This article presents a quantitative synthesis of examiner familiarity effects on Caucasian and minority students' test performance. Fourteen controlled studies were coded in terms of methodological quality (high vs. low) and race-ethnicity (Caucasian vs. Black and Hispanic). An analogue to analysis of variance conducted on weighted unbiased effect sizes indicated that examiner familiarity produced a significant effect, with Caucasian and minority examinees' test performance raised by .05 and .72 standard deviations, respectively. Examiner familiarity's differential effect on Caucasian and minority examinees did not interact with the methodological quality of the studies. Nevertheless, limitations of the extant data base require caution in drawing implications for assessment practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BersoffD. N. (1981). Testing and the law. American Psychologist, 36, 1047–1056.
2.
CohenJ. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.
3.
ColeM., & BrunerJ. S. (1972). Preliminaries to a theory of cultural differences. In GordonI. (Ed.), Seventy-first yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, part II—Early childhood education. Chicago: University of Chicago.
4.
DunnL. M. (1968). Special education for the mildly retarded—Is much of it justifiable?Exceptional Children, 35, 5–22.
5.
FuchsD. (1981, April). Differential responses of preschool language-handicapped children to familiar and unfamiliar testers as a function of task complexity, length of acquaintanceship, and sex of child. In ShipmanV., (Chair), Client identification and issues of validity: The influence of situational variables on children's cognitive performance. Symposium presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Los Angeles.
6.
FuchsD. (1987). Examiner familiarity effects on test performance: Implications for training and practice. In NeisworthJ. T. (Ed.), Personnel preparation [special issue]. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 7. 90–104.
7.
FuchsD.FeatherstoneN.GarwickD. R., & FuchsL. S. (1984). Effects of examiner familiarity and task characteristics on speech and language-impaired children's test performance. Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 16198–204.
8.
FuchsD., & FuchsL. S. (1986a, August). You can take a test out of the situation, but you can't always take the situation out of a test: Bias in minority assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC (Available from authors.)
9.
FuchsD., & FuchsL. S. (1986b). Test procedure bias: A meta-analysis of examiner familiarity effects. Review of Educational Research, 56, 243–262.
10.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.BenowitzS., & BarringerK. (1987). Norm-referenced tests: Are they valid for use with handicapped children?Exceptional Children, 54, 263–271.
11.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.DaileyA. M., & PowerM. H. (1985). The effect of examiners' personal familiarity and professional experience on handicapped children's test performance. Journal of Educational Research. 78, 141–146.
12.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.GarwickD. R., & FeatherstoneN. (1983). Test performance of language-handicapped children with familiar and unfamiliar examiners. Journal of Psychology, 114, 37–46.
13.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.PowerM. H., & DaileyA. M. (1985). Bias in the assessment of handicapped children. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 185–198.
14.
FuchsL. S., & FuchsD. (1984). Examiner accuracy during protocol completion. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 2, 101–108.
15.
GlassG. V.McGawB., & SmithM. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16.
GoodnowJ. J. (1984). On being judged “intelligent.”International Journal of Psychology, 19, 391–406.
17.
GoodyE. N. (1978). Towards a theory of questions. In GoodyE. N. (Ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction (pp. 17–43). London: Cambridge University Press.
18.
HawkesT. H., & FurstN. F. (1971). Race, socioeconomic situation, achievement, IQ, and teacher ratings of student behavior as factors relating to anxiety in upper elementary school children. Sociology of Education, 44, 333–350.
19.
HedgesL. (1981). Distribution theory for Glass's estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6, 359–361.
20.
HedgesL. (1982). Estimation of effect size from a series of independent experiments. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 490–499.
21.
HedgesL. (1984). Advances in statistical methods for meta-analysis. In YeatonW. H. & WortmanP. N. (Eds.), Issues in data synthesis. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 24, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
22.
JensenA. R. (1981). Straight talk about mental tests. New York: The Free Press.
23.
KatzI. (1968). Factors influencing Negro performance in the desegregated school. In DeutschM.KatzI., and JensenA. (Eds.), Social class, race and psychological development (pp. 254–289). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
24.
KaufmanN. J.Dudley-MarlingC., & SerlinR. L. (1986). An examination of statistical interactions in the special education literature. The Journal of Special Education, 20, 31–42.
25.
Larry P. v. Wilson Riles. (1971). U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, No. C-71-2270 RFP.
26.
MessickS. (1984). Assessment in context: Appraising student performance in relation to instructional quality. Educational Researcher, 13, 3–8.
27.
OaklandT. (1983). Concurrent and predictive validity estimates for the WISC-R IQs and ELPs by racial-ethnic and SES groups. School Psychology Review, 12, 57–61.
28.
PhilipsS. U. (1983). The invisible culture: Communication in classroom and community on the Warm Springs Indian reservation. New York: Longman.
29.
ReschlyD. J. (1981). Psychological testing in educational classification and placement. American Psychologist, 36, 1094–1102.
30.
SamudaR. J. (1975). Psychological testing of American minorities. New York: Harper & Row.
31.
SattlerJ. M., & GwynneJ. (1982). White examiners do not impede the intelligence test performance of black children: To debunk a myth. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50, 196–208.
32.
ShadeB. J. (1982). Afro-American cognitive style: A variable in school success?Review of Educational Research, 52, 219–244.
33.
SigelI. E. (1974). When do we know what a child knows?Human Development, 17, 201–217.
34.
ThompsonR. H.WhiteK. R., & MorganD. P. (1982). Teacher-student interaction patterns in classrooms with mainstreamed mildly handicapped students. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 220–236.
