A technique for the development of a differential prediction battery.

Abstract

ngton I. The Differential PredictionProblem Methods for developing a test battery to predict success in a single specified type of activity are well known. These methods are concerned primarily with selecting tests to predict a single criterion. But in most practical situations we are not concerned with predicting success in just a single activity or assignment. In the military service it is not a question of predicting the success of a prospective recruit in just a single specialty. Rather, the military services are concerned with predicting success in all or most of their numerous (military occupational) specialties. In an industrial organization, it is not enough to have procedures for predicting success in merely a single type of job. It is desirable to have procedures for predicting success in as many of the different jobs existing in the company as possible.Similarly in our institutions of higher education it is not enough for an entering student to know simply whether he will or 1 This research was carried out under Contract between the University of Washi ngton and the Office of Naval Research. The data used to illustrate the technique were provided by Professor August Dvorak. Most of the computations were carried out by Robert Dear and William Meredith. Charlotte MacEwan al so assi sted with the computations and assumed major editorial responsibility for the preparation of the manuscript. Much credit is due the typist, Eleanor Green. Supervision of both computational and editorial activities was provided by William Cl emans. To each of these able contributors I am deepl y grateful.

Specifications for an Operational Two-Tiered Classification System for the Army Volume 1: Report

“…The substitutability of predicted performance for actual performance in the evaluation of both selection and classification efficiency of personnel systems-as well as the development and research relating to selection and classification systems-was suggested by both Horst (1954) and Brogden. Brogden (1955) provided a proof of this substitutability using several highly justifiable basic assumptions.…”

“…Brogden (1951Brogden ( , 1959 and Horst (1954) were early proponents of job specific predictor composites in the multiple job context, a key principle of DAT. More recent proponents include Zeidner (1991, 1995); Johnson, Zeidner and Leaman (1992); Scholarios, Johnson and Zeidner (1994);Statman (1992); Zeidner and Johnson (1991a, 1991b, 1991cand Zeidner, Scholarios and Johnson (1997).…”

Building a joint-service classification research roadmap: Methodological issues in selection and classification

“…Differential validity refers to the ability of a set of tests to predict the difference between criterion scores, such as performance on different jobs. Horst (1954) defined an index of differential validity (Hd) as the average variance in the difference scores between all pairs of criteria accounted for by a set of tests. It is not feasible to calculate H, directly, because criterion scores are not available for more than one job for any individual.…”

“…Selection or classification methods that are not based on full LSEs optimize one Zunction at the expense of the other. When full LSEs are infeasible because of the number of tests or jobs, then methods should be selected to maximize Hd (Horst, 1954). Constraints such as job quotas can be incorporated into the classification process through straightforward mathematical programming methods.…”

Classification and Assignment within Pride (CLASP): A Recruit Assignment Model.

“…An index of prediction efficiency was developed by Horst (1954) in his attempts to produce methodologies for constructing differential prediction test batteries. The decision index procedure, the basis of the optimal-sequential assignment approach in APDS-PROMIS and CLASP, was first proposed by Ward (1959) in his attempt to obtain close-to-optimal solutions under sequential assignment conditions.…”