A Comparison of Three Models for Determining Test Fairness
There are three prominent models of test fairness in the dichotomous situation: (a) Thorndike's Constant Ratio model (the ratio of the proportion successful to the proportion selected should be equal for the majority and the minority group); (b) Darlington's Conditional Probability model (...
Gespeichert in:
1. Verfasser: | |
---|---|
Format: | Report |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | |
container_title | |
container_volume | |
creator | Lewis,Mary A |
description | There are three prominent models of test fairness in the dichotomous situation: (a) Thorndike's Constant Ratio model (the ratio of the proportion successful to the proportion selected should be equal for the majority and the minority group); (b) Darlington's Conditional Probability model (the probability of selection, given that an individual is successful, should be equal for both groups); and (c) Einhorn and Bass' Equal Probability model (the probability of success, given that an individual is selected, should be equal for both groups). The present study explored, using a Monte Carlo technique, the robustness of these models to divergent sample size. This technique allows the generation of normally distributed variables of known means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations. Results indicated that all three models were equally able to identify test fairness under the conditions specified in the present study. The choice of model to use when evaluating test fairness must remain a subjective one based on the fairness goals of the testing agency and further definition of the test fairness by Federal guidelines. |
format | Report |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>dtic_1RU</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_dtic_stinet_ADA066586</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>ADA066586</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-dtic_stinet_ADA0665863</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNrjZLByVHDOzy1ILMoszs9TyE9TCMkoSk1V8M1PSc0pVkjLL1JwSS1JLcrNzMvMS1cISS0uUXBLzCzKSy0u5mFgTUvMKU7lhdLcDDJuriHOHropJZnJ8cUlmXmpJfGOLo4GZmamFmbGBKQBSUUrgA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>report</recordtype></control><display><type>report</type><title>A Comparison of Three Models for Determining Test Fairness</title><source>DTIC Technical Reports</source><creator>Lewis,Mary A</creator><creatorcontrib>Lewis,Mary A ; FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON D C OFFICE OF AVIATION MEDICINE</creatorcontrib><description>There are three prominent models of test fairness in the dichotomous situation: (a) Thorndike's Constant Ratio model (the ratio of the proportion successful to the proportion selected should be equal for the majority and the minority group); (b) Darlington's Conditional Probability model (the probability of selection, given that an individual is successful, should be equal for both groups); and (c) Einhorn and Bass' Equal Probability model (the probability of success, given that an individual is selected, should be equal for both groups). The present study explored, using a Monte Carlo technique, the robustness of these models to divergent sample size. This technique allows the generation of normally distributed variables of known means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations. Results indicated that all three models were equally able to identify test fairness under the conditions specified in the present study. The choice of model to use when evaluating test fairness must remain a subjective one based on the fairness goals of the testing agency and further definition of the test fairness by Federal guidelines.</description><language>eng</language><subject>COMPARISON ; FAA-AM-C-78/79-PSY-66 ; Fairness ; PERSONNEL SELECTION ; PROBABILITY ; PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS ; Psychology ; RATIOS ; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTIONS ; Statistics and Probability ; TEST METHODS</subject><creationdate>1978</creationdate><rights>APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,776,881,27546,27547</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA066586$$EView_record_in_DTIC$$FView_record_in_$$GDTIC$$Hfree_for_read</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lewis,Mary A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON D C OFFICE OF AVIATION MEDICINE</creatorcontrib><title>A Comparison of Three Models for Determining Test Fairness</title><description>There are three prominent models of test fairness in the dichotomous situation: (a) Thorndike's Constant Ratio model (the ratio of the proportion successful to the proportion selected should be equal for the majority and the minority group); (b) Darlington's Conditional Probability model (the probability of selection, given that an individual is successful, should be equal for both groups); and (c) Einhorn and Bass' Equal Probability model (the probability of success, given that an individual is selected, should be equal for both groups). The present study explored, using a Monte Carlo technique, the robustness of these models to divergent sample size. This technique allows the generation of normally distributed variables of known means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations. Results indicated that all three models were equally able to identify test fairness under the conditions specified in the present study. The choice of model to use when evaluating test fairness must remain a subjective one based on the fairness goals of the testing agency and further definition of the test fairness by Federal guidelines.