A comparison of two approaches to correction of restriction of range in correlation analysis

Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation

Volumn 14, Issue 5, 2009, Pages

  Wiberg, Marie ^a   Sundström, Anna ^a  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952091726     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15317714     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Caretta, T. R., & Ree, M. J. (1995). Air force officer qualifying test validity for predicting pilot training performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 9(4), 379-388.
2. Chernyshenko, O. S., & Ones, D. S. (1999). How selective are psychology graduate programs? The effect of the selection ratio on GRE score validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59(6), 951-961.
3. Cohen-Schotanus, J., Muijtjens, A. M. M., Reinders, J. J., Agsteribbe, J., Rossum, H. J. M., van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2006). The predictive validity of grade point average scores in a partial lottery medical school admission system. Medical Education, 40, 1012-1019.
4. Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977). Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B(39), 1-38.
5. Duan, B., & Dunlap, W. P. (1997). The accuracy of different methods for estimating the standard error of correlations corrected for range restriction. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 254-265.
6. Forsyth, E. (1992). Cohort study of learner and novice drivers part 2: attitudes, opinions and the development of driving skills in the first 2 years (Research report No. 372). Crowthorne, Berkshire: Transport research laboratory.
7. Gross, A. L. (1982). Relaxing assumptions underlying corrections for range restriction. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 42, 795-801.
8. Gross, A. L., & Fleischman, L. (1983). Restriction of range corrections when both distribution and selection assumptions is violated. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 227-237.
9. Gross, A. L., & McGanney, M. L. (1987). The restriction of range problem and nonignorable selection processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 604-610.
10. Gulliksen, H. (1950). Theory of mental tests. New York: John Wiley & sons.
11. Gustafsson, J.-E., & Reuterberg, S.-E. (2000). Metodproblem vid studier av högskoleprovets prognosförmåga - och deras lösning! [Methodological problems associated with the study of the predictive validity of the SweSAT] Pedagogisk Forskning i Sverige, 5(4), 273-283.
12. Held, J. D., & Foley, P. P. (1994). Explanations for accuracy of the general multivariate formulas in correction for range restriction. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18, 355-367.
13. Henriksson, W., & Wolming, S. (1998). Academic performance in four study programmes: a comparison of students admitted on the basis of GPA and SweSAT scores, with and without credits for work experience. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 42, 135-150.
14. Herzog, T. N., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). Using multiple imputations to handle nonresponse in sample surveys. In W. G. Madow, I. Olkin & D. B. Rubin (Eds.), Incomplete data in sample surveys. London: Academic Press Inc.
15. Holmes, D. J. (1990). The robustness of the usual correction for restriction in range due to explicit selection. Psychometrika, 55, 19-32.
16. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of Meta-Analysis. Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings. London: Sage Publications.
17. Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2001). A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis of the Predictive Validity of the Graduate Record Examinations: Implications for Graduate Student Selection and Performance. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 162-181.
18. Lawley, D. N. (1943). A note on Karl Pearson's selection formulae. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinborough, LXIII-Part 1, 28-30.
19. Levin, J. (1972). An occurence of an increase in correlation by restriction of range. Psychometrika, 37, 93-97.
20. Linn, R. L. (1967). Range restriction problems in the validation of a guidance test battery. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
21. Little, J. A. (1992). Regression with missing $X$'s: a review. Journal of American Statistical Association, 87, 1227-1237.
22. Little, J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Statistical analysis with missing data (2 ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
23. Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
24. Madow, W. G., Olkin, I., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). Incomplete data in sample surveys. London: Academic Press Inc.
25. Mendoza, J. L. (1993). Fisher transformations and correlations corrected for selection and missing data. Psychometrika, 58, 601-615.
26. Pearson, K. (1903). Mathematical contributions to the theory of evolution: II. On the influence of natural selection on the variability and correlation of organs. Royal Society Philosophical Transactions, 200(Series A), 1-66.
27. Raju, N. S., & Brand, P. A. (2003). Determining the Significance of Correlations Corrected for Unreliability and Range Restriction. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27(1), 52-71.
28. Sackett, P. R., & Yang, H. (2000). Correction for range restriction: an expanded typology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 112-118.
29. Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147-177.
30. Scheffer, J. (2002). Dealing with missing data. Res Lett Inf Math Sci, 3, 153-160.
31. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research Findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262-274.
32. Sireci, S. G., & Talento-Miller, E. (2006). Evaluating the Predictive Validity of Graduate Management Admission Test Scores. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 305-317.
33. SPSS. (2002). MVA. Available from www.spss.com.
34. SPSS. (2002). MVA. Available from www.spss.com. Vägverket [Swedish Road Administration]. (1996). VVFS 1996:168 Vägverkets författningssamling. vägverkets föreskrifter om kursplaner, behörighet B. [Regulations concerning driving license class B]. Borlänge: Swedish Road Administration.
35. Schmidt, F. L., Oh, I.-S., & Le, H. (2006). Increasing the accuracy of corrections for range restriction: implications for selection procedure validities and other research results. Personnel Psychology, 59, 281-305.
36. Sundström, A. (2003). Den svenska förarprövningen. Sambandet mellan kunskapsprovet och körprovet, provens struktur samt körkortsutbildningens betydelse [Driver testing in Sweden. A study of the relationship between the theoretical and practical test, the structure of the tests and the effect of driver education on test performance] (PM No. 183). Umeå universitet: Enheten för pedagogiska mätningar.
37. Särndal, C.-E., Swensson, B., & Wretman, J. (1992). Model assisted survey sampling. New York Springer-Verlag.
38. Talento-Miller, E., & Rudner, L. M. (2008). The Validity of Graduate Management Admission Test Scores. A Summary of Studies Conducted From 1997 to 2004. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(1), 129-138.
39. Theron, C. C. (1999). The effect of a joint correction for the attenuating effect of criterion unreliability and case 1 restriction of range on expected criterion performance and the conditional probability of success. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 787-803.
40. Thorndike, R. L. (1949). Personnel selection: test and measurement techniques. New York: Wiley.
41. Weitzman, R. A. (2005). The prediction of college achievement by the scholastic aptitude test and the high school record. Journal of Educational Measurement, 19(3), 179-191.
42. Wiberg, M. (2004). Klassisk och modern testteori. Analys av det teoretiska och praktiska körkortsprovet [Classical and modern test theory: analysis of the theoretical and practical driving-license test] (BVM No. 5). Umeå universitet: Institutionen för beteendevetenskapliga mätningar.
43. Wiberg, M., Stenlund, T., Sundström, A., & Henriksson, W. (2005). Underlag för urval till försöksverksamhet för kursplan B [Considerations for sampling in an experimental project about a new model for driving-license examination]. Umeå universitet: Institutionen för beteendevetenskapliga mätningar.
44. Wolming, S. (2000). Förarprövningens struktur och resultat. En studie av relationen mellan kunskapsprov och körprov samt utbildningsbakgrundens betydelse [The structure and results of driving-license examination] (PM No. 166). Umeå universitet: Enheten för pedagogiska mätningar.
45. Wolming, S., & Wiberg, M. (2004). The Swedish driver licensure examination: exploration of a two-stage model. Journal of Safety Research, 35, 491-495.