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 (...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. Verfasser: Lewis,Mary A
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