Methodological, Statistical, and Ethical Issues in the Study of Bias in Psychological Tests

  • John E. Hunter
  • Frank L. Schmidt
  • John Rauschenberger
Part of the Perspectives on Individual Differences book series (PIDF)


The hypothesis that tests are biased against minority groups asserts that scores on psychological tests may be accurate estimates of the ability of majority white test-takers but they are poor estimates of the ability of minority persons. This hypothesis can be tested empirically with data from any domain. If tests are biased, then evidence of bias should be found in every domain in which tests are used. If the evidence in any domain shows ability tests to be unbiased, then the hypothesis of bias must be abandoned. Findings suggesting bias in another domain would have to be explained by some other hypothesis that is specific to that domain.


Test Score Selection Ratio Black Worker Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Test Bias 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bartlett, C. J., Bobko, P., Mosier, S. B., & Hannan, R. Testing for fairness with a moderated multiple regression strategy: An alternative to differential analysis. Personnel Psychology, 1978, 31, 233–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boehm, V. R. Differential prediction: A methodological artifact? Journal of Applied Psychology, 1977, 62, 146–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brogden, H. E. On the interpretation of the correlation coefficient as a measure of predictive efficiency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1946, 37, 65–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Campbell, J. T., Crooks, L. A., Mahoney, M. H., & Rock, D. A. An investigation of sources of bias in the prediction of job performance: A six-year study. Final Project Report No. PR-73-37. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service, 1973.Google Scholar
  5. Cleary, T. A., & Hilton, T. I. Test bias: Prediction of grades of Negro and white students in integrated colleges. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1968, 5, 115–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cole, N. S. Bias in selection. ACT Research Report No. 51, May, 1972. Iowa City, Iowa: American College Testing Program, 1972.Google Scholar
  7. Cole, N. S. Bias in selection. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1973, 10, 237–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cronbach, L. J. Equity in selection—Where psychometrics and political philosophy meet. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1976, 13, 31–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cronbach, L. J., & Gleser, G. C. Psychological tests and personnel decisions. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1965.Google Scholar
  10. Cronbach, L. J., Yalow, E., & Schaeffer, G. A mathematical structure for analyzing fairness in selection. Personnel Psychology, 1980, 33, 693–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Darlington, R. B. Another look at “cultural fairness.” Journal of Educational Measurement, 1971, 3, 71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Darlington, R. B. Cultural test bias: Comment on Hunter and Schmidt. Psychological Bulletin, 1978, 85, 673–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Edwards, W., & Phillips, L. D. Man as transducer for probabilities in Bayesian command and control systems. In M. W. Shelley II & G. L. Bryan (Eds.), Human judgments and optimality. New York: Wiley, 1964.Google Scholar
  14. Gael, S., & Grant, D. L. Employment test validation for minority and non-minority telephone company service representatives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1972, 56, 135–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gael, S., Grant, D. L., & Ritchie, R. J. Employment test validation for minority and nonminority clerks with work sample criteria. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 420–426.(a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gael, S., Grant, D. L., & Ritchie, R. J. Employment test validation for minority and nonminority telephone operators. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 411–419.(b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ghiselli, E. E. The validity of aptitude tests in personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 1973, 26, 461–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gordon, R. A. Examining labeling theory: The case of mental retardation. In W. R. Gove (Ed.), The labeling of deviance: A perspective. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage/Halstead, 1975.Google Scholar
  19. Gordon, R. A., & Rudert, E. E. Bad news concerning IQ tests. Sociology of Education, 1979, 52, 174–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grant, D. L., & Bray, D. W. Validation of employment tests for telephone company installation and repair occupations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1970, 54, 7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gross, A. L., & Su, W. Defining a “fair” or “unbiased” selection model: A question of utilities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 345–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Humphreys, L. G. Statistical definitions of test validity for minority groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1973, 58, 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hunter, J. E. An analysis of validity, differential validity, test fairness, and utility for the Philadelphia Police Officers Selection Examination prepared by the Educational Testing Service. Report to the Philadelphia Federal District Court, Alvarez v. City of Philadelphia, 1979.Google Scholar
  24. Hunter, J. E. Test validation for 12,000 jobs: An application of synthetic validity generalization to the General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Employment Service, U.S. Department of Labor, 1980.Google Scholar
  25. Hunter, J. E. The economic benefits of personnel selection using ability tests: A state of the art review including a detailed analysis of the dollar benefit of US. Employment Service placements and a critique of the low cutoff method of test use. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Employment Service, U.S. Department of Labor, 1981.Google Scholar
  26. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. A critical analysis of the statistical and ethical implications of five definitions of test fairness. Psychological Bulletin, 1976, 83(6), 1053–1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. Differential and single group validity of employment tests by race: A critical analysis of three recent studies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1978, 63, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. Fitting people to jobs: Implications of personnel selection for national productivity. In M. D. Dunnette & E. A. Fleishman (Ed.), Human performance and productivity: Human capability assessment. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1981.Google Scholar
