ARMY RESEARCH INST FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES ALEXANDRIA VA
The objective of this research was to determine whether format changes in the AFQT test booklet and answer sheet could be introduced operationally without changing existing norms. Performance on the operationally AFQT was compared with performance on an experimental version of the alternate form. Three types of comparability were studied 1 The comparability of test administration difficulty in terms of time, effort expended, examinee understanding, and examinee execution of instructions. 2 The comparability of machine scoring efficiency in terms of proportion of answer sheets of each type rejected by the test scoring machine. 3 The comparability of scores in terms of means, standard deviations, and correlation coefficients. Use of the high density answer sheet does not make the AFQT more difficult than use of the low density answer sheet. The high density AFQT answer sheet may be substituted for the low density AFQT answer sheet in operational programs without restandardization. Reducing the size of the illustrations appears to increase the difficulty of the tool functions and spatial relations subtests.