Reliability Artifacts in Comparable Worth Procedures

Richard D. Arvey, Scott E. Maxwell, Lauren M. Abraham

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

17 Scopus citations

Abstract

Comparable worth principles suggest that regression line differences between male- and female-dominated jobs be examined where pay is regressed on job evaluation point values. When the lines differ, the typical recommendation is to raise the wages for female-dominated jobs using the male-regression line as a target wage line. We argue and demonstrate that unreliable job evaluation measures could artifactually produce regression line differences between male- and female-dominated jobs, even when no such bias exists. We subsequently examine reverse regression (Goldberger, 1984) and other procedures as alternative methods of determining bias. We show that lisrel procedures (Jöreskog and Sörbom, 1984) provide accurate and nonbiased estimates of wage discrimination in comparable worth analyses.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)695-705
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Applied Psychology
Volume70
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 1985

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Reliability Artifacts in Comparable Worth Procedures'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this