----

##  Self-Reported GPA and SAT Scores. ERIC Digest.                               

College students who participate in educational or psychological                research projects are sometimes asked to report their Scholastic                Assessment Test (SAT) scores or their grade point                               average (GPA)scores as part of the research. The use of self-reports            from students is a common, yet risky, methodological venture because            it relies upon individuals to provide accurate and unbiased ratings             without external verification of the data. This Digest  investigates            the methodological practice of relying on self-reported SAT and GPA             scores, explores the differential reliability of self-reported SAT              and GPA values, and examines trends of deviation in a sample of                 Midwestern teacher education students. 
The research in SAT score              accuracy has generally indicated that students' reports correlate               with actual scores in the range of .60 to .80(Goldman, Flake, and               Matheson, 1990; Frucot and Cook, 1994; Trice,1990). Furthermore,                there is evidence that individuals who do not provide their scores              are more likely to have low SAT scores, suggesting a potential skew             in the self-report performance literature (Flake and Goldman, 1991;             Trice, 1990). In a rigorous analysis of the relationship between                actual and reported scores on the SAT, Shepperd (1993) reported that            students with low SAT scores not only inflated their self-reported              scores, but also rated the score they received on the SAT as                    inaccurate or flawed. Furthermore, when students reported SAT scores            with no explicit instructions, the tendency to inflate the score was            evident. However, when the students were asked to report their SAT              scores for a second time (two months after the initial report), but             with an incentive for accuracy and the assurance that any inflation             would be known, the average deviation from true score was  9 points             for the total scale SAT score, a mere 1/10 of a standard                        deviation (Shepperd, 1993). Shepperd hypothesized that this pattern             supported the theory that the inflation was an attempt to portray a             positive image, rather than a misrepresentation arising from a                  memory deficit. 
With GPA ratings, there is also evidence for                  skewed self-reports; specifically, there is greater inflation by                students with lower GPAs than by students with higher GPAs (Dobbins,            Farh, and Werbel, 1993; Frucot and Cook, 1994). This inflation of               GPA has been found to be free from a ceiling effect, and it has been            proposed to be a consequence of social desirability (Dobbins et al.,            1993). The following study was conducted to test the accuracy and               trends  of deviation noted in undergraduates' self-reported SAT and             GPA values. The results were expected to support previous reports               that  self-reported values for GPA and SAT were relatively                      reliable (in the range of .70 to .90). Furthermore, the results were            expected  to identify that for both GPA and SAT, low scorers'                   ratings would vary from actual scores more than high scorers', with             the self-reported values demonstrating an inflated value. Finally,              it was predicted that individuals who overestimated their                       performance levels would do so to a greater magnitude than those                individuals reporting an underestimation of their                               performance. METHODParticipants.  Eighty-nine undergraduate               students at a mid-sized Midwestern university reported their current            cumulative GPA and the scores they had received on the SAT.                     Respondents were predominantly Caucasian females ranging in age from            19 to 28 (M = 19.99, SD = 1.06); all were in the second year of an              undergraduate pre-service teacher education program. 
Procedure.               The participants were asked to provide their undergraduate                      cumulative GPAs and their official SAT scores as part of another                research project. If they were unsure of their scores, they were                instructed to provide their "best guess" regarding the SAT verbal,              math, and total scores, as well as GPA. Students were not told at               the time what their scores would be used for, nor that the scores               would be checked against their official records. The participants               were debriefed  in a subsequent experimental session, at which time             they provided consent to access the necessary university                        records. 
Students who did not take the SAT (typically taking the              ACT for entrance) were excluded from the analyses of SAT score                  accuracy. Similarly, students without official university grade                 records (i.e., transfer students from community colleges) were                  excluded from the analyses on the accuracy of GPA. 
