提高我们对测试中预测偏差的理解。

IF 9.4 1区 心理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Journal of Applied Psychology Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-12 DOI:10.1037/apl0001152
Herman Aguinis, Steven A Culpepper
{"title":"提高我们对测试中预测偏差的理解。","authors":"Herman Aguinis, Steven A Culpepper","doi":"10.1037/apl0001152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Predictive bias (i.e., differential prediction) means that regression equations predicting performance differ across groups based on protected status (e.g., ethnicity, sexual orientation, sexual identity, pregnancy, disability, and religion). Thus, making prescreening, admissions, and selection decisions when predictive bias exists violates principles of fairness based on equal treatment and opportunity. First, we conducted a two-part study showing that different types of predictive bias exist. Specifically, we conducted a Monte Carlo simulation showing that out-of-sample predictions provide a more precise understanding of the nature of predictive bias-whether it is based on intercept and/or slope differences across groups. Then, we conducted a college admissions study based on 29,734 Black and 304,372 White students, and 35,681 Latinx and 308,818 White students and provided evidence about the existence of both intercept- and slope-based predictive bias. Third, we discuss the nature and different types of predictive bias and offer analytical work to explain why each type exists, thereby providing insights into the causes of different types of predictive bias. We also map the statistical causes of predictive bias onto the existing literature on likely underlying psychological and contextual mechanisms. Overall, we hope our article will help reorient future predictive bias research from whether it exists to the why of different types of predictive bias. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"402-414"},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving our understanding of predictive bias in testing.\",\"authors\":\"Herman Aguinis, Steven A Culpepper\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/apl0001152\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Predictive bias (i.e., differential prediction) means that regression equations predicting performance differ across groups based on protected status (e.g., ethnicity, sexual orientation, sexual identity, pregnancy, disability, and religion). Thus, making prescreening, admissions, and selection decisions when predictive bias exists violates principles of fairness based on equal treatment and opportunity. First, we conducted a two-part study showing that different types of predictive bias exist. Specifically, we conducted a Monte Carlo simulation showing that out-of-sample predictions provide a more precise understanding of the nature of predictive bias-whether it is based on intercept and/or slope differences across groups. Then, we conducted a college admissions study based on 29,734 Black and 304,372 White students, and 35,681 Latinx and 308,818 White students and provided evidence about the existence of both intercept- and slope-based predictive bias. Third, we discuss the nature and different types of predictive bias and offer analytical work to explain why each type exists, thereby providing insights into the causes of different types of predictive bias. We also map the statistical causes of predictive bias onto the existing literature on likely underlying psychological and contextual mechanisms. Overall, we hope our article will help reorient future predictive bias research from whether it exists to the why of different types of predictive bias. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15135,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"402-414\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001152\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001152","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

预测偏差(即差异预测)意味着预测表现的回归方程因受保护状态(如种族、性取向、性认同、怀孕、残疾和宗教)而异。因此,当存在预测偏见时,做出预筛选、录取和选拔决定违反了基于平等待遇和机会的公平原则。首先,我们进行了一项分为两部分的研究,表明存在不同类型的预测偏差。具体而言,我们进行了蒙特卡洛模拟,表明样本外预测可以更准确地了解预测偏差的性质,无论是基于组间的截距和/或斜率差异。然后,我们对29734名黑人和304372名白人学生、35681名拉丁裔和308818名白人进行了一项大学招生研究,并提供了基于截距和斜率的预测偏差存在的证据。第三,我们讨论了预测偏差的性质和不同类型,并提供了分析工作来解释每种类型存在的原因,从而深入了解不同类型预测偏差的原因。我们还将预测偏差的统计原因映射到现有的关于潜在心理和上下文机制的文献中。总的来说,我们希望我们的文章将有助于重新定位未来的预测偏差研究,从是否存在到不同类型的预测偏差的原因。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Improving our understanding of predictive bias in testing.

Predictive bias (i.e., differential prediction) means that regression equations predicting performance differ across groups based on protected status (e.g., ethnicity, sexual orientation, sexual identity, pregnancy, disability, and religion). Thus, making prescreening, admissions, and selection decisions when predictive bias exists violates principles of fairness based on equal treatment and opportunity. First, we conducted a two-part study showing that different types of predictive bias exist. Specifically, we conducted a Monte Carlo simulation showing that out-of-sample predictions provide a more precise understanding of the nature of predictive bias-whether it is based on intercept and/or slope differences across groups. Then, we conducted a college admissions study based on 29,734 Black and 304,372 White students, and 35,681 Latinx and 308,818 White students and provided evidence about the existence of both intercept- and slope-based predictive bias. Third, we discuss the nature and different types of predictive bias and offer analytical work to explain why each type exists, thereby providing insights into the causes of different types of predictive bias. We also map the statistical causes of predictive bias onto the existing literature on likely underlying psychological and contextual mechanisms. Overall, we hope our article will help reorient future predictive bias research from whether it exists to the why of different types of predictive bias. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
175
期刊介绍: The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including: 1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses). 2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research. 3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.
期刊最新文献
Prospects for reducing group mean differences on cognitive tests via item selection strategies. Self-promotion in entrepreneurship: A driver for proactive adaptation. Coping with work-nonwork stressors over time: A person-centered, multistudy integration of coping breadth and depth. A person-centered approach to behaving badly at work: An examination of workplace deviance patterns. How perceived lack of benevolence harms trust of artificial intelligence management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1