1. Obtain test scores from a group of respondents, but do not use the test in making a decision. 2.

At some later time, obtain a performance measure for those respondents, and correlate these measures with test scores to obtain predictive validity.

EXAMPLES
For instance, we might theorize that a measure of math ability should be able to predict how well a person will do in an engineering-based profession. We could give our measure to experienced engineers and see if there is a high correlation between scores on the measure and their salaries as engineers. A high correlation would provide evidence for predictive validity -- it would show that our measure can correctly predict something that we theoretically thing it should be able to predict.

A TEST MUST BE VALIDPredictive Validity

When evaluating test to real-life predictions, even very modest correlations of r = .02 or .03 can be of considerable importance. For example, the impact of chemotherapy on breast cancer survival is r = .03. In selection, hiring, and counseling contexts, current interpretations suggest that correlations as low as r = .02 or .03 are meaningful, with many psychological (and medical test) assessments and real life criteria falling in the r = .10 to .30 level, and a few rising beyond that level.

Giving high school juniors the ACT test for admission to a university. The test is the predictor and first semester grades in college are the criterion. If the correlation is large, this means the ACT is useful for predicting future grades.

 The extent to which scores on the scale are related to, and predictive of, some future outcome that is of practical utility. e.g., If higher scores on the SAT are positively correlated with higher G.P.A.s and visa versa, then the SAT is said to have predictive validity.

The Predictive Validity of the SAT is mildly supported by the relation of that scale with performance in graduate school.

A certain percentage of individuals are conditioned, as children, to behave in ways that are contrary to their natural and naturally preferred behaviors and are, as a result, often unaware of their natural tendencies and unable to utilize them effectively as adults. In such cases, individuals are unable to recognize or report ownership of inborn traits. These individuals generally recognize, identify with and report their conditioned traits, even though these traits may be ineffective and counterproductive to the individual's functioning.

 Prediction: Such individuals can easily misrepresent themselves on single dimensional profiles and this misrepresentation cannot be detected or determined by such an instrument.

The result is that single dimensional profiles describe the profiler's erroneous self-perception thereby deepening the conviction and the discomfort attached to it, rather than identifying it as erroneous and helping the individual move away from ineffective or harmful conditioning.

Result: In 90% (84% of group one and 96% of group two) of subjects who were not self-aware enough to test congruently, further examination of the incongruence resulted in the subject being able to discover and define the source (or sources) of the conflict, thereby gaining the awareness necessary to correct the incongruence to their satisfaction. We cannot say whether the corrections were actually made in every case, only that subjects reported an awareness of what was needed to make such changes.

When circumstances create high stress situations, individuals may choose to draw When circumstances create high stress situations, individuals may choose toupon functions that are not commonly to draw upon functions that are not commonly used, in an effort handle the situation or reduce the stress. During these times, the used, in report only the functions currently in use, even though individual may an effort to handle the situation or these are not the stress. During naturally in ordinary or low reduce the functions that are used these times, the stress situations. individual may report only the functions currently in use, even though these are not the functions that are used naturally in ordinary or low stress situations.

 Prediction: Should a single dimensional profile, which measures preferences and reports an overall "personality" based on the chosen preferences, be taken during such high stress periods. The result will be erroneous and can add to the confusion of the subject rather than clarify what is happening as a result of the stressful situation. The same subject could take the preferences profile after the situation has passed and get a completely different reading on his or her "personality". The multidimensional approach allows individuals to see where stressors have altered their functioning and enables them to consciously work through the situation, and to more purposefully use the preferences that are aiding them now in similar future situations.

Result: In 90% (84% of group one and 96% of group two) of subjects who were not self-aware enough to test congruently, further examination of the incongruence resulted in the subject being able to discover and define the source (or sources) of the conflict, thereby gaining the awareness necessary to correct the incongruence to their satisfaction. We cannot say whether the corrections were actually made in every case, only that subjects reported an awareness of what was needed to make such changes.

 Predictive validity is regarded as a very strong measure of statistical validity, but it does contain a few weaknesses that statisticians and researchers need to take into consideration. Predictive validity does not test all of the available data, and individuals who are not selected cannot, by definition, go on to produce a score on that particular criterion.