Analyses.  To              investigate the impact of direction of reported scores' deviation               from the actual scores, each participant's reported value was                   categorized as either an overestimation, an underestimation, or as              accurate in relation to the official records. These reports were                examined to identify whether the magnitude of deviation from                    students who overestimated and underestimated their scores differed             significantly from each other. To examine whether low-scoring                   individuals inflated their scores more than high-scoring individuals            in both SAT and GPA self-report values, four groups were established            for each measure, using the quartile split method. To investigate               differential magnitudes of deviation based on both direction of                 deviation (overestimation and underestimation) and actual                       performance level, univariate analyses of variance were conducted on            the absolute value of the deviation of the reported score from the              actual score. RESULTSStudents' self-reported GPA scores were              found to be remarkably similar to official records. The Pearson                 product moment correlation revealed a significant correlation                   between self-reported and actual cumulative GPA, r = .97, p < .0001,            n = 75. Similarly, correlational analyses of the accuracy of the                students' self-reported SAT scores revealed significant                         relationships between self-reports and actual performance levels for            the total score (r = .88, p = .0001, n = 72), verbal                            subscale (r = .73, p = .0001, n = 64), and math subscale (r = .89,              p = .0001, n = 64). 
To examine deviation of GPA scores, a two by              four univariate analysis of variance was used, with two levels of               direction of deviation (overestimation and underestimation) and four            levels of actual GPA (as established by quartile placement in the               sample). The ANOVA revealed a significant main effect for level of              GPA on deviation from reality. Neither the main effect for direction            of deviation nor the interaction produced a significant effect. The             data indicated progressively more accurate ratings of GPA as the                level of GPA increased. Post-hoc analyses of group differences                  revealed differences between the quartiles, with the first-quartile             deviations being significantly higher than the third (p < .005) and             fourth (p < .001), and the participants in the second quartile                  producing significantly higher deviations than the                              fourth (p < .05). 
Similar analyses were conducted on  the verbal              and math subscales of the SAT. Because the total score for the SAT              is a combination of these two subscales, no additional analysis of              the  total score was conducted. To examine deviation of the SAT                 subscale  scores, two separate two by four univariate analyses of               variance were conducted, with two levels of direction and four                  levels of SAT performance. The ANOVA revealed no significant effects            for the verbal subscale. The results for the math subscale revealed             a trend similar to GPA, with a significant main effect for level of             SAT performance (as determined by quartile placements), while the               main effect for direction of deviation and interaction were not                 significant. Post-hoc analyses revealed that members in the first               quartile produced significantly higher deviations than members in               the second (p < .03) and third (p <.004)                                        quartiles. 
DISCUSSION
The results of this study of GPA and SAT               self-reports allow for ageneral statement regarding the role of                 self-reported performanceindicators to be made. The initial                     hypothesis regarding accuracy ofratings was supported, revealing                that the participants had highlyreliable ratings of cumulative                  GPA (r = .97). Such high correlationswould suggest that overall,                self-reported GPA levels are sufficientlyaccurate. The overall                  accuracy of the students' self-reported SATscores were considerably             lower than the accuracy of GPA; however,the average accuracy was                still within reasonable guidelines (Nunnallyand Bernstein, 1994).               The results supported the expectation that theaccuracy of                       self-reported SAT scores would be lower thanself-reported                       GPAs.
This difference in accuracy may be related to the factors of             repetition and recency. Cumulative GPA is reported to undergraduate             students on a consistent and frequent basis, typically at least two             to three times per year. SAT scores, however, are not typically                 reported to the students once they've been admitted to the                      university; consequently, the majority of these participants would              not likely have seen their official SAT scores for a period of two              or more years. 
Further investigation revealed that accuracy of                self-reported scores was dependent upon the independent variable of             performance level. The analyses of accuracy in self-reported GPA                revealed that the bottom 25% of students provided estimates that                were significantly less accurate than each of the remaining quartile            groups. These data support a trend reported by Dobbins et                       al. (1993), who revealed that students with lower GPAs tended to                inflate their scores more than students with higher averages. In a              similar vein, self-reports of SAT performance generally became more             accurate as actual performance increased. Overall, it appears that              students at the lowest end of performance are more likely than the              high-achieving groups to misrepresent their scores. This is                     consistent with the proposal that the students at the low-performing            levels may provide inflated scores as a function of social                      desirability (Dobbins et al, 1993). 
