Test of slope and intercept bias in college admissions: A response to Aguinis, Culpepper, and Pierce (2010)

Journal of Applied Psychology

Volumn 98, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 134-147

  Mattern, Krista D ^a   Patterson, Brian F ^a  

^a The College Board   (United States)

Author keywords

College admissions; Intercept bias; Predictive bias; SAT; Slope bias

Indexed keywords

APTITUDE TEST; ARTICLE; BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; HUMAN; PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; STANDARD; STATISTICAL BIAS;

APTITUDE TESTS; BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); HUMANS; PERSONNEL SELECTION;

EID: 84880974838     PISSN: 00219010     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0030610     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Aguinis, H., Beaty, J. C., Boik, R. J., & Pierce, C. A. (2005). Effect size and power in assessing moderating effects of categorical variables using multiple regression: A 30-year review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 94-107. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.94
2. Aguinis, H., Culpepper, S. A., & Pierce, C. A. (2010). Revival of test bias research in preemployment testing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 648-680. doi:10.1037/a0018714
3. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
4. Allen, N. L., & Dunbar, S. B. (1990). Standard errors of correlations adjusted for incidental selection. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 83-94. doi:10.1177/014662169001400109
5. Barritt, L. S. (1966). Note: The consistency of first-semester college grade point average. Journal of Educational Measurement, 3, 261-262.
6. Bendig, A. W. (1953). The reliability of letter grades. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 13, 311-321. doi:10.1177/ 001316445301300215
7. Berry, C. M., & Sackett, P. R. (2009). Individual differences in course choice result in underestimation of the validity of college admissions systems. Psychological Science, 20, 822-830. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280 .2009.02368.x
8. Bobko, P. (1983). An analysis of correlations corrected for attenuation and range restriction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 584-589. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.68.4.584
9. Bowen, W. G., & Bok, D. (1998). The shape of the river: Long-term consequences of considering race in college and university admissions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
10. Bridgeman, B., McCamley-Jenkins, L., & Ervin, N. (2000). Predictions of freshman grade-point average from the revised and recentered SAT I: Reasoning Test (College Board Research Rep. No. 2000-1). New York, NY: College Board.
11. Clark, M. J., & Grandy, J. (1984). Sex differences in the academic performance of Scholastic Aptitude Test takers (College Board Rep. No. 84-8). New York, NY: College Board.
12. Cleary, T. A. (1968). Test bias: Prediction of grades of Negro and White students in integrated colleges. Journal of Educational Measurement, 5, 115-124. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1968.tb00613.x
13. Clinedinst, M. E., & Hawkins, D. A. (2010). 2010 state of college admissions. Arlington, VA: National Association for College Admissions Counseling.
14. Clogg, C. C., Petkova, E., & Haritou, A. (1995). Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. American Journal of Sociology, 100, 1261-1293. doi:10.1086/230638
15. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. College Board. (2006). 2006 college-bound seniors: Total group profile report. New York, NY: College Board.
17. College Board. (2007). 2007 college-bound seniors: Total group profile report. New York, NY: College Board.
18. College Board. (2008a). Test characteristics of the SAT: Reliability, difficulty levels, completion rates (March-December 2007). Retrieved from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/Test_Characteristics_ of_the_SAT.pdf
19. College Board. (2008b). 2008 college-bound seniors: Total group profile report. New York, NY: College Board.
20. Cronbach, L. J., & Schaeffer, G. A. (1981). Extensions of personnel selection theory to aspects of minority hiring (Project Rep. No. 81-A2). Stanford, CA; Stanford University, Institute for Research on Educational Finance and Governance.
21. Gulliksen, H. (1950). Theory of mental tests. New York, NY: Wiley.
22. Hewitt, B. N., & Goldman, R. D. (1975). Occam's razor slices through the myth that college women overachieve. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 325-330. doi:10.1037/h0077010
