Validity & Reliability
The validity coefficient of a cognitive ability test or GCA is 0.51, one of the highest validity coefficient, structured interview as equally valid. Cognitive ability test brings forth many advantages, they are considered highly reliable, both verbal reasoning and numerical test have shown high validity for a wide range of jobs, validity rises with the increasing complexity of the job and combinations of aptitude test have higher validities than individual test alone (HR-Guide, 2002). Meta-analytic studies have demonstrated that GCA as one of the most powerful predictors of success job performance and training. GCA has been used in the past to hire federally such as in the Army.
A combination of criterion-related validity
…show more content…
The disadvantages often associated with this type of test is that the score tends to differ based on minority/non-minority group. "Non-minorities typically score one standard deviation above minorities which may result in adverse impact depending on how the scores are used in the selection process (HR-Guide, 2002).” For example, in a survey conducted by 154 organizations across Canada, Ng and Sears reported positive association with “lower levels of minority group representation in the organization as a whole, and in management ranks (Catano, 2013).” Due to the increased knowledge-based skills necessary for a job, reading and verbal skills are required in the cognitive ability test. For minority groups that proves to be a disadvantage, since English is not their first language. Similarly, it negatively impacts an applicant based on sex. Knowledge of mathematics may negatively impact the score for females. The way the score is used is important because if a knockout were to be the case, which it is in this particular selection process than it has a negative impact on minority …show more content…
To reduce the adverse impact a knock-out cognitive ability test has on minority groups, I would recommend the continued use of cognitive ability test but not as a complete knock-out measure, used as a knockout after the four step formal-assessment (application, written-test and/or interview, reference and security check and language test) is complete. Along side a purchased personality test that measure contentiousness a validity coefficient of 0.31. A combination of both predictors increased the validity coefficient to 0.60 and allows for a better interpretation of applicants without negatively impacting certain groups. A mandatory formal interview for all positions, not just supervisor positions, would be ideal but it is not cost effective for the number of positions that need to be filled in the short period of
Not only does the KBIT-2 lack in accommodating for cultural and language barriers, but it is also deficient towards those with mild to moderate motor difficulties due to the fact that the test requires minimal motor skills (Bain & Jaspers, 2010). However, since the test does not require time limits individuals with mild motor difficulties could be assessed. Overall, the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Second Edition appears to be psychometrically strong and feasible assessment to administer (Bain & Jaspers, 2010).
The g factor, or "general factor", is a construct developed in psychometrics to determine cognitive abilities. It is a variable that summarizes positive correlations among various cognitive tasks, which demonstrate an individual's performance at one type of cognitive task tends to be comparable to his or her performance at other kinds of cognitive tasks. The g factor typically accounts for 40 to 50 percent of the variance in IQ test performance, and IQ scores are frequently regarded as estimates of an individual's g factor rating (Kamphaus et al. 2005). The terms IQ, general intelligence, general cognitive ability, general mental ability, or simply intelligence, are often used interchangeably to refer to the common core shared by cognitive tests (Deary et al, 2012).
Along with the already clear and precise guidelines for the Woodcock-Johnson III NU Tests of Cognitive Abilities, seven new features have been added to the tests (Woodcock & Johnson, 1989). In the Woodcock-Johnson III NU: Tests of Cognitive Abilities, it includes eight new tests, which measure information-processing abilities (Keith, Kranzler, & Flanagan, 2001). These tests include ones which measure working memory, planning, naming speed, and attention (Woodcock, McGrew, & Mather, 2001b). Also included in this version are five new cognitive clusters (McGrew, Werder, & Woodcock, 1991). Of these five clusters, there are also two additional clusters that are available when cognitive and achievement batteries are used together (Ramos, Alfonso, & Schermerhorn, 2009). Included in the tests that is helpful are interception plans and modified organization; the interception plans and modified organization increase the depth and breadth of coverage (Benner, Ralston, & Feuerborn, 2012). New features of the Woodcock-Johnson III NU: Tests of Cognitive Abilities also includes expanded cognitive factor structure, developing comparison between the tests; in the expanded cognitive factor structure, two to three tests measure different aspects of a broader ability more clearly (Jones et al., 2008). Another change is the fact that clusters and tests are now grouped into three broad cognitive areas (Ritchey & Coker, 2013). The three cognitive areas include Verbal Ability, Thinking Ability, and Cognitive Efficiency (Floyd et al., 2010). Expanded procedures for evaluating ability and achievement discrepancies is another new feature as well (Kranzler, Flores, & Coady, 2010). Also in the list of new features is a Diagnostic Supplement to the W...