</description><subject>COMPARISON</subject><subject>FAA-AM-C-78/79-PSY-66</subject><subject>Fairness</subject><subject>PERSONNEL SELECTION</subject><subject>PROBABILITY</subject><subject>PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>RATIOS</subject><subject>STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTIONS</subject><subject>Statistics and Probability</subject><subject>TEST METHODS</subject><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>report</rsrctype><creationdate>1978</creationdate><recordtype>report</recordtype><sourceid>1RU</sourceid><recordid>eNrjZLByVHDOzy1ILMoszs9TyE9TCMkoSk1V8M1PSc0pVkjLL1JwSS1JLcrNzMvMS1cISS0uUXBLzCzKSy0u5mFgTUvMKU7lhdLcDDJuriHOHropJZnJ8cUlmXmpJfGOLo4GZmamFmbGBKQBSUUrgA</recordid><startdate>197811</startdate><enddate>197811</enddate><creator>Lewis,Mary A</creator><scope>1RU</scope><scope>BHM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>197811</creationdate><title>A Comparison of Three Models for Determining Test Fairness</title><author>Lewis,Mary A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-dtic_stinet_ADA0665863</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>reports</rsrctype><prefilter>reports</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1978</creationdate><topic>COMPARISON</topic><topic>FAA-AM-C-78/79-PSY-66</topic><topic>Fairness</topic><topic>PERSONNEL SELECTION</topic><topic>PROBABILITY</topic><topic>PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>RATIOS</topic><topic>STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTIONS</topic><topic>Statistics and Probability</topic><topic>TEST METHODS</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lewis,Mary A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON D C OFFICE OF AVIATION MEDICINE</creatorcontrib><collection>DTIC Technical Reports</collection><collection>DTIC STINET</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lewis,Mary A</au><aucorp>FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON D C OFFICE OF AVIATION MEDICINE</aucorp><format>book</format><genre>unknown</genre><ristype>RPRT</ristype><btitle>A Comparison of Three Models for Determining Test Fairness</btitle><date>1978-11</date><risdate>1978</risdate><abstract>There are three prominent models of test fairness in the dichotomous situation: (a) Thorndike's Constant Ratio model (the ratio of the proportion successful to the proportion selected should be equal for the majority and the minority group); (b) Darlington's Conditional Probability model (the probability of selection, given that an individual is successful, should be equal for both groups); and (c) Einhorn and Bass' Equal Probability model (the probability of success, given that an individual is selected, should be equal for both groups). The present study explored, using a Monte Carlo technique, the robustness of these models to divergent sample size. This technique allows the generation of normally distributed variables of known means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations. Results indicated that all three models were equally able to identify test fairness under the conditions specified in the present study. The choice of model to use when evaluating test fairness must remain a subjective one based on the fairness goals of the testing agency and further definition of the test fairness by Federal guidelines.</abstract><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
identifier | |
ispartof | |
issn | |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_dtic_stinet_ADA066586 |
source | DTIC Technical Reports |
subjects | COMPARISON FAA-AM-C-78/79-PSY-66 Fairness PERSONNEL SELECTION PROBABILITY PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS Psychology RATIOS STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTIONS Statistics and Probability TEST METHODS |
title | A Comparison of Three Models for Determining Test Fairness |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T13%3A57%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-dtic_1RU&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=unknown&rft.btitle=A%20Comparison%20of%20Three%20Models%20for%20Determining%20Test%20Fairness&rft.au=Lewis,Mary%20A&rft.aucorp=FEDERAL%20AVIATION%20ADMINISTRATION%20WASHINGTON%20D%20C%20OFFICE%20OF%20AVIATION%20MEDICINE&rft.date=1978-11&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cdtic_1RU%3EADA066586%3C/dtic_1RU%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |