Replication of Zeidner, Johnson, and Colleagues' Method for Estimating Army Aptitudes Area (AA) Composites

Diaz, Tirso; Ingerick, Michael; Lightfoot, Mary Ann

doi:10.21236/ada426299

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In an earlier report (see Diaz et al, 2004), we successfully replicated Zeidner, Johnson, and colleagues' method for estimating the proposed OLS-weighted composites. In this section, we evaluate the stability of those weights.…”

Section: Stability Of Proposed Aptitude Area (Aa) Compositesmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…To address these issues, we conducted a series of exploratory, descriptive analyses to empirically assess the stability of the proposed test composites. All analyses were based on estimates originally derived by Zeidner, Johnson, and colleagues (Zeidner et al, 2000(Zeidner et al, , 2001 and successfully replicated by Diaz et al (2004). Estimates were based on data contained in the Skills Qualification Test (SQT) program database.…”

Section: Overview Of Zeidner and Colleagues' Methods For Deriving Regrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The first report (Diaz, Ingerick, & Lightfoot, 2004) independently replicated the Zeidner, Johnson, and colleagues' method of empirically deriving AA composites, including the nine AA composites currently in operational use. The primary purpose of this second report is to summarize research evaluating the efficacy of the proposed AA system to meet the Army's classification objectives.…”

Section: Purpose Of Reportmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of alternative Aptitude Area (AA) composites and job families for army classification

Diaz¹,

Ingerick²,

Lightfoot³

2004

PsycEXTRA Dataset

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(Maximum 200 words):Effective January 2002, the Army adopted a set of nine AA composites based on empirically estimated weights for a seven subtest AS V AB battery. With support from the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI), Zeidner, Johnson, and colleagues developed these composites as part of a proposed two-tiered classification system. This change was motivated by a program of research funded by ARI and conducted by Zeidner, Johnson, and others demonstrating that the proposed system could significantly improve the overall classification and assignment of Army personnel to entry-level jobs.The current study aimed to independently evaluate the efficacy of the proposed AA composites, and corresponding job families, to meet the Army's classification objectives. More specifically, the present study tested the stability and differential validity of the proposed AA composites and accompanying job families, particularly the 17 and 150 relative to the 9 AAs, and their practical effects on classification efficiency, as measured by mean predicted performance (MPP). For both scientific and practical reasons, the findings suggest the continued operational use of the nine (standardized) AA composites based on the empirically estimated weights developed by Zeidner and colleagues. Army Project Number 2O465803D730 Personnel and Training Analysis ActivitiesApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. in IV FOREWORDAssigning tens of thousands of Army recruits per year to the jobs for which they are best suited and in a way that maximizes aggregate Soldier performance represents a major goal for the Army. The U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) has a long history of conducting and supporting research aimed at improving the Army's selection and classification process. Effective January 2002, the Army adopted a set of nine Aptitude Area (AA) composites, to select and classify recruits into entry-level jobs, utilizing weights derived from Soldier performance data (circa 1989). Relative to the composites they replaced, the new composites are more defensible with their reliance upon actual performance data, and they make use of the entire profile of aptitude information available for each recruit.The current study aimed to independently evaluate the efficacy of these new composites as well as alternative AA composites to meet the Army's classification objectives. More specifically, the present study tested the stability and relative uniqueness of several alternative AA composite /job family structures, and their practical effects on classification efficiency. For both scientific and practical reasons, the findings recommend the continued operational use of the nine (standardized) AA composites and do not support the use of a larger number of composites /job families. These findings have been briefed to the Enlisted Accessions Division, G-l and, in effect, represent a pull-back of recommendations based on earlier research for increasing the ...

show abstract

Section: Stability Of Proposed Aptitude Area (Aa) Compositesmentioning

confidence: 66%

Section: Overview Of Zeidner and Colleagues' Methods For Deriving Regrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Purpose Of Reportmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation