Toward a New Attrition Screening Paradigm: Latest Army Advances

Managing and reducing attrition during the first term of enlistment is a continuing priority for the services. Over the past decade, attrition rates in the Army have averaged between 25% and 30% during first-term periods of enlistment. Historically, the services have relied on education credentials, with special emphasis on possessing a high school diploma, as a primary indicator of completion rates after enlistment and as a proxy for the ability to adapt to a military lifestyle. A primary purpose of this paper is to describe Army research to develop new indicators of adaptability to augment the current system based on education credentials. This work has focused primarily on noncognitive, personality measures and how such measures can be combined with other existing measures for attrition screening during enlistment processing. These advances represent a new paradigm that relies less heavily on education credentials and can provide a more comprehensive and inclusive approach. This new approach incorporates advances in testing methodology to make it more viable for use in large-scale, high-stakes testing applications.     

The Challenges of Multiculturalism

Although the term multiculturalism is often understood on the public level as an ideology or as a social programme (to be ‘for’ or ‘against’), I argue in this paper that the term should also be understood to refer to the complex range of issues associated with cultural and religious diversity in society, and the social management of the challenges and opportunities such diversity offers. Understood in this sense, multiculturalism is not an optional extra, it is not something that a society can choose to have or avoid. For any country without closed borders then multiculturalism is a fact of today—it is present within the society. What is important are the social and political responses to the cultural and religious diversity that results from transnational flows and settlement of people. This introduction to the collection of papers highlights the need to understand multiculturalism as a process which is always contextual, and the role that state management of difference in the successful development of diversity plays.     

Do Actions Speak Louder Than Words? A Comparison of Three Organizational Practices for Reducing Racial/Ethnic Harassment and Discrimination

We assessed the effectiveness of three commonly suggested organizational practices for reducing racial/ethnic harassment and discrimination (REHD): training; resources for reporting REHD; and implementation actions taken by leadership to reduce REHD. In a sample of 39,475 U.S. military personnel, we conducted dominance analyses to examine the relative contributions of these practices to REHD. Implementation contributed more to the prediction of REHD than did training or resources. Moreover, implementation moderated the effect of resources and training. This suggests that active leadership effort to address REHD can be 1 of the most effective means of reducing such behavior.     

Differentiating Gender Discrimination and Sexist Behavior: An Examination of Antecedents and Outcomes

The United States Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) currently assesses gender discrimination and sexist behavior separately in its surveys of active duty and reserve service members. However, based on their definitional and theoretical similarities, it is possible that the two constructs may overlap to some extent. Using a military sample of 8,123 female respondents, this issue was examined using path analysis. The results of this study show that gender discrimination and sexist behavior are predicted by several common antecedent variables. In addition, each construct is shown to predict both common and unique outcomes. Implications for the organizational assessment of sexist behavior and gender discrimination are discussed.     

Effect size indices for analyses of measurement equivalence: understanding the practical importance of differences between groups

Because of the practical, theoretical, and legal implications of differential item functioning (DIF) for organizational assessments, studies of measurement equivalence are a necessary first step before scores can be compared across individuals from different groups. However, commonly recommended criteria for evaluating results from these analyses have several important limitations. The present study proposes an effect size index for confirmatory factor analytic (CFA) studies of measurement equivalence to address 1 of these limitations. The application of this index is illustrated with personality data from American English, Greek, and Chinese samples. Results showed a range of nonequivalence across these samples, and these differences were linked to the observed effects of DIF on the outcomes of the assessment (i.e., group-level mean differences and adverse impact).     

Proctored Versus Unproctored Internet Tests: Are unproctored noncognitive tests as predictive of job performance?

As the usage of unproctored Internet testing (UIT) increases in selection settings, concerns about the validity of such practices must be addressed. While recent examinations of the issue have focused primarily on the practicality, ethics, and potential legal ramifications of UIT, this paper provides an examination of the criterion‐related validity of unproctored assessments. Using a database of validity evidence, we examine the predictive validity of several noncognitive assessments (i.e., personality and biodata) with respect to a number of subjective and objective job performance metrics. Results generally indicate that assessments administered in proctored and unproctored settings have similar validities. Limitations of this research and implications for practice are discussed.     

Confirmatory Validation and Measurement Equivalence of the Eating Loss of Control Scale in Binge Eating and Non-Clinical Samples

Although Loss of Control (LOC) is a transdiagnostic factor in eating pathology, there are few standalone assessments of LOC. The objective of this study was to evaluate the uni-dimensionality and measurement equivalence of the Eating Loss of Control Scale (ELOCS). Confirmatory factor analyses were used to achieve a well-fitting uni-dimensional model in clinical (N?=?226) and non-clinical (N?=?476) samples. Measurement equivalence was tested in a factor analytic framework, and effect sizes were computed to evaluate the impact of non-equivalence. A well-fitting model was achieved in both samples after the removal of 4 items. The instrument showed configural equivalence but not metric equivalence. Results suggest that the ELOCS is a reliable and valid measure of LOC in clinical and non-clinical samples. However, while the nature of the LOC construct is similar across binge eating and non-clinical participants, comparisons of ELOCS across these groups are affected by measurement non-equivalence. This research also revealed novel insights into the relative sensitivity of model fitting and effect size approaches to investigating measurement equivalence.