Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-07T17:57:39.121Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rumors of general mental ability’s demise are the next red herring

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 August 2023

Jeffrey M. Cucina Open the ORCID record for Jeffrey M. Cucina [Opens in a new window]  and
Theodore L. Hayes Open the ORCID record for Theodore L. Hayes [Opens in a new window]
Jeffrey M. Cucina*
Affiliation:
Personnel Research and Assessment Division, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Washington, DC, USA
Theodore L. Hayes
Affiliation:
Arlington, VA, USA
*
Corresponding author: Jeffrey M. Cucina; Email: jcucina@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , September 2023 , pp. 301 - 306
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Note. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the U.S. Federal Government, or any agency of the U.S. federal government. Portions of this paper were presented at the 2023 meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.

References

Brown, K.G., Le, H., & Schmidt, F.L. (2006). Specific aptitude theory revisited: Is there incremental validity for training performance? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 87–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J.B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courtney-Hays, J.M., Carswell, J.J., Cucina, J.M., Melcher, K.M., & Vassar, A. (2011). Variety is the spice of validation: Moving beyond “traditional” criteria. Panel discussion at the 26th annual SIOP Conference, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Cucina, J.M., Burtnick, S.K., De la Flor, M.E., Walmsley, P.T., & Wilson, K.J. (2023a). Meta-analytic validity of cognitive ability for hands-on military job performance. Poster presented at the 38th annual SIOP Conference, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
Cucina, J.M., Wilson, K.J., Hayes, T.L., Walmsley, P.T., & Votraw, L.M. (2023b). Is there a g in gunslinger? Cognitive predictors of firearms proficiency. Intelligence, 99, 101768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freund, P. A., & Kasten, N. (2012). How smart do you think you are? A meta-analysis on the validity of self-estimates of cognitive ability. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 296–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gascon, C.S. (2022, July 13). Labor constraints remain greatest challenge for resurgent manufacturing sector. The Regional Economist. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.Google Scholar
Grubb, A.D. (2011) Promotional assessment at the FBI: How the search for a high-tech solution led to a high-fidelity low-tech simulation. In Adler, S. & N.T. Tippins (Eds.), Technology-Enhanced Assessment of Talent (pp. 338–354). Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Hartigan, J.A & Wigdor, A.K. (1989). Fairness in employment testing: Validity generalization, minority issues, and the General Aptitude Test Battery. National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Hayes, T.L., McElreath, J., & Reilly, S.M. (2003). The criterion-related validity of logic-based measurement and reasoning tests in public sector merit-based selection systems (Report Number 03-01). U.S. Department of Homeland Security.Google Scholar
Hayes, T.L., & Reilly, S.M. (2002, April). The criterion-related validity of logic-based measurement tests: The SIOP conference paper. In Hayes, T.L., The validity of logic-based measurement for selection and promotion decisions. Symposium conducted at the 17th annual SIOP Conference, Toronto, Canada. Google Scholar
Held, J.D., Carretta, T.R., Johnson, J.W., & McCloy, R.A. (2015). Technical guidance for conducting ASVAB validation/standards studies in the U.S. Navy (Technical Report NPRST-TR-15-2). Navy Personnel Research, Studies, and Technology.Google Scholar
Huang, J.L., Blume, B.D., Ford, J.K., & Baldwin, T.T. (2015). A tale of two transfers: Disentangling maximum and typical transfer and their respective predictors. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30(4), 709–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, E., & Madhyastha, T.M. (2012). Cognitive demands of the workplace. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics, 5, 18–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, J.E. (1983a). Test validation for 12,000 jobs: An application of synthetic validity and validity generalization to the General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB). (Technical Report No. USES-TRR-45). U.S. Department of Labor.Google Scholar
Hunter, J.E. (1983b). A causal analysis of cognitive ability, job knowledge, job performance, and supervisor ratings. In Landy, F., Zedick, S., & Cleveland, J. (Eds.), Performance measurement and theory (pp. 257–266). Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lang, J.W.B., Kersting, M., & Hulsheger, U.R. (2010). Range shrinkage of cognitive ability test scores in applicant pools for German governmental jobs: Implications for range restriction corrections. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 18, 321–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacLane, C.N., Cucina, J.M., Busciglio, H.H., & Su, C. (2020). Supervisory opportunity to observe moderates criterion-related validity estimates. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 28, 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McHenry, J.J., Hough, L.M., Toquam, J.L., Hanson, M.A., & Ashworth, S. (1990). Project A validity results: The relationship between predictor and criterion domains. Personnel Psychology, 43, 335–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, K.R., & Cleveland, J.N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Pearlman, K., Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. (1980). Validity generalization results for tests used to predict job proficiency and training success in clerical occupations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 373–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollack, L., Simons, C., & Patel, R. (1999). Federal professional and administrative occupations: An application of the Multipurpose Occupational Systems Analysis Inventory–Closed-ended (MOSAIC). Office of Personnel Management.Google Scholar
Ree, M.J., Earles, J.A., & Teachout, M.S. (1994). Predicting job performance: Not much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 518–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sackett, P.R., & Ostgaard, D. J. (1994). Job-specific applicant pools and national norms for cognitive ability tests: Implications for range restriction corrections in validation research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 680–684.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sackett, P.R., Zhang, C., Berry, C.M., & Lievens, F. (2022). Revisiting meta-analytic estimates of validity in personnel selection: Addressing systematic overcorrection for restriction of range. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107, 2040–2068.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sackett, P.R., Zhang, C., Berry, C.M., & Lievens, F. (2023). Revisiting the design of selection systems in light of new findings regarding the validity of widely used predictors. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 16(3), 283–300. doi: 10.1017/iop.2023.24 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, F.L., Le, H., Oh, I-S., & Shaffer, J. (2007). General mental ability, job performance, and red herrings: Responses to Osterman, Hauser, and Schmitt. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21, 64–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, R., Nester, M.A., & Palmer, E. (2007). The validity of logic-based tests. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Public Management Association for Human Resources Assessment Council (IPMAAC), St. Louis, MO.Google Scholar
Welsh, J.R. Jr., Kucinkas, S.K., & Curran, L.T. (1990). Armed Services Vocational Battery (ASVAB): Integrative review of validity studies (Report No. AFH R L-TR-90-22). Brooks Air Force Base, TX: Air Force Human Resources Laboratory.Google Scholar
Wigdor, A.K., & Green, B.F., (1991). Performance assessment for the workplace, Vol. 1; Vol. 2: Technical issues. National Academy Press.Google Scholar