Understanding Psychology (10th Ed)

psychological tests 
Standard mea-
sures devised to assess behavior 
objectively; used by psychologists to 
help people make decisions about their 
lives and understand more about 
themselves.
feL82795_ch13_436-469.indd Page 461 8/6/10 7:25 PM user-f465
feL82795_ch13_436-469.indd Page 461 8/6/10 7:25 PM user-f465
/Users/user-f465/Desktop
/Users/user-f465/Desktop

---

462 Chapter 
13 
Personality
Finally, psychological tests are based on norms, standards of test performance 
that permit the comparison of one person’s score on a test with the scores of others 
who have taken the same test. For example, a norm permits test-takers who have 
received a certain score on a test to know that they have scored in the top 10% of all 
those who have taken the test. 
Norms are established by administering a specifi c test to a large number of 
people and determining the typical scores. It is then possible to compare a single 
person’s score with the scores of the group, which provides a comparative 
measure of test performance against the performance of others who have taken 
the test. 
The establishment of appropriate norms is not a simple endeavor. For instance, 
the specifi c group that is employed to determine norms for a test has a profound 
effect on the way an individual’s performance is evaluated. In fact, as we discuss 
next, the process of establishing norms can take on political overtones.
The passions of politics may confront the objectivity of science 
when test norms are established, at least in the realm of 
standardized tests that are meant to predict future job 
performance. In fact, a national controversy has developed 
around the question of whether different norms should be 
established for members of various racial and ethnic groups 
(Manly, 2005, 2006; Manly & Echemendia, 2007; Pedraza & 
Mungas, 2008). 
The test that sparked the controversy was the U.S. government’s General Aptitude 
Test Battery, a test that measures a broad range of abilities from eye-hand coordination 
to reading profi ciency. The problem was that African Americans and Hispanics tend to 
score lower on the test, on average, than members of other groups. The lower scores 
often are due to a lack of prior relevant experience and job opportunities, which in turn 
has been due to prejudice and discrimination. 
To promote the employment of minority racial groups, the government developed 
a separate set of norms for African Americans and Hispanics. Rather than using the 
pool of all people who took the tests, the scores of African-American and Hispanic 
applicants were compared only with the scores of other African Americans and 
Hispanics. Consequently, a Hispanic who scored in the top 20% of the Hispanics taking 
the test was considered to have performed equivalently to a white job applicant who 
scored in the top 20% of the whites who took the test, even though the absolute score 
of the Hispanic might be lower than that of the white. 
Critics of the adjusted norming system suggested that such a procedure 
discriminates in favor of certain racial and ethnic groups at the expense of others, 
thereby fanning the fl ames of racial bigotry. The practice was challenged legally; with 
the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1991, race norming on the General Aptitude Test 
Battery was discontinued (Galef, 2001). 
However, proponents of race norming continue to argue that norming procedures 
that take race into account are an affi rmative action tool that simply permits minority 
job-seekers to be placed on an equal footing with white job-seekers. Furthermore, a 
panel of the National Academy of Sciences supported the practice of adjusting test 
norms. It suggested that the unadjusted test norms are not very useful in predicting job 
performance and that they would tend to screen out otherwise qualifi ed minority 
group members (Fleming, 2000). 
Job testing is not the only area in which issues arise regarding norms and the 
meaning of test scores. The issue of how to treat racial differences in IQ scores is also 
controversial and divisive. Clearly, race norming raises profound and intense feelings 
that may come into confl ict with scientifi c objectivity (Leiter & Leiter, 2003; Rushton & 
Jensen, 2006; Davis, 2009). 
Exploring