Using the Thorndike Model to Assess the Fairness of Cognitive Ability Tests for Personnel Selection

Abstract

This study evaluates cognitive ability tests (CATs) as predictors of job performance against the Thorndike (1971) model of fairness. Meta-analytic results indicate that CATs substantially misrepresent the relative qualifications between Blacks and Whites in the United States: CATs predict an average job performance difference between groups as three times larger than is actually the case. In practice, then, Blacks are disproportionally burdened by more false-negative selection errors, and this tendency increases markedly under higher CAT cutoffs. Thus, CATs work against proportionate representation of Blacks in the workplace. From an Employment Equity (E.E.) perspective, this is not justifiable because the pool of qualified Black candidates, relative to Whites, is considerably larger than is suggested by CAT scores.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
May 01, 2001
Accession Number
ADA398473

Entities

People

  • Greg A. Chung-yan
  • Steven F. Cronshaw

Organizations

  • University of Guelph

Tags

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Accuracy
  • African Americans
  • Air Force
  • Air Force Research Laboratories
  • Applied Psychology
  • Computer Programming
  • Computer Programs
  • Employment
  • Ethnic Groups
  • Management Personnel
  • Minority Groups
  • Personnel Management
  • Personnel Selection
  • Psychology
  • Ratings
  • Training
  • United States

Readers

  • Computational Modeling and Simulation
  • Psychometric Testing or Psychological Assessment.
  • Women's Health and Cancer Risk Research: African American Women and Pregnancy Outcomes.