Technical Report - International Military Testing Association

.
-._
. .
. .
- .
.
. *
Duboie (1957) hor rlhovn thet, ‘*e properly conetructod retie (ouch
u that described ebove) te eaecntlelly � opeciel cane of a reelduel,
i.e., the velue in the rmrnoretor vorfeble lees thet pert wkfch fe cortolated
vich the denanioator variable. Accordingly, a rotio � hould
corralaza .OO with the dcnaminattir verieble.” Thin hoe practieel
� ����������� fa that ue ten perfom our rcteaerch in tha form of port
and pariiel corraletion technlquae, end utiilee the results, if lndlutad
by the dete, la the form of a ratio Index. Traditionally, thfo
index has been derived by dividing � atudent’e, obearked performance
(i .a., any training grede) by hie predicted parformeaco. One could
divide by � etudent’e rw eptftude grede, but it ie coaoiderad to be
8 further reflnmeeat to luee e predicted score derived on the beeie of
OQ@O � ptitudr grede. In � lthar ceee. the reeultent index 18 untorrelated
tith � ptitude (i..., .OO). Thur. rlmller co the pert correletlcm, the
retfo epproech dlvidec m trelning grede into tm pertr; thet verfrnce
rrhich fe predicted by rpritude and that verience which is unpredkted
b y aptitude: (i.e.,the achlavemeut index). 7714 ochiavemaant index
will be 1.00 or < ) 1.00 dcpandfng on the megnltudee of the cmmrator
end denmfnator � ������
It me7 be benoflcfrl to clarify two uuttere at thie point in order
ta define thlr index properly. Tha achisvaneat index 1s oiraller to the
“reelduel goin” AS we Fndfcetsd. The former meeure ie indicative of
"mot ivat ion ,I’ end the letter, of “gain” In leeruing. One rae7 Infer
thet both maneuree Ore “pure” indices of motivotiou end gain in learning.
his ehould not be � eeumed *inc.> they era both roeiduole repreeenting
verieace unexplelned by mserured � ptitude on the one hand end athlsvement
on the other. Dubole In “Correletlonel Analyrie i n Training Reeeerch”
(APA Peper, 1956) and Hayo in “PAQ Kenual” (e CNAl7XHlXA Reeeerch Report,
1957). rtepactlvaly, indfcete that each residue1 lo not � “pure” meeeura
of Rein or motlvetloa.
The � econd problem often encountered concerue the predlctLve
cepeclty of the � chlevcmmt index. This cm ba viewed in tvo ueye. On
the one heod, � trefnlag ;grede , � e I indiceted, emi be divided into tw
pert8 which are uncorraletad vith � rch other. Therefore, in � correletlonel
� enee, eech pert connrrlbutee uniquely to the prodlctlon of an
outside criterion. Houevcsr, rfnce these two pert8 era breed oa tha aeae
trrlning grade, tt � hould not be � rmmed thet the cwbiood prrdlction
by there perte will be grtrrter then prediction by thet trelnLag grede
iteelf. This vae diecurecd in � reeanS f3UTECHTR.A rorcerch report by
-go titled “An ApprLerell of Retie Scores.” Date on thlr mtter ir
conteiaed In Tcible 1. TV0 rchoolr era reprsrrnted. It ten be rem thee
the � chievcsnt Index (elno celled PAQ) dose not add to the Multiple ‘1”
AS coutpered to the rfmple “r” vtmn uring t h e training grade clone. Thue ,
without PAQ the OLmple r’(i wre .761 end .767; vlth PAQ, the Multiple
B’S vere .762 end .763, rcepcctfvely. However, there ere other prectieel
_ ,.. -- ---- . . .-__ ^_. ._..- __ - -- .._-
I
.
.
.
58
.
i
‘.
/- ;
I *