z-logo
Premium
Definition and Measurement of Selection Bias: From Constant Ratio to Constant Difference
Author(s) -
Cahan Sorel,
Gamliel Eyal
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
journal of educational measurement
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.917
H-Index - 47
eISSN - 1745-3984
pISSN - 0022-0655
DOI - 10.1111/j.1745-3984.2006.00009.x
Subject(s) - constant (computer programming) , selection (genetic algorithm) , converse , statistics , mathematics , selection bias , conceptualization , econometrics , computer science , artificial intelligence , geometry , programming language
Despite its intuitive appeal and popularity, Thorndike's constant ratio (CR) model for unbiased selection is inherently inconsistent in n ‐free selection. Satisfaction of the condition for unbiased selection, when formulated in terms of success/acceptance probabilities, usually precludes satisfaction by the converse probabilities of rejection/failure, and vice versa. This paper suggests that this inconsistency is unavoidable due to the (negative) linear relation between “percent accepted” ( P ) and “percent rejected” (1 – P ), which does not preserve ratios and, thus, invalidates the conceptualization and measurement of selection bias in ratio terms. Therefore, we propose to substitute the CR model with a constant difference (CD) model for the definition and measurement of selection bias, and show the latter's underlying rationale and its applicability in both n ‐free and fixed‐ n selection.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom