This part of the Program is designed to compare the passing rates of each gender and ethnic group on a single practice, procedure, or test. It may also be used to compare group passing rates on an overall selection or promotion process, although an event-by-event analysis should be the primary comparison in most circumstances [the 1991 Civil Rights Act requires that a “particular employment practice” needs to be identified as the source of adverse impact for a plaintiff to establish a disparate impact case, unless the results are not capable for separation for analysis—see Section 2000e-2(k)(1)(A)(i)].
This type of analysis can be regarded as the “most typical” type of adverse impact analysis, and is specifically explained in the Uniform Guidelines as a “rates comparison” (see Section 4D) that compares the passing rates between two groups (e.g., men and women) on a practice, procedure, or test. This Program can also be used to analyze the outcome of layoffs, demotions, or other similar personnel transactions where there are only two possible outcomes (e.g., promoted / not promoted; hired / not hired, etc.).
Processing...
Footnotes:
(1) 80% Test: This test compares the passing rate percentage of women (to men) and
each ethnic group (to whites). It is referred to as a "rule of thumb" type of analysis
in the Uniform Guidelines. Adverse impact can exist with or without a violation
of the 80% Test. Because the 80% Test is easily influenced by small numbers (when
data sets are small) and it does not consider the probability distribution related
to the data set, a greater consideration should be given to the Statistical Tests.
(2) Stat. Test: There are two Statistical Tests in this sheet. The "Exact" Test
uses the (two-tail) Fisher Exact procedure to assess whether the difference in selection
rates between two groups (e.g., men vs. women) is extreme enough to be considered
"beyond chance." Values less than .05 (in red) are "statistically significant";
values between .05 and .10 (in orange) are "close" to significance. Values less
than .05 should be evaluated for Practical Significance (see "Pract. Test"). The
"Calculate" button must be clicked for the Exact Test to calculate. The
"Estimated" Stat. Test uses the (two-tail) Hypergeometric Variance Estimator formula
to estimate the Exact Test, and usually overestimates the probability value. The
Estimated output should not be relied upon when small numbers are used (<30).
(3) Pract. Test: This test evaluates the practical significance of the statistical
test findings (if applicable). Taken from a court case, this test evaluates the
"practical stability" of the Statistical Test results. The test hypothetically changes
2 persons in the women or ethnic group from "failing" to "passing," and then re-evaluates
the Statistical Test for significance. A "No" means that the test result is "not
practically significant"; a "Yes" means that the test is practically significant,
and the difference in passing rates is both statistically and practically significant
(constituting a "stable" and "significant" adverse impact finding).
(4) Interpretation of Statistical Test: These outputs describe the degree of the
Statistical Test findings. For example, if the output shows the likelihood of the
statistical test value is "1 in 20," this means that the difference in passing rates
between groups (e.g., men vs. women) is so extreme that the odds of it occurring
by chance is only 1 in 20, or about 5%. In other words, this result indicates that
chance can be "ruled out" as this reason for this difference. The "Probability as
Std. Deviations" describes the probability value (from the Statistical Test) in
terms of standard deviations units, which are sometimes easier to interpret than
small probability values. A standard deviation of 1.96 corresponds with a probability
value of .05, and a likelihood of 1 chance in 20.