complexity, the use of within job versus across job study design, focus on applicant versus incumbent samples, and the exact construct of interest are important moderators of standardized group differences. In many instances, standardized group differences are less than 1 standard deviation. We conduct similar analyses for Hispanics, when possible, and note that Hispanic-White differences are somewhat less than Black-White differences.Ethnic group differences on measures of cognitive ability have been investigated by some of the earliest social science researchers (e.g., Galton, 1892;Thorndike, 1921) and this topic continues to receive a great

show abstract

Section: Black-white Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethnic Group Differences in Cognitive Ability in Employment and Educational Settings: A Meta‐analysis

Roth¹,

BeVier

Bobko³

et al. 2001

Personnel Psychology

306

332

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, there is research indicating that the SAT demonstrates comparable validity to the AFOQT for predicting important Air Force outcomes. Cowan, Barrett, and Wegner (1989) examined SAT data on ROTC applicants between 1978 and 1981 and reported essentially identical SAT and AFOQT academic composite validities (see Table 4.1).…”

Section: Predicting Work-related Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other support for the possibility of replacing the AFOQT with the SAT comes from evidence showing that the SAT correlates highly with the AFOQT. For example, Diehl (1986) examined scores from 3,575 cadets entering the professional officer corps and found a correla- Cowan, Barrett, and Wegner, 1989. tion of 0.80 for SAT scores with the AFOQT academic composite (i.e., combined verbal and quantitative scores). 2 The math section of the SAT correlated more strongly with the AFOQT quantitative composite than with the verbal composite (0.71 and 0.47 respectively), and the verbal section on the SAT correlated more highly with the AFOQT verbal composite than with the quantitative composite (0.77 and 0.43 respectively).…”

Section: Predicting Work-related Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Air Force Officer Qualifying Test Validity, Fairness, and Bias

Hardison¹,

Sims²,

Wong³

2010

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions.

show abstract