Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Application patterns when applicants know the odds: implications for selection research and practice.

Nathan R Kuncel1, David M Klieger

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. kunce001@umn.edu

The Journal of Applied Psychology
|March 21, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

John P. Campbell (1937-2025).

The American psychologist·2026
Same author

Brain, personality, and leadership: A meta-analysis of performance predictors among West Point cadets.

Military psychology : the official journal of the Division of Military Psychology, American Psychological Association·2026
Same author

Graduate grade inflation at a U.S. research-intensive university: A 22-year longitudinal analysis.

PloS one·2026
Same author

Prospects for reducing group mean differences on cognitive tests via item selection strategies.

The Journal of applied psychology·2024
Same author

Examining the Existence of Cognitive Thresholds in Highly Quantitative College Courses.

Journal of Intelligence·2024
Same author

A contemporary look at the relationship between general cognitive ability and job performance.

The Journal of applied psychology·2023
Same journal

Grateful leaders and attentive followers: How grateful attention transmits the cascade of gratitude expressions to strengthen coworker relationships.

The Journal of applied psychology·2026
Same journal

Scoring employment interviews with large language models: Evaluation design components, validity investigations, and best practice recommendations.

The Journal of applied psychology·2026
Same journal

A profile analysis of leader interpersonal emotion management strategies.

The Journal of applied psychology·2026
Same journal

A choice architecture intervention to increase diversity: Diverse defaults can counteract hiring discrimination.

The Journal of applied psychology·2026
Same journal

Transformational leadership in context: A meta-analysis of 40 years of research.

The Journal of applied psychology·2026
Same journal

Organizations espousing an authenticity ideology repel stigmatized job seekers.

The Journal of applied psychology·2026
See all related articles

A significant 23% difference exists between Law School Admission Test (LSAT) scores of all test takers and those who apply to law school. This highlights substantial self-selection behavior influencing applicant pools.

Area of Science:

  • Psychometrics
  • Educational Measurement
  • Admissions Testing

Background:

  • Previous research indicated minimal differences between population and applicant pool standard deviations in admissions.
  • Understanding applicant pool characteristics is crucial for accurate predictive validity studies.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To quantify the disparity in Law School Admission Test (LSAT) scores between all test takers and actual law school applicants.
  • To examine self-selection behavior across different tiers of law schools.
  • To assess the implications of score knowledge and perceived selection ratios on range restriction corrections.

Main Methods:

  • Comparative analysis of LSAT score distributions for all test takers versus law school applicants.
  • Statistical examination of self-selection patterns across various law school rankings.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • A substantial 23% disparity was identified between the standard deviations of LSAT scores for all test takers and those who applied to law school.
  • Robust self-selection behavior was evident across all law school ranks.
  • Applicants aware of their scores and facing low selection ratios require smaller range restriction corrections.

Conclusions:

  • Applicant self-selection significantly alters the score distribution compared to the general test-taking population.
  • Knowledge of scores and perceived selection ratios are critical factors in applicant behavior and statistical corrections.
  • These findings necessitate revised approaches to range restriction corrections in admissions research.