is required to take prior to hiring. A psychological test is taken as well to evaluate
of decisions can and cannot be made on the basis of test data, and how should those decisions be made? What credentials, if any, are necessary to administer and interpret psychological tests? What rights do examinees undergoing psychological evaluation have? Public scrutiny of psychological testing reached its zenith in 1965 with a series of probing and unprecedented congressional hearings (see Amrine, 1965). Against a backdrop of mounting public concern about—as well as legal challenges to—psychological testing, many psychologists in the 1960s began to look anew at the testing enterprise. Beyond being a mere instrument of measurement, a psychological test was conceptualized by many as a tool of a highly trained examiner. The value of a particular
It is hard to say whether these tests are efficient in assessing a student’s knowledge. There have been studies done that shows how students perform contributes to a number of factors. Students are individuals just as adults and can easily slip up on a test, just as many adults have done because of numerous reasons. They suffer from stress, lack of sleep, how they are feeling, whether they ate, and many other reasons. “These influences most dramatically affect low-income students and students of color” (French, 2003). From the rise of immigration there have been tests (IQ and Stanford-Binet) that were used to sort and track students based on race and income. According to a study it has been concluded that these tests will continue to hinder the ability of Black and Latino students to graduate from high school (Orfield and Wald, 2000; Haney, 1999; McNeil, 2000).
Gray, S. W., & Zide, M. R. (2007). An introduction to the competency-based assessment model.
Unfortunately, I do not have much experience with intelligence tests modern or otherwise so my answer will come from course material. I came across this statement which I found interesting “there is no shared agreement as to what intelligence is and how it should be measured” (Drummond & Jones, 2010, p. 173). Intelligence testing carries with it so much controversy, it also places limits on where people believe their place is in society. There are multiple factors that can affect the testing on a given day: fatigue, stress, heredity, socioeconomic status the list could on and on. The results of this test can be damming painting inaccurate self-images of people. On one hand people will attempt to achieve heights unattainable, conversely
Bias could be a part of intelligence testing and be good for certain groups because of the way some questions are worded. Some individuals will test much higher in these specific groups as opposed to those that are not in the group, but not forgetting that culture experiences play a role in test scores. Individuals tested might have scores immeasurable because of conventional test that do not take into account one’s skills or capabilities. Intelligence test is determined and valid for general and basic skill set, but cannot determine overall how knowledgeable the individual truly is. To some up intelligence test are not effective in measuring an individual’s ability because several issues could arise and IQ test ought to be shunned (Shiraev & Levy, 2010).
...ized intelligence test therefore having different validity for various racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups. Since the tests emphasize verbal skills and knowledge that are part of Western schooling, it is unfair to presume it will correctly test the cognitive abilities of other groups. One prime example is the immigration screening process exercised by the U.S government in early 20th century, based on the results of which was used to make extremely far-fetched and sweeping generalisations of whole nations based solely on the test results designed for U.S citizens. An estimated 80% of immigrants were labelled as ‘feebleminded’ in during testing. Due to these results being widely distributed and heavily influencing citizens as well as politicians, the U.S Congress resolved to pass the ‘Immigration Act 1924’ which restricted immigration from a low 3% down to 2%.
In this world, there are many different individuals who are not only different in demographics but also different neurologically. Due to an immense amount of people it is important to first understand each individual, in order, to better understand them and to help them when it comes to certain areas such as education, the work force, and etc…. For this reason psychologists have aimed to further understand individuals through the use of psychological assessments. This paper aims to examine a particular assessment tool, the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (Fifth Edition), which measures both intelligence and cognitive abilities (Roid, 2003). This assessment is usually administered by psychologists and the scores are most often used to determine placement in academics and services allotted to children and adolescents (despite their compatibility for adults) (Wilson & Gilmore, 2012). Furthermore before the investigation dives into the particulars of the test, such as its strengths and weakness’, it is best to first learn more about the intelligence scales general characteristics.
The pro of using this theory to determine intelligence some abilities and skills actually do have correlation. The con of using this theory to determine intelligence is human abilities being as diverse as they are cannot be lumped together in one g factor.
In today’s highly competitive job market it is extremely challenging and important for businesses to fill a vacancy with the right candidate (Cann, 2013). Due to high demand of potential candidates, developing a portfolio of employability skills which include psychometric testing is considered important in every workplace (Mills et al., 2011). Thus, I recently took three practice psychometric tests on verbal, numerical and inductive/logical reasoning. This essay is a reflection of my personal experience of psychometric testing. First, I will talk about what the literature comments on in relation to the strengths and weaknesses of psychometric testing. Then, I will assess whether literature reflects
Risavy, S., & Hausdorf, P. (2011). Personality Testing in Personnel Selection: Adverse Impact and Differential Hiring Rates. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19(1), 18-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2011.00531.x
... relevant samples of all aspects of the skills measured. Firefighters must pass a physical test equivalent to the physical tasks required fighting fires. Physical requirements of a firefighter include the ability lift 75 pounds while wearing a respirator and being able to run up flights of stairs. Criterion-related validity compares test scores with a well-established independent measure known to be valid. At Bluebonnet Homes, an Intermediate Care Facility for Persons with Mental Retardation (ICF/MR), potential employees are asked a series of real-life questions modeling experiences they will encounter while on the job. The potential employee’s ability to identify the exact problem in each of the scenarios and the solutions they determine correct help trainers to assess future job success. High scores on the assessment activities predict successful job performance.