This article considers the validity of the Employment Expectation Questionnaire (beta version; EEQ-B) from construct-, content-, and criterion-related perspectives. Experimental and nonexperimental designs were incorporated into this study to address the following two research questions: Does the EEQ-B model predict worker satisfactoriness? and Are disability label-related biases identified in the EEQ-B related to differential judgments of worker satisfactoriness? A convenience sample of 316 students was analyzed. Results indicate that the factors of the EEQ-B accounted for 33% of the variance in predicting worker satisfactoriness and that people with cognitive disability labels were rated significantly higher than other groups. The authors contend that this supports the construct- and criterion-related validity assumptions of the instrument, and they suggest directions for further efforts at validation and related attitude research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing . Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2.
Bills, D. (1988). Credentials and capacities: Employers' perceptions of the acquisition of skills. The Sociological Quarterly, 29, 439-449.
3.
Bluestone, B. (1989). Employment prospects for persons with disabilities . In W. E. Kieman & R. L. Schalock (Eds.), Economics, industry, and disability (pp. 17-25). Baltimore: Brookes .
4.
Bowman, J. (1987): Attitudes toward disabled persons: Social distance and work competence. Journal of Rehabilitation, 53, 41-44.
5.
Christman, L., & Slaten, B. (1991). Attitudes toward people with disabilities and judgments of employment potential. Perceptual and Motor Skills , 72, 467-475.
6.
Cleary, T.A. (1968). Test bias: Prediction of grades of negro and white students in integrated colleges. Journal of Educational Measurement , 5, 115-124.
7.
Cole, N.S. (1981). Bias in testing. American Psychologist , 36, 1067-1077.
8.
Cronbach, L.J. (1971). Test validation. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement (2nd ed., pp. 443-507). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
9.
Diksa, E., & Rogers, E.S. (1996). Employer concerns about hiring persons with psychiatric disability: Results of the employer attitude questionnaire. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 40, 31-44.
10.
Fuqua, D., Rathbun, M., & Gade, E. (1984). A comparison of employer attitudes toward the worker: Problems of eight types of disabled workers. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 15, 40-41.
11.
Geist, C., & Calzaretta, W. (1982). Placement handbook for counseling disabled persons. Springfield, IL: Thomas.
12.
Greenwood, R., & Johnson, V. (1987). Employer perspectives on workers with disabilities . Journal of Rehabilitation, 53(3), 37-45.
Harris, M.M. (1989). Reconsidering the employment interview: A review of recent literature and suggestions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 42, 691-726.
17.
Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (1976). Critical analysis of the statistical and ethical implications of various definitions of test bias. Psychological Bulletin,83, 1053-1071.
18.
Krefting, L., & Brief, A. (1977). The impact of applicant disability on evaluative judgments in the selection process. Academy of Management Journal, 19, 675-680.
19.
Landy, F.J., Shankster, L.J., & Kohler, S.S. (1994). Personnel selection and placement. Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 261-96.
20.
Lofquist, L.H., & Dawis, R.V. (1991). Essentials of person environment correspondence counseling. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
21.
Millington, M.J. (1998). Employment expectation questionnaire-Beta version. Unpublished questionnaire, Louisiana State University Medical Center at New Orleans.
22.
Millington, M.J., Butterworth, J., Fesko, S.L., & McCarthy, H. (1998). The constructs and practices of job placement . In R. M. Parker & E. M. Szymanski (Eds.), Rehabilitation counseling: Basics and beyond (3rd ed.; pp. 379-409). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
23.
Millington, M.J., Reid, C., & Leierer, S. (1997). Employment expectations in rehabilitation counseling: Factors of employment selection. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 40, 215-228.
24.
Millington, M.J., Rosenthal, D., & Lott. A. (1998). Employment expectation profiles as a differential measure of employment-relevant attitudes towards people with disabilities . Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 28(4), 36-39.
25.
Millington, M.J., Szymanski, E.M., & Hanley-Maxwell, C. (1994). The effect of the label of mental retardation on employer concerns and selection. RehabiLitation CounselingBulletin, 38, 27-43.
26.
Muchinsky, P.M. (1986). Personnel selection methods. In C. L. Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 37-70). New York: Wiley.
27.
Nesbitt, R.E., & Wilson, T.D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231-259.
28.
Pedhazur, E.J., & Schmelkin, L.P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29.
Peterson, N.S., & Novick, M.R. (1976). An evaluation of some models for culture-fair selection. Journal of Educational Measurement, 13, 3-29.
30.
Pooley, J.M., & Bump, E.A. (1993). The learning performance and cost effectiveness of mentally disabled workers. Group and Organization Management18 (1), 88-102.
31.
Schmitt, N., & Noe, R.A. (1986). Personnel selection and equal employment opportunity . In C. L. Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 71-115 ). New York: Wiley.
32.
Smith, M., & George, D. (1996). Selection methods. In C. L. Cooper & 1. T. Robertson (Eds.), Key reviews in managerial psychology (pp. 54-96). New York: Wiley.
33.
Thurston, L.L. (1928). Attitudes can be measured. American Journal of Sociology, 33, 529-554.
34.
U.S. Department of Labor. (1991). Dictionary of occupational titles (4th ed.). Indianapolis, IN: JIST Works.
35.
Wampold, B.E., Davis, B., Good, R.H., III. (1990). Hypothesis valdity of clinical research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 58, 360-367.
36.
Wright, B. (1988). Attitudes and the fundamental negative bias: Conditions and corrections. In H. E. Yuker (Ed.), Attitudes toward persons with disabilities (pp. 3-21). New York: Springer.
