Evaluating Military Selection and Classification Systems in the Multiple Job Context

Abstract

This article contrasts 2 research paradigms used in designing and evaluating test batteries and predictor composites for selection and classification in the multiple job context. Selection and classification test batteries such as the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery are designed and evaluated primarily in terms of incremental predictive validity. An alternative research paradigm offered by differential assignment theory (DAT) uses a standardized mean predicted performance measure as the index of efficiency. A review of the DAT research paradigm and studies applying it to U.S. Army test and performance data forms the focus for a comparison between the findings of predictive validity and DAT research. We suggest that the DAT research paradigm is a more appropriate vehicle for evaluating test batteries and predictor composites used for assignment in the military context.