The Air Force Officer Qualifying Test

Validity, Fairness, and Bias

Chaitra M. Hardison, Carra S. Sims, Eunice C. Wong

ResearchPublished May 10, 2010

The Air Force has long recognized the importance of selecting the most qualified officers possible. For more than 60 years, it has relied on the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test (AFOQT) as one measure of those qualifications. A variety of concerns have been raised about whether the AFOQT is biased, too expensive, or even valid for predicting officer success. The authors conducted a literature search to answer these concerns. They conclude that the AFOQT is a good selection test that predicts important Air Force outcomes and is not biased against minorities or women. The Air Force would not benefit by replacing the AFOQT with the SAT primarily because it would still have to administer subtests that measure specific aptitudes and knowledge needed for predicting pilot and combat systems officer success. However, other valid selection tools, such as personality tests, could be used to complement the AFOQT.

Topics

Document Details

  • Copyright: RAND Corporation
  • Availability: Web Only
  • Year: 2010
  • Pages: 80
  • Document Number: TR-744-AF

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Hardison, Chaitra M., Carra S. Sims, and Eunice C. Wong, The Air Force Officer Qualifying Test: Validity, Fairness, and Bias. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2010. https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR744.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

The research reported here was sponsored by the United States Air Force and conducted by RAND Project AIR FORCE.

This publication is part of the RAND technical report series. RAND technical reports, products of RAND from 2003 to 2011, presented research findings on a topic limited in scope or intended for a narrow audience; discussions of the methodology employed in research; literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research professionals, and supporting documentation; and preliminary findings. All RAND technical reports were subject to rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.