The Role of Range Restriction and Criterion Contamination in Assessing Differential Validity by Race/Ethnicity

Purpose

Berry et al.’s (J Appl Psychol 96:881–906, 2011) meta-analysis of cognitive ability test validity data across employment, college admissions, and military domains demonstrated that validity is lower for Black and Hispanic subgroups than for Asian and White subgroups. However, Berry et al. relied on observed test-criterion correlations and it is therefore not clear whether validity differences generalize beyond observed validities. The present study investigates the roles that range restriction and criterion contamination play in differential validity.

Design/Methodology/Approach

A large dataset (N > 140,000) containing SAT scores and college grades of Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White test takers was used. Within-race corrections for multivariate range restriction were applied. Differential validity analyses were carried out using freshman GPA versus individual course grades as criteria to control for the contaminating influence of individual differences between students in course choice.

Findings

Observed validities underestimated the magnitude of validity differences between subgroups relative to when range restriction and criterion contamination were controlled. Analyses also demonstrate that validity differences would translate to larger regression slope differences (i.e., differential prediction).

Implications

Subgroup differences in range restriction and/or individual differences in course choice cannot account for lower validity of the SAT for Black and Hispanic subgroups. Controlling for these factors increased subgroup validity differences. Future research must look to other explanations for subgroup validity differences.

Originality

The present study is the first differential validity study to simultaneously control for range restriction and individual differences in course choice, and answers a call to investigate potential causes of differential validity.     

Further validation of a single‐item measure of social identification

We examine the validity and reliability of a single‐item measure of social identification (SISI). Convergent validity is shown with significant positive correlations with previously published unidimensional and multidimensional measures of in‐group identification and other group‐relevant measures (e.g., entitativity and collective self‐esteem). Divergent validity is shown via nonsignificant correlations with social desirability measures. Predictive validity is shown with positive correlations with group‐relevant behavior (e.g., volunteerism and voting). External validity is shown with correlations with other in‐group identification measures in a community sample. The reliability of the scale is shown by examining scores of the SISI for six different identities at three points in time. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The influence of just-world beliefs on driving anger and aggressive driving intentions

Decades of research demonstrate that the extent to which one believes the world is just can have important interpersonal consequences. Unfortunately, most of the commonly studied consequences are negative in nature. Guided by previous research demonstrating the buffering effect of just‐world beliefs and anger, the present research explores how belief in a just world (BJW) may mitigate anger in the domain of driving anger and examines the limiting conditions of this effect. Study 1 demonstrated the expected negative relation between common measures of BJW and anger expression in a driving context. Study 2 found that the buffering effects of just‐world beliefs and driver aggression were greater when BJW was violated (vs. not). Study 3 replicated the effects on aggression and anger and established a mediational role of anger on the buffering effects of just‐world beliefs on thoughts and driver aggression. Aggr. Behav. 38:389‐402, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Psychosocial factors and reading difficulties: students with reading difficulties drawn from a representative population sample

In a representative sample of 2,464 Norwegian adolescents, aged 12-15 years, 7.8% (n= 191) reported reading difficulties (RD). No gender difference was found. Adolescents with RD were compared to classmates on psychosocial variables. In univariate analysis, RD adolescents report higher levels of depressive symptoms, more school stress, worried more about going to school, had lower school grades and lower attachment to parents than those without RD. They also scored lower on Global Self-worth and on Social Acceptance scales. Further, they reported reduced levels of psycho-functioning during the previous year because of mental health problems, they had received more help and had used more medication for such problems. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, receiving help for mental health problems and reduced psycho-functioning showed the strongest associations with student RD status. No gender interactions were found. The study demonstrated important differences between adolescents with and without RD.     

Prevalence, course, incidence, and 1-year prediction of deliberate self-harm and suicide attempts in early Norwegian school adolescents

In this survey of early Norwegian school adolescents, the prevalence, course, and incidence of self-harm behavior with or without suicide intent were examined, in addition to predictors of self-harm for a 1-year follow-up period. Lifetime prevalence rates of self-harm without suicide intent and suicide attempts were 2.9% and 3.0%, respectively, while 1-year incidence rates were 3.6% and 1.7%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, five predictors significantly differentiated self-harmers from non-self-harming adolescents. Early school adolescents having frequent or intense suicidal ideation over an extended time period and attempting self-harm repeatedly with or without suicide intent should be identified and offered treatment.     

Predicting aggressive driving behavior from anger and negative cognitions

The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the anger experience and expression, as well as cognitive distortions, of individuals who self-report higher and lower levels of driver aggression. Fifty-seven higher driver aggression participants and 73 lower driver aggression participants completed measures of trait anger, driving anger, anger expression, angry thoughts while driving, hostile thoughts, and dysfunctional attitudes. The present study results suggest that higher aggression drivers demonstrate a different pattern of affective experience, problematic cognitive tendencies, and subsequent negative outcomes in comparison to those reporting lower levels of aggression. Future research should continue to investigate patterns of negative cognitions for aggressive drivers, in order to inform treatment and prevention strategies for this societal concern.