Bias in Psychological Assessment: An Empirical Review and Recommendations

By C. Reynolds, L. Suzuki. 2003

127 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/75816ea0b05b12668d6b30447e5a1a2b914e658b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

1. Christopher T. Lowenkamp
2. J. Skeem

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Christopher T. Lowenkamp
2. J. Skeem

In Sociology and Political Science

1. J. Skeem
2. J. Monahan
3. Christopher T. Lowenkamp
4. Alexandra Chouldechova
5. Ben Green
6. Cynthia Rudin
7. Sam Corbett-Davies
8. Sharad Goel

Citations in the corpus

• RISK, RACE, AND RECIDIVISM: PREDICTIVE BIAS AND DISPARATE IMPACT*: RISK, RACE, AND RECIDIVISM (2016, background): “…differences do not reflect test bias, using instruments that yield such differences to inform sentencing may create disparate impact (in legal terms; see Griggs vs. Duke Power Co., 1971; cf. McClesky v. Kemp, 1987) or inequitable social consequences (in moral terms; Reynolds and Suzuki, 2012).”
• Gender, risk assessment, and sanctioning: The cost of treating women like men. (2016, background): “…if mean score differences between men and women do not reflect test bias, using instruments that yield such differences to inform sentencing may create disparate impact (in legal terms; see Griggs v. Duke Power, 1971) or inequitable social consequences (in moral terms; see Reynolds & Suzuki 2012).”