Technical Report - International Military Testing Association

_ . - . .._ - -_-..-.-- _-_- ._,__X_____.___r_C_ _ --_ .._.-.. - .
- _ __ .-_. - _ -~. .__ ..__ .-_ -. - _____. - _- _ _. .- _ _ _
.
. .
.
_.- ---....-I- --...- -~..-.‘---.------.-. C....‘~e-.C.---F --*- -..s.*---1m-*r~- --...-,.. -..ea.,I .,,_.__. _.‘_,” ,_ I ,, ..
By centering on the main mtfvvation nyetenm, ns demonstrated to
be consistently present in the typlcal indFvFdua1 of our culture, rather
than on “special purpose,“ arbitary conglomerations, .eubJectivelyconceivad
interest divisions, or iamginary “drives,” the test design
recognizes the whole adult.
It may be possible that we can use the research findings behind
these tests. We can develop our own motivational fastor tests from
the great fund of current, veil-founded, and documented research.
Since we have large populations (serviceman) avaiiable to us, we can
validate the tests rather easily. ~160, with our quite adequate computer
machinery to work with, we can easily do the required statistical work.
The tests which we could develop can be wed in three areas: (1) to
rupplement or replace parts of our rating wales, (2) to set up a criterion
for validating and improving ‘*supervisory and cognitive” portions of our
present teata, and (3) to set UP a criterion for validating our rating
rcales against.
.
Conclusions
When we look back at Chain.ln’s Bridges’ chart here, and see the
large percent of variance that is not covered by general *‘achfevewnt”
type job-knowledge tests and rating scales; and when we see in the
one case of Mr. Shirkey’s Factor Analysis of, the Army’s new rating scale,
that our supervisory section of the Army’s Job mastery test dt-.e not load
highly vith *he factor of Leadership Potential; and when we remember that
the rating scale is influenced by many factora of the rater, ratee, and
the content setting, perhaps this ic a major area which we should explore.
Chairman Bridges and I would like to nou open the session to a general
discussion of personality testing and Job performance.
.
79
.
” *
.
!
I
I
I