Subtest and Composite Validity of ASVAB Forms 11, 12, and 13 for Technical Training Courses
Abstract
The validity of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) subtests and composites for predicting final school grades in 150 technical schools was investigated. After correction for restriction of range and predictor unreliability, Paragraph Comprehension was found to be the most valid subtest (average r = .77) across all the schools. Within the traditional classification categories of Mechanical, Administrative, General, and Electronics (M, A, G, & E), Arithmetic Reasoning was found to be the most valid subtest after correction for range restriction. Except for the Electronics composite, the specific composite (M, A, G, & E) used for classification was not as valid as the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFOT) nor the sum of the four Air Force composites, both of which are measures of psychometric general cognitive ability. The Administrative composite was less valid under all circumstances than the three other composites, the AFOT, or the sum of M, A, G, & E. Best-weighted-regression-based composites were slightly more predictive than the sum of M, A, G, & E, but at the expense of penalizing good test performance through the use of negative weights. A selection and classification system based on either best-regression-weighted subtest or on the E composite and the AFOT would increase validity. AFOT, Aptitude, ASVAB, Correlation Training.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Feb 01, 1992
- Accession Number
- ADA247728
Entities
People
- James A. Earles
- Malcolm J. Ree
Organizations
- Armstrong Laboratory