Incremental Validity of Personality Measures in Predicting Underwater Performance and Adaptation

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joaquín Colodro ◽  
Enrique J. Garcés-de-los-Fayos ◽  
Juan J. López-García ◽  
Lucía Colodro-Conde
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Psychological Intervention ◽  
Scuba Diving ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
Discrimination Power ◽  
Effective Response ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Underwater Environment ◽  
Image Position

AbstractIntelligence and personality traits are currently considered effective predictors of human behavior and job performance. However, there are few studies about their relevance in the underwater environment. Data from a sample of military personnel performing scuba diving courses were analyzed with regression techniques, testing the contribution of individual differences and ascertaining the incremental validity of the personality in an environment with extreme psychophysical demands. The results confirmed the incremental validity of personality traits (ΔR2 = .20, f2 = .25) over the predictive contribution of general mental ability (ΔR2 = .07, f2 = .08) in divers’ performance. Moreover, personality ($R_L^2$ = .34) also showed a higher validity to predict underwater adaptation than general mental ability ($R_L^2$ = .09). The ROC curve indicated 86% of the maximum possible discrimination power for the prediction of underwater adaptation, AUC = .86, p < .001, 95% CI (.82–.90). These findings confirm the shift and reversal of incremental validity of dispositional traits in the underwater environment and the relevance of personality traits as predictors of an effective response to the changing circumstances of military scuba diving. They also may improve the understanding of the behavioral effects and psychophysiological complications of diving and can also provide guidance for psychological intervention and prevention of risk in this extreme environment.

scholarly journals Incremental Validity of Character Strengths as Predictors of Job Performance Beyond General Mental Ability and the Big Five

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Harzer ◽  
Natalia Bezuglova ◽  
Marco Weber
Keyword(s):  
Job Performance ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Character Strengths ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Work Behavior ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
Web Based ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Explained Variance

Over the last decades, various predictors have proven relevant for job performance [e.g., general mental ability (GMA), broad personality traits, such as the Big Five]. However, prediction of job performance is far from perfect, and further potentially relevant predictors need to be investigated. Narrower personality traits, such as individuals' character strengths, have emerged as meaningfully related to different aspects of job performance. However, it is still unclear whether character strengths can explain additional variance in job performance over and above already known powerful predictors. Consequently, the present study aimed at (1) examining the incremental validity of character strengths as predictors of job performance beyond GMA and/or the Big Five traits and (2) identifying the most important predictors of job performance out of the 24 character strengths, GMA, and the Big Five. Job performance was operationalized with multidimensional measures of both productive and counterproductive work behavior. A sample of 169 employees from different occupations completed web-based self-assessments on character strengths, GMA, and the Big Five. Additionally, the employees' supervisors provided web-based ratings of their job performance. Results showed that character strengths incrementally predicted job performance beyond GMA, the Big Five, or GMA plus the Big Five; explained variance increased up to 54.8, 43.1, and 38.4%, respectively, depending on the dimension of job performance. Exploratory relative weight analyses revealed that for each of the dimensions of job performance, at least one character strength explained a numerically higher amount of variance than GMA and the Big Five, except for individual task proactivity, where GMA exhibited the numerically highest amount of explained variance. The present study shows that character strengths are relevant predictors of job performance in addition to GMA and other conceptualizations of personality (i.e., the Big Five). This also highlights the role of socio-emotional skills, such as character strengths, for the understanding of performance outcomes above and beyond cognitive ability.

Authenticity matters more than intelligence and personality in predicting metacognition

2015 ◽  
Vol 47 (7) ◽  
pp. 363-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan S. Chiaburu ◽  
Inchul Cho ◽  
Richard Gardner
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Individual Difference ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
Content Type ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Academic Settings ◽  
Ffm Personality Traits

Purpose – Metacognition – or learning how to learn – is an important competence in business and academic settings. The purpose of this paper is to examine individual difference predictors of metacognition, including two traditional (general mental ability (GMA), five-factor model (FFM) personality traits) ones, and a novel one, individual authenticity. Design/methodology/approach – Volunteers (n=243) were asked to rate the extent to which they agreed with the respective statements on a seven-point Likert-type scale for GMA, FFM personality traits, and authenticity measures. Data were collected at different points in time to introduce psychological separation among the study measures. Findings – The authors found that while metacognition is not predicted by GMA, it is positively predicted by two of the five-factor model personality traits, conscientiousness, and extraversion. More importantly, the authors examined that individuals’ authenticity – in the form of (low) self-alienation – will enhance metacognition, over-and-above the previously mentioned predictors. Originality/value – The authors attempt to broaden the understanding of authenticity and its relationship with another important outcome construct, metacognition along with GMA and personality traits, in academic settings.

scholarly journals Incremental Validity of Leaderless Group Discussion Ratings Over and Above General Mental Ability and Personality in Predicting Promotion

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 373-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xavier Borteyrou ◽  
Filip Lievens ◽  
Marilou Bruchon-Schweitzer ◽  
Anne Congard ◽  
Nicole Rascle
Keyword(s):  
Group Discussion ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Leaderless Group

The Validity of Specific Cognitive Abilities for the Prediction of Training Success in Germany

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 123-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wiebke Goertz ◽  
Ute R. Hülsheger ◽  
Günter W. Maier
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Personnel Selection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
Occupational Category ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Training Success ◽  
Specific Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Better Than

General mental ability (GMA) has long been considered one of the best predictors of training success and considerably better than specific cognitive abilities (SCAs). Recently, however, researchers have provided evidence that SCAs may be of similar importance for training success, a finding supporting personnel selection based on job-related requirements. The present meta-analysis therefore seeks to assess validities of SCAs for training success in various occupations in a sample of German primary studies. Our meta-analysis (k = 72) revealed operational validities between ρ = .18 and ρ = .26 for different SCAs. Furthermore, results varied by occupational category, supporting a job-specific benefit of SCAs.

Is Retest Bias Biased?

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 45-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason G. Randall ◽  
Anton J. Villado ◽  
Christina U. Zimmer
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Emotional Stability ◽  
Adverse Impact ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
Ability Test ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Psychological Mechanisms

Abstract. The purpose of this study was to test for race and sex differences in general mental ability (GMA) retest performance and to identify the psychological mechanisms underlying these differences. An initial and retest administration of a GMA assessment separated by a six-week span was completed by 318 participants. Contrary to our predictions, we found that race, sex, and emotional stability failed to moderate GMA retest performance. However, GMA assessed via another ability test and conscientiousness both partially explained retest performance. Additionally, we found that retesting may reduce adverse impact ratios by lowering the hiring threshold. Ultimately, our findings reinforce the need for organizations to consider race, sex, ability, and personality when implementing retesting procedures.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document