The Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT) is Even More Valid Than We Thought: A New Development in Meta-Analysis and Its Implications for the Validity of the GMAT
Recent research in the field of meta-analysis has provided a procedure of improved accuracy to correct for range restriction, which allows for more accurate calibrations of the validities of various admission and selection tools. For illustrative purposes, we reanalyzed the database meta-analyzed by Kuncel, Crede, and Thomas (2007) on the validity of the GMAT and found that the validity of the GMAT has been underestimated by 7% due to the application of suboptimal range-restriction corrections. These findings have important implications for both researchers and practitioners in the field of education and learning, who should choose and use the most accurate methods available in an effort to accurately estimate validity and to ensure educational resources are targeted at those most likely to benefit.
Academy of Management Learning & Education
"The Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT) is Even More Valid Than We Thought: A New Development in Meta-Analysis and Its Implications for the Validity of the GMAT" (2008). Faculty Bibliography 2000s. 783.