Two forms of minority-group test bias as psychometric artifacts with an animal model (Rattus norvegicus).

Abstract

Controversy abounds over attributing group differences on tests to nature, nurture, or test bias. Limitations of correlational sampling from natural populations necessitate experimental methods to resolve underlying issues. In classical psychometrics test items are selected from a larger item pool through analysis of item responses in a sample of subjects. Rats of six inbred strains (n = 366) were tested in multiple mazes to provide a large item pool. Six populations were created, each with differing proportions of each strain. Items selected through independent item analyses within each population yielded six tests. An independent cross-validation sample (n = 146) provided scores on all six tests. This sample was also tested in another set of maze problems defined as the criterion to be predicted. Strain means and intrastrain predictive validities for the six tests varied with strain representation in the population used for item selection (p less than .001). Conventional item-selection procedures clearly produced two forms of minority test bias.