Comparable worth judgments: A measurement properties analysis

Abstract

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 71(3) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2009-18143-001 ). There was an error on page 146 on the fourth line from the top. The text should read: "evaluation method convergence was an in appropriate test of measurement validity."] Examined the Position Analysis Questionnaire, the guide chart plan, and the custom plan as methods of comparable-worth job evaluation from a psychometric qualities perspective. Evaluation scores for 20 positions in a state agency were generated by 4 experienced analysts via each method. Reliability, discriminant validity, and convergence of the measures were examined in the context of comparable-worth pay classification decision making. Results show that (1) reliability coefficients above .95 could still be inadequate for comparable-worth job evaluation application, (2) factor (dimension) redundancy was potentially a major shortcoming of job evaluation measures, (3) evaluation methods differed in terms of measurement quality, and (4) classification decisions were likely to be method dependent. It is concluded that none of the 3 evaluation methods exhibited the psychometric qualities desired of a procedure to serve as the governing criterion in pay classification decisions. (38 ref) (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)