Situational Judgment Tests & Disparate Impact: The Big Picture Linda S. Gottfredson University of Delaware SIOP, Los Angeles April 16, 2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Test Development.
Advertisements

Chapter 6 JA and the Law 1. JA and the Law Legislation and Regulations – Constitution 14 th Amendment (equal protection) 5 th Amendment (due process)
R ESPONSE P ROCESSES IN SJT P ERFORMANCE : T HE R OLE OF G ENERAL AND S PECIFIC K NOWLEDGE James A. GrandMatthew T. Allen Kenneth Pearlman 27 th Annual.
Cal State Northridge Psy 427 Andrew Ainsworth PhD
STAFFING. KEY ASSUMPTIONS ä People differ ä Jobs differ ä Goal? ä ä Requires ä.
Chapter 3 Developing Predictive Hypotheses Cognitive & Non Cog Abilities Personality Criteria Chap 3 Developing Predictive Hypotheses1.
III Choosing the Right Method Chapter 10 Assessing Via Tests p235 Paper & Pencil Work Sample Situational Judgment (SJT) Computer Adaptive chapter 10 Assessing.
Educational Outcomes: The Role of Competencies and The Importance of Assessment.
Staffing Chapters
Why is g so deeply insinuated in social inequality? Linda S. Gottfredson, PhD School of Education University of Delaware, USA International Society for.
Ch 3: Personality and Abilities Part 1 – Jan 30, 2007.
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR
“What’s Holding Women Back in Science?” Wrong Question Linda S. Gottfredson University of Delaware.
C R E S S T / U C L A Improving the Validity of Measures by Focusing on Learning Eva L. Baker CRESST National Conference: Research Goes to School Los Angeles,
SELECTION & ASSESSMENT SESSION THREE: MEASURING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SELECTION METHODS.
Principles of High Quality Assessment
Ch 4: Personality and Abilities Part 1 – Jan 31, 2008.
ROI in HRM: Validity of Selection Procedures Nicole Blake Edgar Nolasco Deena Desai.
Chapter 4: Predictors: Psychological Assessment
How to write a publishable qualitative article
Employee Testing and Selection
Questions to check whether or not the test is well designed: 1. How do you know if a test is effective? 2. Can it be given within appropriate administrative.
General Mental Ability aka (GMA) aka (g factor) aka (g)
TAYLOR HOWARD The Employment Interview: A Review of Current Studies and Directions for Future Research.
Sex Differences in Math Test Performance What Do They Mean? Caitilyn Allen Professor of Plant Pathology and Women’s Studies U. Wisconsin-Madison.
Chapter 4 Principles of Quantitative Research. Answering Questions  Quantitative Research attempts to answer questions by ascribing importance (significance)
Human Resources Selection.
Assessing Job Candidates: Tools for Selection
Technical Adequacy Session One Part Three.
Foundations of Recruitment and Selection I: Reliability and Validity
 RESEARCH TOPIC  Read and analyze FUTURE SCENE  I. IDENTIFY CHALLENGES  II. SELECT AN UNDERLYING PROBLEM  III. PRODUCE SOLUTION IDEAS  IV. SELECT.
SELECTION. SELECTION PROCESS BY WHICH AN ORGANIZATION CHOOSES PERSONS WHO BEST MEET THE SELECTION CRITERIA FOR THE POSITION AVAILABLE, CONSIDERING CURRENT.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall Testing and Selecting Employees.
Selecting Employees and Placing Them in Jobs
MGTO 231 Human Resources Management Personnel selection II Dr. Kin Fai Ellick WONG.
ASSESSING INTELLIGENCE PETER LEE AND SEJIN PAIK. How Do We Measure Intelligence? WAIS (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale) - widely used intelligence test.
Validity. Face Validity  The extent to which items on a test appear to be meaningful and relevant to the construct being measured.
1 Chapter 6 Selection and Placement. 2 Introduction Why Selection is Important?
Gender in Research as a mark of excellence Training notes.
Kristine E. Kwong, Esq. PITFALLS OF SETTING MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS.
Gender Schemas: Consequences & Remedies Materials Adapted from: - Virginia Valian - Women in Science & Engineering Leadership Institute University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Selecting Employees to Fit the Job and the Organization 03/04/2013.
Measurement Validity.
Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Uniform Framework for employment decisions -- apply only to selection procedures for employment decisions Discrimination.
Measurement MANA 4328 Dr. Jeanne Michalski
Human Resource Management Recruitment and Selection.
VALIDITY, RELIABILITY & PRACTICALITY Prof. Rosynella Cardozo Prof. Jonathan Magdalena.
Performance Assessment Pertemuan 8 Matakuliah: L0074/Psikologi Industri dan Organisasi 2 Tahun: 2008.
History of I/O Research Methods Criterion Measurement Predictors Job Analysis.
Selecting Employees Strategically: What Managers Need to Know Today.
Employee Testing and Selection Human Resource Management 14 th Edition, Global Edition Gary Dessler Copyright © 2015 Pearson Education Ltd.
Students in the Southeastern United States
6 Selecting Employees and Placing Them in Jobs
Measurement: Part 2.
Principles of Quantitative Research
Acquiring and Preparing Human Resources
Test Design & Construction
Measurement: Part 2.
Tests and Measurements: Reliability
Discipline: Personnel management and organizational behavior
III Choosing the Right Method Chapter 10 Assessing Via Tests
Nhung T. Nguyen, Ph.D. Towson University
Chapter 6 JA and the Law.
AREA OF STUDY 2: INTELLIGENCE & PERSONALITY
Chapter 5 (Part 3): Recruitment & Selection
III Choosing the Right Method Chapter 10 Assessing Via Tests
Civil Service Commission
DM’ing with Multiple Predictors
Cal State Northridge Psy 427 Andrew Ainsworth PhD
Chapter 6 Selecting Employees
Presentation transcript:

Situational Judgment Tests & Disparate Impact: The Big Picture Linda S. Gottfredson University of Delaware SIOP, Los Angeles April 16, 2005

Fact-Set 1: Structure & Relation of Predictor & Criterion Domains Cognitive Non- cognitive Technical Citizenship Predictor domain Criterion domain Technical Citizenship

Fact-Set 1: Structure & Relation of Predictor & Criterion Domains g Non- g Technical Citizenship Predictor domain Criterion domain Simple to complex jobs

Fact-Set 2: Race & Sex Differences in g and Personality g Non- g Predictor domain d: W-B W-H W-A Male-Female ~0 ~0 ? ~0 + emotional stabil. - agreeable - conscientious No evidence of change over place or time g (and d) not a function of content or format, but cognitive load

Predictions From 2 Fact-Patterns g Non- g Predictive validity: Constructs Selection tests & criterion measures Citizen Tech Predictive validity: Disp impact—race:

Predictions From 2 Fact-Patterns g Non- g Predictive validity: Constructs Selection tests & criterion measures Citizen Tech Predictive validity: Disp impact—sex:

MA Results for SJT Predictors ( Nguyen, McDaniel, & Whetzel paper) g Non- g Predictive validity: Disparate impact-race : Format: Video Written Response: Behavior Knowledge Consistent with theory on g, g load,& g difs But what constructs are formats capturing? What constructs do we want? Unwelcome questions for practice Can only interfere with picking on d

Tweaking Tests Won’t Help Much Rules of thumb 1.Eliminating d requires eliminating g 2.Eliminating g reduces validity (would you want your doctor picked only on personality? 3.Don’t-ask-don’t-tell governs discussion 4.Law, politics, & employer insist on ~0 d So, new enthusiasm for changing the criteria Race-driven, but an important question

MA Results for Performance Criteria (McKay & McDaniel paper) g Non- g Predictive validity (g load): Disparate impact: Contextual Task Overall rating Work sample Job knowledge Will choice of criteria be race-driven? Again Consistent with theory on g, g load,& g difs But what constructs are measures capturing? What constructs do we want?

Two MA Studies: Bottom Line Conclusions Cognitive load is the major source of disparate impact (by race) in both predictors and criteria Recommendations Avoiding the big picture? –Pick SJTs with lower g load (but prudently) Avoiding the here-and-now? –Raise cognitive ability of lower-scoring groups But, less so than others. Show the big picture

SJTs for College Admission (Imus, Schmitt, Kim, Friede, & Oswald paper) Two similarities –Same basic g-d tradeoffs in selection –That’s why “non-cognitive” predictors are being sought One difference –Women over-represented in college (60-40) College Board efforts—one of two teams highly competent

Academic SJT: Research Design and Results GPA Performance measures Selection tests SJT-15 ? SJT-36 Disparate Impact: W-B r=.20r=.17 Is GPA the correct criterion? Does it select for female personality? What constructs captured? Maybe really a sex effect? Why seek unidimen- sionality? What increm- mental validity?

Bottom Line Conclusions— Good news for SJTs in admissions –Biased items, but balanced so make no difference –Some validity –No disparate impact (by race) Recommendations— IRT can be useful with SJTs –Avoiding the big picture? –Proceeding as if didn’t have the 2 fact-sets? –Can expect same disappointments/tradeoffs as in personnel selection for race –Primary effect of SJTs may be to further reduce male representation –Problem is not a technical one –Its roots in g will not be entertained first in this field (health is more promising)