Biomedical subjects

Philip L Roth

Publications and source records attributed to Philip L Roth.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Modeling the behavior of the 4/5ths rule for determining adverse impact: reasons for caution.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's 4/5ths rule has been used for over 20 years in applied psychology and employment law. The rule signals that there is adverse impact when the protected group selection ratio is less than 80% of the highest scoring group's selection ratio. We conducted several simulations and found, consistent with some previous management science literature, that the 4/5ths rule often resulted in false-positive readings of adverse impact even when there were no underlying (population) standardized group differences between subgroups. We then incorporated tests of statistical significance and found that adding such tests to the 4/5ths rule eliminated many false-positive indications of adverse impact. We also examined simulated selection systems based on meta-analytic values from the selection literature. The frequency of adverse impact signals from the 4/5ths rule increased markedly relative to simulations with no subgroup population differences. Adding statistical tests mitigated the number of indications of adverse impact to some extent.

Employment↗

PubMed2005

Assessing personality with a structured employment interview: construct-related validity and susceptibility to response inflation.

The authors evaluated the extent to which a personality-based structured interview was susceptible to response inflation. Interview questions were developed to measure facets of agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability. Interviewers administered mock interviews to participants instructed to respond honestly or like a job applicant. Interviewees completed scales of the same 3 facets from the NEO Personality Inventory, under the same honest and applicant-like instructions. Interviewers also evaluated interviewee personality with the NEO. Multitrait-multimethod analysis and confirmatory factor analysis provided some evidence for the construct-related validity of the personality interviews. As for response inflation, analyses revealed that the scores from the applicant-like condition were significantly more elevated (relative to honest condition scores) for self-report personality ratings than for interviewer personality ratings. In addition, instructions to respond like an applicant appeared to have a detrimental effect on the structure of the self-report and interview ratings, but not interviewer NEO ratings.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Data quality affects meta-analytic conclusions: a response to Miner and Raju (2004) concerning entrepreneurial risk propensity.

J. B. Miner and N. S. Raju (2004) contended that there are additional studies that compare the risk propensity of entrepreneurs and managers, which, when added to the data from W. H. Stewart and P. L. Roth (2001) and meta-analyzed, produce relationships between risk propensity and entrepreneurial status that are substantially weaker than previously believed. This conclusion was evaluated by identifying and examining methodological problems associated with their inclusion of effect sizes (i.e., ds) from studies with variables not relevant to research questions, dependent samples, extraneous variance in outcome variables, and confusion of constructs. When these methodological issues were addressed, a new meta-analysis indicated an overall conclusion consistent with that of Stewart and Roth, but the results varied according to instrumentation, particularly objective instrumentation (observed d = 0.31) versus the Miner Sentence Completion Scale-Form T (observed d = -0.35).

Entrepreneurship↗

PubMed2003

Ethnic group differences in measures of job performance: a new meta-analysis.

The authors conducted a new meta-analysis of ethnic group differences in job performance. Given a substantially increased set of data as compared with earlier analyses, the authors were able to conduct analyses of Black-White differences within more homogeneous categories of job performance and to reexamine findings on objective versus subjective measurement. Contrary to one perspective sometimes adopted in the field, objective measures are associated with very similar, if not somewhat larger, standardized ethnic group differences (ds) than subjective measures across a variety of indicators. This trend was consistent across quality, quantity, and absenteeism measures. Further, work samples and job knowledge tests are associated with larger ds than performance ratings or measures of absenteeism. Analysis of Hispanic-White standardized differences shows that they are generally lower than Black-White differences in several categories.

Employee Performance Appraisal↗

PubMed2002

Corrections for range restriction in structured interview ethnic group differences: the values may be larger than researchers thought.

Previous studies of standardized ethnic group differences in the employment interview have shown differences to be relatively small. Unfortunately, many researchers conducting interview studies have not considered the issue of range restriction in research design. This omission is likely to lead to underestimates of standardized ethnic group differences (d) when the interview is considered as an initial screening device or used in combination with other initial screening devices. The authors found that 2 forms of a behavioral interview were associated with standardized ethnic group differences of .36 and .56 when corrected for range restriction. These differences are substantially larger than previously thought and demonstrate the importance of considering a variety of study design characteristics in obtaining the appropriate parameter estimates.

Adult↗