Modeling the Practical Effects of Applicant Reactions: Subgroup Differences in Test‐Taking Motivation, Test Performance, and Selection Rates
Open accessAbstract
Research suggests that Black–White differences in test‐taking motivation may be related to subgroup test score differences, but this research has not shown the extent to which minimizing subgroup motivation differences will reduce subgroup differences in selection rates and adverse impact. This Monte Carlo study examined how enhancing Blacks' test‐taking motivation for cognitive ability tests might reduce adverse impact across a range of (a) subgroup test differences, (b) selection ratios, (c) subgroup differences in test‐taking motivation, and (d) relationships between motivation and test scores. The results suggest that although enhancing test‐taking motivation will consistently reduce subgroup differences in test performance and adverse impact, the effect is often small and will not eliminate adverse impact for any condition we examine. However, under some conditions the reduction may be important, and the discussion considers conditions where even these minimal reductions may be practically helpful.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Ployhart and Ehrhart (2002) found that reducing ethnic differences in test motivation could reduce performance differences by 5-30%.
“Ployhart and Ehrhart (2002) found that reducing ethnic differences in test motivation could reduce performance differences by 5-30%.”
From Factors Related to Mean Score Group Differences on Cognitive Ability Tests: A Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as Ployhart and Ehrhart (2002)
Cites
Chan, D. (1997) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.82.2.311 · Cited by 100 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Similarly, there are racial differences in many applicant perceptions (including perceptions of face validity and beliefs in testing) such that Blacks hold less favorable perceptions than Whites (Chan 1997; Ryan 2001; Schmit and Ryan 1997).”
BackgroundResultInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Group differences in emotional intelligence scores: theoretical and practical implications
van Rooy, D. V., Alonso, A., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.05.023 · Cited by 307 · see citing works
McCarthy, J. M., Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., Anderson, N. R., Costa, A. C., & Ahmed, S. M. (2017) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206316681846 · Cited by 258 · see citing works
“When minority groups are highly motivated or anxious about selection tests, they are likely to experience higher levels of cognitive interference, lowering their test performance (Ployhart & Ehrhart, 2002).”
BackgroundATTRACTING AND SELECTING: WHAT PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH TELLS US
Ryan, A., & Tippins, N. (2004) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.20026 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Arthur, W., Glaze, R., Jarrett, S. M., White, C. D., Schurig, I., & Taylor, J. E. (2014) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0035788 · Cited by 61
“…et al., 1998; Weekley & Jones, 1997), response instructions (i.e., behavioral- vs. knowledge-based; McDaniel, Whetzel, Hartman, Nguyen, & Grubb, 2006; Ployhart & Ehrhart, 2002), scoring method (Bergman, Drasgow, Donovan, Henning, & Juraska, 2006), and stem complexity (Ployhart & MacKenzie, 2011).”
BackgroundViswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. (2004) · doi:10.1111/j.0965-075x.2004.00272.x · Cited by 59
Job-Seeker Reactions to Selection Process Information in Job Ads
Reeve, C., & Schultz, L. (2004) · doi:10.1111/j.0965-075x.2004.00289.x · Cited by 53
Does Selection Measure Scoring Influence Motivation: One Size Fits All?
Roch, S. G., Mishra, V., & Trombini, E. J. (2014) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/ijsa.12054 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Perceptions of assessment center exercises: between exercises differences and interventions
Roch, S. G. (2024) · Industrial and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1017/iop.2024.4 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Factors Related to Mean Score Group Differences on Cognitive Ability Tests: A Systematic Review
Cuppello, S., Zibarras, L. D., & Corr, P. J. (2025) · Trends in Psychology · doi:10.1007/s43076-025-00504-5
Naryniecki, T. J. (2026) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/ijsa.70047
Roch, S. G., & Devon, K. (2025) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/ijsa.70002
- Authors
- Ployhart, R. E., & Ehrhart, M. G.
- Affiliations
- University of South Carolina (US)
- San Diego State University (US)
- Venue
- International Journal of Selection and Assessment
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-12
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 258-270
- ISSN
- 0965-075X (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2389
- OpenAlex
- W2047583805
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 2.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- papers.ssrn.com
- Locations
- International Journal of Selection and Assessment (publishedVersion)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical Education and Admissions
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Keywords
- test-taking motivation, applicant reactions, black-white disparities, adverse impact, subgroup differences, selection ratio, cognitive ability tests, test performance
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