Contrary to the initial                   hypothesis, there were no differences in deviation from actual                  scores by those participants who overestimated and underestimated               their performance levels. The expectation was that the deviations               would be higher for overestimators, consistent with the social                  desirability hypothesis. However, no such trend was revealed,                   suggesting that the deviations from actual scores are due in part to            errors in memory, and not all deviations are driven by a desire to              misrepresent ability levels. 
Given ideal conditions, there would              be no sense in relying on students to report their GPA and SAT                  scores from memory. However, several conditions may limit a                     researcher's ability to gain access to official records, including              administrative rules and privacy issues. When these conditions                  arise, forcing a researcher into a compromised methodological                   activity, these data suggest that researchers can rely upon                     self-reported GPA estimates. The data suggest that the use of                   self-reported SAT scores is less reliable than GPA estimations, but             can be tempered by indicating to the students that accuracy is of               primary interest, perhaps by assuring anonymity to the                          participants (see Shepperd, 1993). The use of self-reported GPA and             SAT scores increases the efficiency of data collection available to             researchers, particularly when these scores are simply additional               variables of interest, perhaps when attempting to account for                   variance in designs examining course performance, test anxiety, or              career orientations. The ease of acquiring these values through                 self-report, combined with the high levels of accuracy under the                current methodology, make this practice an enticing alternative to              the more laborious process of accessing official student                        records. 
However, these results do not support the use of                     self-reported GPA and SAT scores for policy decisions, particularly             if the students are able to determine the intent of the score                   collection. In situations where the students' GPA and SAT scores                will be used to differentiate among candidates for selection into               special programs or positions, students may be more likely to                   provide false estimates to improve their standing. Furthermore, this            practice should not be generalized to participants at different                 developmental levels without assessing a pilot sample to ensure the             reliability is still adequate. 
This digest is based on an article             originally appearing in Practical Assessment Research and                       Evaluation REFERENCESDobbins, G. H., Farh, J. L., and Werbel,             J. D. (1993). The influence of self-monitoring and inflation of                 grade-point averages for research and selection purposes. Journal of            Applied Social Psychology, 23, 321-334. 
Flake, W. L., and Goldman,            B. A. (1991). Comparison of grade point averages and SAT scores                 between reporting and nonreporting men and women and freshmen and               sophomores. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 72, 177-178. 
Frucot, V.              G., and Cook, G. L. (1994). Further research on the accuracy of                 students' self-reported grade point averages, SAT scores, and course            grades. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 743-746. 
Goldman, B. A.,             Flake, W. L., and Matheson, M. B. (1990). Accuracy of college                   students' perceptions of their SAT scores and high school and                   college grade point averages relative to their ability. Perceptual              and Motor Skills, 70, 514. 
Nunnally, J. C., and Bernstein, I.                 H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill,                Inc. 
Shepperd, J. A. (1993). Student derogation of the Scholastic             Aptitude Test: Biases in perceptions and presentations of College               Board scores. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 14,                          455-473. 
Trice, A. D. (1990). Reliability of students'                        self-reports of scholastic aptitude scores: Data from juniors and               seniors. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71, 290. 
----- 
This                   publication was prepared with funding from the Office of Educational            Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under                   contract ED99CO0032.  The opinions expressed in this report do not              necessarily reflect the positions of policies of OERI or the U.S.               Department of Education.  Permission is granted to copy and                     distribute this ERIC/AE Digest.                                              **Title:** Self-Reported GPA and SAT Scores. ERIC Digest.                               **Note:** Based on an article originally appearing in "Practical Assessment               Research and Evaluation."                                                    **Document Type:** Information Analyses---ERIC Information Analysis Products (IAPs) (071); Information Analyses---ERIC Digests (Selected) in Full Text (073); **Available From:** ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation, 1129 Shriver                   Laboratory, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. Tel:                800-464-3742 (Toll Free).                                                    **Descriptors:** College Entrance Examinations,  College Students, Education Majors,              Grade Point Average, Higher Education, Psychological Studies,                   Research Methodology, Teacher Education                                     **Identifiers:** ERIC Digests, Scholastic Assessment Tests,  Self Report Measures             
###
[Return to ERIC Digest Search Page]