NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Back to results
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ840233
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2009
Pages: 3
Abstractor: As Provided
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: ISSN-0003-066X
EISSN: N/A
The Absence of Underprediction Does Not Imply the Absence of Measurement Bias
Wicherts, Jelte M.; Millsap, Roger E.
American Psychologist, v64 n4 p281-283 May-Jun 2009
Sacked, Borne man, and Connelly recently discussed several criticisms that are often raised against the use of cognitive tests in selection. One criticism concerns the issue of measurement bias in cognitive ability tests with respect to specific groups in society. Sacked et AL. (2008) stated that "absent additional information, one cannot determine whether mean differences [in test scores] reflect true differences in the developed ability being measured or bias in the measurement of that ability" (p. 222). Their discussion of measurement bias appears to suggest that measurement bias in tests can be accurately detected through the study of differential prediction of criteria across groups. In this comment, we argue that this assertion is incorrect. In fact, it has been known for more than a decade that tests of differential regression are not generally diagnostic of measurement bias (Millsap, 1997, 1998, 2008). (Contains 1 figure.)
American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org/publications
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Opinion Papers
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Grant or Contract Numbers: N/A