I__. - International Military Testing Association

Table 2 presents the intercorrelations among scores obtained using the five different scoring ptocedures.
These intercorrelations range from moderate to very high. Correlations between scores that are
based on the same set of responses (e.g., M-Correct with M-Effectiveness) are higher than cortelations
between scores that are based on different sets of responses (e.g., M-Correct with L-Correct). The correlations
between L-Effectiveness and the other scores are negative, because lower L-Effectiveness scores
are actua.lly better. The high (negative) correlation between M-Effectiveness and L-Effectiveness seems
to indicate that these two scores measure similar or related constructs.
Table 1
Situational Judgment Test Means, Standard Deviations, and Internal Consistencies
Scoring Procedure N Mean SD
Internal
Consistency
Reliability’
M-Correct 10253 5. 16.52 4.29 50
M-Effectiveness lo253 4.91 .34 .68
L-Correct 10073 14.86 3.86 .57
L-Effectiveness loo73 3.542 .31 .68
M-L Effectiveness loo73 1.36 .61 .75
’ KR-20 ’
2 Low scona indicate higher performance.
3 Soldiers with mom than 10% incomplete or invalid data were anittad from these a&‘ses.
Table 2
Situational Judgment Test Score Intercorrelations for the Five Scoring Procedures
M-Eff. L-Correct L-Eff. M - L Eff.
M-Correct .94 52 44 .86
M-Eff. -me .59 -.70 .93
L-Correct m e- -*- -.86 .78
L-Eff. m-e v-m --_ -.92
M - L Eff. -w- we- --- w-m
Note. Sample sizes range from 1007 to 1025.
271
.._ II
..----... ._.___._ I-
.