23. Hezlett, S. A., Kuncel, N., Vey, M. A., Ahart, A. M., Ones, D. S., Campbell, J. P., & Camara, W. J. (2001, April). The effectiveness of the SAT in predicting success early and late in college: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Seattle, WA.
24. Humphreys, L. G. (1986). An analysis and evaluation of test and item bias in the prediction context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 327-333. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.2.327
25. Kuncel, N. R., Credé, M., & Thomas, L. L. (2005). The validity of self-reported grade point average, class ranks, and test scores: A metaanalysis and review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 75, 63-82. doi:10.3102/00346543075001063
26. Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2004). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 148-161. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.148
27. Lawley, D. N. (1943). A note on Karl Pearson's selection formulae. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Section A, 62, 28-30.
28. Linn, R. L. (1983). Pearson selection formulas: Implications for studies of predictive bias and estimates of educational effects in selected samples. Journal of Educational Measurement, 20, 1-15. doi:10.1111/j.1745- 3984.1983.tb00185.x
29. Mattern, K. D., Patterson, B. F., Shaw, E. J., Kobrin, J. L., & Barbuti, S. (2008). Differential validity and prediction of the SAT (College Board Research Rep. No. 2008-4). New York, NY: College Board.
30. National Association for College Admissions Counseling. (2008). Report of the Commission on the Use of Standardized Tests in Undergraduate Admissions. Arlington, VA: Author.
31. Patterson, B. F., & Mattern, K. D. (2011). Validity of the SAT for predicting first-year grades: 2008 SAT validity sample (College Board Statistical Rep. No. 2011-5). New York, NY: College Board.
32. Patterson, B. F., Mattern, K. D., & Kobrin, J. L. (2009). Validity of the SAT for predicting FYGPA: 2007 SAT validity sample (College Board Statistical Rep. No. 2009-1). New York, NY: College Board.
33. Pearson, K. (1902). On the mathematical theory of errors of judgment, with special reference to the personal equation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series A, 198, 235-299. doi:10.1098/rsta .1902.0005
34. Ramist, L., Lewis, C., & McCamley-Jenkins, L. (1994). Student group differences in predicting college grades: Sex, language, and ethnic groups (College Board Research Rep. No. 93-1). New York, NY: College Board.
35. Reilly, R. R., & Warech, M. A. (1993). The validity and fairness of alternatives to cognitive tests. In L. C. Wing & B. R. Gifford (Eds.), Policy issues in employment testing (pp. 131-224). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
36. Sackett, P. R., Kuncel, N. R., Arneson, J. J., Cooper, S. R., & Waters, S. D. (2009). Does socio-economic status explain the relationship between admissions tests and post-secondary academic performance? Psychological Bulletin, 135, 1-22. doi:10.1037/a0013978
37. Sackett, P. R., Laczo, R. M., & Lippe, Z. P. (2003). Differential prediction and the use of multiple predictors: The omitted variables problem. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1046-1056. doi:10.1037/0021-9010 .88.6.1046
38. Sackett, P. R., & Yang, H. (2000). Correction for range restriction: An expanded typology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 112-118. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.112
39. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications from 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262- 274. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262
40. Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. (2003). Principles for the validation and use of personnel selection procedures (4th ed.). College Park, MD: Author.
41. Stricker, L., Rock, D., & Burton, N. (1991). Sex differences in SAT prediction of college grades (College Board Rep. No. 91-2). New York, NY: College Board.
42. Wainer, H., & Steinberg, L. S. (1992). Sex differences in performance on the Mathematics section of the Scholastic Aptitude Test: A bidirectional validity study. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 323-336.
43. Young, J. W. (2001). Differential validity, differential prediction, and college admissions testing: A comprehensive review and analysis (College Board Research Rep. No. 2001-6). New York, NY: College Board.
44. Zwick, R. (2002). Fair game? The use of standardized admissions tests in higher education. New York, NY: Routledge.
45. Zwick, R., & Himelfarb, I. (2011). The effect of high school socioeconomic status on the predictive validity of SAT scores and high school grade-point average. Journal of Educational Measurement, 48, 101-121. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.2011.00136.x