Building a Joint-Service Classification Research Roadmap: Individual Differences Measurement

Russell, Terera L.; Reynolds, Douglas H.; Campbell, John P.

doi:10.21236/ada280155

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 142 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results show that adding the AO subtest to the AFQT resulted in a small increase in the subgroup differences for male-female comparisons, as well as black-white comparisons. This is consistent with previous research (Carey, 1994;Russell & Peterson, 2001;Russell, Reynolds, & Campbell, 1994) suggesting that while these subgroups differ in AO subtest performance, the differences are smaller or comparable to those found on the AFQT. Carey's (1994) research also suggests that adding other mechanically-oriented ASVAB tests (as opposed to the AO subtest) would result in relatively larger subgroup differences.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Supplemental Predictor Compositessupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Research to date on gender differences on the AO subtest has been relatively promising. In general, it appears that the gap between male and female scores is reduced (or eliminated) on the AO subtest in comparison to other tests of spatial aptitude Russell & Peterson, 2001;Russell, Reynolds, & Campbell, 1994). This finding is consistent with previous research indicating that gender differences tend to be lower on spatial tests measuring visualization in contrast to other forms of spatial aptitude (e.g., orientation, speeded rotation) (Linn & Peterson, 1985).…”

Section: Gendersupporting

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessment of Assembling Objects (AO) for Improving Predictive Performance of the Armed Forces Qualification Test

Anderson¹,

Hoffman²,

Tate³

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this investigation was to examine whether the Assembling Objects test (AO) should be added to the AFQT predictor composite. The investigation included a literature review and analysis of data from Army Classification project. Analyses included regressions with 20 different criteria, subgroup analyses, and bias analyses. Findings suggest that the Army should consider including the AO subtest in the AFQT predictor composite. Adding the AO subtest to the AFQT composite would likely increase the prediction of performance and job knowledge, while potentially decreasing the subgroup predictor differences between Hispanic and white subgroups. Although adding the AO subtest to the AFQT composite may increase the subgroup predictor differences of female and black subgroups relative to their respective majority comparison groups, results suggest that any additional subgroup differences would be borne out in performance differences, and that the revised AFQT composite would thus be fair and unbiased to minority groups. Future research should examine the degree to which these findings differ across job clusters, where cluster members are similar in terms of abilities needed to perform the work.

show abstract

Section: Evaluation Of Supplemental Predictor Compositessupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Gendersupporting

confidence: 85%

Assessment of Assembling Objects (AO) for Improving Predictive Performance of the Armed Forces Qualification Test

Anderson¹,

Hoffman²,

Tate³

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While there is a practice effect on these tests, we do not find it to be alarming or of great concern. The psychomotor test scores did improve with practice, perhaps by one quarter to one-third of an SD, and improvements of that magnitude are often observed for cognitive tests (Russell et al, 1994). Additionally, the rank ordering of examinees' scores did not change much during the administration of a block of items, as indicated by reasonably high internal consistency estimates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Development of Experimental Army Enlisted Personnel Selection and Classification Tests and Job Performance Criteria

Knapp¹,

Sager²,

Tremble³

2005

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We chose in this study to focus on the aviation occupation, one of the largest consumers of TBs, in an attempt to review the role of TBs' composite scores in selection and assessment, as well as to evaluate their utility and effectiveness for predicting future performance. We found aviation an appropriate field for this investigation due to the long history of TBs' use in pilot selection (e.g., Bates, Colwell, King, Siem, & Zelenski, ; Carretta, ; Damos, , ; Howse & Damos, ; Olson, Walker, & Phillips, ; Paullin, Katz, Bruskiewicz, Houston, & Damos, ; Retzlaff, King, & Callister, ; Russell, Reynolds, & Campbell, ), and the wide variety of tests available for the study that cover several domains of cognitive abilities commonly assessed during the pilot selection process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple test batteries as predictors for pilot performance: A meta‐analytic investigation

ALMamari

Traynor

2019

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Test Batteries (TBs) have a long history of use in pilot selection. The extent to which TBs predict future pilot performance has important implications. The existing pilot‐related psychometric meta‐analyses have focused primarily on scores of individual ability tests, rather than the combined scores composited from multiple ability tests. The objective of this study was to investigate the predictive validity of TBs' composite scores for several criteria of pilot performance. Informed by the Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory, we proposed a classification scheme of six categories representing the most common composite scores in selection assessment: Acquired Knowledge, Perceptual Processing, Motor Abilities, Controlled Attention, General Ability, and Work Sample. For overall pilot performance, based on 267 correlations from 118 independent samples, results showed that the six categories of TBs are valid predictors (Meanr = .10–.34), and at least five of them have validity that is likely to generalize across selection contexts.

show abstract

Building a Joint-Service Classification Research Roadmap: Individual Differences Measurement

Cited by 9 publications

References 142 publications

Assessment of Assembling Objects (AO) for Improving Predictive Performance of the Armed Forces Qualification Test

Assessment of Assembling Objects (AO) for Improving Predictive Performance of the Armed Forces Qualification Test

Development of Experimental Army Enlisted Personnel Selection and Classification Tests and Job Performance Criteria

Multiple test batteries as predictors for pilot performance: A meta‐analytic investigation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About