Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Macmann, G. M.
Right arrow Articles by Barnett, D. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Discrepancy Score Analysis: A Computer Simulation of Classification Stability

Gregg M. Macmann

University of Cincinnati

David W. Barnett

University of Cincinnati

Although the identification of a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability has been proposed as a diagnostic indicator of learning disabilities, questions regarding the technical adequacy of severe discrepancy score classification have not been carefully examined. This study simulated the effects of measurement error, instrument selection, and the cutoff standards used to define "severe" underachievement on the stability of severe discrepancy score classification decisions. A statistical software package was used to generate aptitude and achievement data, calculate regression-prediction discrepancy scores, and classify cases of severe underachievement for a hypothetical population of 5,000 cases. The results indicated that the actuarial classification of severe underachievement was disproportionately related to chance and instrument selection. The results are generalizable to any psychometrically-based classification procedure.

Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, Vol. 3, No. 4, 363-375 (1985)
DOI: 10.1177/073428298500300409


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?