IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ilrrev/v47y1994i4p610-621.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Credibility of Drug Tests: A Multi-Stage Bayesian Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Darold T. Barnum
  • John M. Gleason

Abstract

The authors show that even when drug tests are extremely accurate by conventional measures, under some circumstances they will yield a high “false accusation rate†(that is, a high percentage of those testing positive for drugs will not have drugs in their systems). For example, if a drug-testing process that produces only one false positive per 2,000 drug-free specimens, and no false negatives, is administered to a population in which 0.1% of the people use the targeted drugs, one-third of those identified as drug users will be falsely accused. The authors propose a multi-stage Bayesian algorithm—an approach commonly used in management science but novel to industrial relations—that assures that a drug-testing process will have a low enough false accusation rate to provide credible evidence of drug use. They also identify other types of employee evaluations to which Bayesian modeling could be applied.

Suggested Citation

  • Darold T. Barnum & John M. Gleason, 1994. "The Credibility of Drug Tests: A Multi-Stage Bayesian Analysis," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 47(4), pages 610-621, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:ilrrev:v:47:y:1994:i:4:p:610-621
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ilr.sagepub.com/content/47/4/610.abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:ilrrev:v:47:y:1994:i:4:p:610-621. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ilr.cornell.edu .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.