  29. Hunter, J. E., Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, R. Differential validity of employment tests by race: A comprehensive review and analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 1979, 86, 721–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hunter, J. E., Schmidt, F. L., & Rauschenberger, J. M. Fairness of psychological tests: Implications of four definitions for selection utility and minority hiring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1977, 62, 245–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jensen, A. R. Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press, 1980.Google Scholar
  32. Katzell, R. A., & Dyer, F. J. Differential validity revived. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1977, 62, 137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ledvinka, J. The statistical definition of fairness in the Federal selection guidelines and its implications for minority employment. Personnel Psychology, 1979, 32, 551–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lee, R., &, Booth, J. M. A utility analysis of a weighted application blank designed to predict turnover of clerical employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59, 516–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lent, R. H., Aurbach, H. A., & Levin, L. S. Research design and validity assessment. Personnel Psychology, 1971, 24, 247–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Linn, R. L. Fair test use in selection. Review of Educational Research, 1973, 43, 139–161.Google Scholar
  37. Linn, R. L. Test bias and the prediction of grades in law school. Journal of Legal Education, 1975, 27, 293–323.Google Scholar
  38. Linn, R. L., & Werts, C. E. Considerations for studies of test bias. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1971, 8, 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mack, M. J., Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. Dollar implications of alternative models of selection: A case study of park rangers. Technical Report, Personnel Research and Development Center, Office of Personnel Management, Washington, D.C., 1984.Google Scholar
  40. Novick, M. R., & Peterson, N. S. Towards equalizing educational and employment opportunity. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1976, 13, 77–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. O’Connor, E. J., Wexley, K. N., & Alexander, R. A. Single-group validity: Fact or fallacy? Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 352–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pearlman, K. The validity of tests used to select clerical personnel: A comprehensive summary and evaluation. U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Personnel Research and Development Center, TS-79-1, August 1979.Google Scholar
  43. Pearlman, K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. Validity generalization results for tests used to predict success and job proficiency in clerical evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1980, 65, 373–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Powers, D. E. Comparing predictions of law school performance for black, Chicano, and white law students. Law School Academic Council, LSAC-77-3, 1977.Google Scholar
  45. Reilly, R. R. A note on minority group test bias studies. Psychological Bulletin, 1973, 80, 130–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Reynolds, C. R. An examination for bias in a preschool test battery across race and sex. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1980, 17, 137–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reynolds, C. R. The problem of bias in psychological assessment. In C. R. Reynolds & T. B. Gutkin (Eds.), A handbook for school psychology. New York: Wiley, 1981.Google Scholar
  48. Reynolds, C. R., & Jensen, A. R. Patterns of intellectual abilities among blacks and whites matched on “g.” Paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Montreal, 1980.Google Scholar
  49. Rosenfeld, M., & Thornton, R. F. The development and validation of a multijurisdictional police examination. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service, 1976.Google Scholar
  50. Ruch, W. W. A re-analysis of published differential validity studies. Paper presented at the symposium “Differential Validation under EEOC and OFCC Testing and Selection Regulations,” American Psychological Association, Honolulu, Hawaii, 1972.Google Scholar
  51. Schmidt, F. L., & Hoffman, B. Empirical comparison of three methods of assessing the utility of a selection device. Journal of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1973, 1, 13–22.Google Scholar
  52. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. Racial and ethnical bias in psychological tests: Divergent implications of two definitions of test bias. American Psychologist, 1974, 29, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schmidt, F. L., Berner, J. G., & Hunter, J. E. Racial differences in validity of employment tests: Reality or illusion? Journal of Applied Psychology, 1973, 53, 5–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Schmidt, F. L., Hunter, J. E., McKenzie, R., & Muldrow, T. The impact of valid selection procedures on workforce productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1979, 64, 609–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schmidt, F. L., Hunter, J. E., Pearlman, K., & Shane, G. S. Further tests of the Schmidt-Hunter Bayesian validity generalization procedure. Personnel Psychology, 1979, 32, 257–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schmidt, F. L., Pearlman, K., & Hunter, J. E. The validity and fairness of employment and educational tests for Hispanic Americans: A review and analysis. Personnel Psychology, 1980, 33, 705–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tenopyr, M. L. Race and socio-economic status as moderators in predicting machineshop training success. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association Meeting, Washington, D.C., 1967.Google Scholar
  58. Thorndike, R. L. Concepts of culture-fairness. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1971, 8, 63–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. U.S. Employment Service. Section III of the Manual for the USES General Aptitude Test Battery. U.S. Department of Labor, 1970.Google Scholar
  60. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, U.S. Civil Service Commission, U.S. Department of Labor and U.S. Department of Justice. Adoption by four agencies of Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures. Federal Register, 1978, 43, 38290–38315.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • John E. Hunter
    • 1
  • Frank L. Schmidt
    • 2
    • 3
  • John Rauschenberger
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  2. 2.U.S. Office of Personnel ManagementUSA
  3. 3.George Washington UniversityUSA
  4. 4.ARMCO CorporationMiddletownUSA

Personalised recommendations