SEEKING CULTURAL FAIRNESS IN A MEASURE OF RELATIONAL REASONING

Relational reasoning, or the ability to identify meaningful patterns within any stream of information, is a fundamental cognitive ability associated with academic success across a variety of domains of learning and levels of schooling. However, the measurement of this construct has been historically problematic. For example, while the construct is typically described as multidimensional—including the identification of multiple types of higher-order patterns—it is most often measured in terms of a single type of pattern: analogy. For that reason, the Test of Relational Reasoning (TORR) was conceived and developed to include three other types of patterns that appear to be meaningful in the educational context: anomaly, antinomy, and antithesis. Moreover, as a way to focus on fluid relational reasoning ability, the TORR was developed to include, except for the directions, entirely visuo-spatial stimuli, which were designed to be as novel as possible for the participant. By focusing on fluid intellectual processing, the TORR was also developed to be fairly administered to undergraduate students—regardless of the particular gender, language, and ethnic groups they belong to. However, although some psychometric investigations of the TORR have been conducted, its actual fairness across those demographic groups has yet to be empirically demonstrated. Therefore, a systematic investigation of differential-item-functioning (DIF) across demographic groups on TORR items was conducted. A large (N = 1,379) sample, representative of the University of Maryland on key demographic variables, was collected, and the resulting data was analyzed using a multi-group, multidimensional item-response theory model comparison procedure. Using this procedure, no significant DIF was found on any of the TORR items across any of the demographic groups of interest. This null finding is interpreted as evidence of the cultural-fairness of the TORR, and potential test-development choices that may have contributed to that cultural-fairness are discussed. For example, the choice to make the TORR an untimed measure, to use novel stimuli, and to avoid stereotype threat in test administration, may have contributed to its cultural-fairness. Future steps for psychometric research on the TORR, and substantive research utilizing the TORR, are also presented and discussed.

Too Busy to Be Fair? The Effect of Managers’ Perceived Workload on Their Core Technical Performance and Justice Rule Adherence

Despite the organizational benefits of treating employees fairly, both anecdotal and empirical evidence suggest that managers do not behave fairly towards their employees in a consistent manner. As treating employees fairly takes up personal resources such as time, effort, and attention, I argue that when managers face high workloads (i.e., high amounts of work and time pressure), they are unable to devote such personal resources to effectively meet both core technical task requirements and treat employees fairly. I propose that in general, managers tend to view their core technical task performance as more important than being fair in their dealings with employees; as a result, when faced with high workloads, they tend to prioritize the former at the expense of the latter. I also propose that managerial fairness will suffer more as a result of heightened workloads than will core technical task performance, unless managers perceive their organization to explicitly reward fair treatment of employees. I find support for my hypotheses across three studies: two experimental studies (with online participants and students respectively) and one field study of managers from a variety of organizations. I discuss the implications of studying fairness in the wider context of managers’ complex role in organizations to the fairness and managerial work demands literatures.

Police Legitimacy in Sub-Saharan Africa

Is fairness in process and outcome a generalizable driver of police legitimacy? In many industrialized nations, studies have demonstrated that police legitimacy is largely a function of whether citizens perceive treatment as normatively fair and respectful. Questions remain whether this model holds in less-industrialized contexts, where corruption and security challenges favor instrumental preferences for effective crime control and prevention. Support for and against the normative model of legitimacy has been found in less-industrialized countries, yet few have simultaneously compared these models across multiple industrializing countries. Using a multilevel framework and data from respondents in 27 countries in sub-Saharan Africa (n~43,000), I find evidence for the presence of both instrumental and normative influences in shaping the perceptions of police legitimacy. More importantly, the internal consistency of legitimacy (defined as obligation to obey, moral alignment, and perceived legality of the police) varies considerably from country to country, suggesting that relationships between legality, morality, and obligation operate differently across contexts. Results are robust to a number of different modeling assumptions and alternative explanations. Overall, the results indicate that both fairness and effectiveness matter, not in all places, and in some cases contrary to theoretical expectations.