Abstract
A content-related test construction strategy was employed as a means of yielding a test with criterion-related evidence of validity. Utilizing a national sample of field sales job incumbents, a group-based job analysis method was developed to identify job requirements. A content validity and concurrent criterion-related study were then conducted. The results demonstrated both content and criterion-related evidence of validity. Differential validity by race or gender was not found. A comparison between minority and non-minority group regression lines found no statistically significant difference between slopes. However, a statistically significant difference between minority and non-minority intercept values was found. The results are discussed in respect to their consistency with other research findings. The significance of the study is addressed in light of the recent Unitarian approach towards the theoretical and practical nature of test validity. It is suggested that practitioners and researchers investigate further the elements of this research effort as guidance for satisfying professional and federal standards.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985).Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Arvey, R. D. (1979).Fairness in Selecting Employees. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Campbell, J. T., Brooks, L. A., Mahoney, M. G. & Rock, D. A. (1973).An Investigation of Sources of Bias in the Prediction of Job Performance — A Six Year Study (Technical Report PF73-37). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Cleary, A. (1968). Test bias: Prediction of grades of negro and white students in integrated colleges.Journal of Education Measurement, 5, 115–124.
Cohen, J. & Cohen, P. (1983).Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Civil Service Commission & Department of Justice. (1978). Uniform guidelines on employee selection procedures.Federal Register, 43, 38290–38315.
Feild, H., Bayley, G. A. & Bayley, S. (1977). Employment test validation for minority and non-minority workers.Personnel Psychology, 30, 37–46.
Flanagan, J. C. & Burns, R. K. (1955). The employee performance record: An new appraisal and development tool.Harvard Business Review, 33, 95–102.
Fry, E. (1968). Readability formula that saves time.Journal of Reading, 11, 513–516.
Guion, R. M. (1980). On trinitarian doctrines of validity.Professional Psychology, 11, 385–398.
Hackman, J. R. & Oldham, G. R. (1980).Work Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Iowa Merit Employment Department. (1974).Job Analysis Guidlines. Des Moines, IA: Iowa Employment Department.
Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity.Personnel Psychology, 28, 563–575.
Lawshe, C. H. (1985). Inferences from personnel tests and their validity.Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 237–238.
Ruch, W. W. (1972, September).A re-analysis of published differential validity studies. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Honolulu, HI.
Society for Industrial and Organization Psychology, Inc. (1987).Principles for the Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures (3rd ed.). College Park, MD: Author.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Diamante, T. Unitarian validation of a mathematical problem-solving exercise for sales occupations. J Bus Psychol 7, 383–401 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01013753
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01013753