Understanding subgroup differences with general mental ability tests in employment selection: Exploring socio-cultural factors across inter-generational groups

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (2-4) ◽  
pp. 176-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter A. Hausdorf ◽  
Chet Robie
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Factors ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
Employment Selection ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Subgroup Differences ◽  
Ability Tests ◽  
Generational Groups

scholarly journals General Intelligence: An Analysis of the Saudi Students’ General Mental Ability and Elementary Cognitive Task Performance

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Hesham Hanafy Alasali
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Performance ◽  
Cognitive Task ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
General Intelligence ◽  
G Factor ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Saudi Students ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Ability Tests ◽  
Elementary Cognitive Tasks

Previous studies on human intelligence has revealed that varied factors influence cognitive performance, and some studies have hypothesized the presence of “general intelligence” (g factor) that is responsible for intelligence. However, most studies have been centered on Western cultures. This study thus examines the Saudi students and the g factor hypothesis. A group of Saudi college students participated in a battery of general mental ability tests and elementary cognitive tasks and were assessed for the influence of various factors on cognitive performance. The study results revealed an increase in the average of Saudi students’ intelligence compared to the results of the previous studies, but it did not yield a g factor.

Intelligence 2.0: Reestablishing a Research Program on g in I–O Psychology

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles A. Scherbaum ◽  
Harold W. Goldstein ◽  
Kenneth P. Yusko ◽  
Rachel Ryan ◽  
Paul J. Hanges
Keyword(s):  
Test Scores ◽  
Performance Outcomes ◽  
Intelligence Test ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Subgroup Differences ◽  
Substantial Progress ◽  
New Research ◽  
Intelligence Test Scores ◽  
Research Initiatives

Intelligence (i.e., g, general mental ability) is an individual difference that is arguably more important than ever for success in the constantly changing, ever more complex world of business (Boal, 2004; Gatewood, Field, & Barrick, 2011). Although the field of industrial–organizational (I–O) psychology initially made substantial contributions to the study of intelligence and its use in applied settings (e.g., Hunter, 1980; Schmidt & Hunter, 1981), we have done relatively little in recent times about studying the nature of the intelligence construct and its measurement. Instead, we have focused predominately on using intelligence to predict performance outcomes and examine racial subgroup differences on intelligence test scores. Although the field of I–O psychology continues to approach intelligence at a surface level, other fields (e.g., clinical psychology, developmental and educational research, and neuropsychology) have continued to study this construct with greater depth and have consequently made more substantial progress in understanding this critical and complex construct. The purpose of this article is to note this lack of progress in I–O psychology and to challenge our field to mount new research initiatives on this critical construct.

Is It Possible to Improve Test Takers’ Perceptions of Ability Tests by Providing an Explanation?

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Klaus G. Melchers ◽  
Barbara Körner
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
Ability Test ◽  
Selection Procedures ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Content Relevance ◽  
Ability Tests ◽  
Group A

Abstract. Previous meta-analytic findings have revealed that explanations can improve applicants’ perceptions of selection procedures. However, they also suggest that these positive effects do not generalize to ability tests. Given some limitations of previous studies and the small empirical basis for the corresponding meta-analytic results, we had another look at whether perceptions of ability tests can be improved by providing an explanation. In two experimental studies, participants had to complete either an attention or a general mental ability test. In the explanation group, a justification was given concerning the content, relevance, and predictiveness of the test. In contrast, no explanation was given in the control group. Providing an explanation significantly improved test takers’ fairness perceptions.

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.

scholarly journals Investigating the Structure of Intelligence Using Latent Variable and Psychometric Network Modeling: A Commentary and Reanalysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 8
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Schmank ◽  
Sara Anne Goring ◽  
Kristof Kovacs ◽  
Andrew R. A. Conway
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Latent Variable ◽  
Network Modeling ◽  
Network Models ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
Variable Model ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Theories Of Intelligence ◽  
Psychological Theories ◽  
Model Preference

In a recent publication in the Journal of Intelligence, Dennis McFarland mischaracterized previous research using latent variable and psychometric network modeling to investigate the structure of intelligence. Misconceptions presented by McFarland are identified and discussed. We reiterate and clarify the goal of our previous research on network models, which is to improve compatibility between psychological theories and statistical models of intelligence. WAIS-IV data provided by McFarland were reanalyzed using latent variable and psychometric network modeling. The results are consistent with our previous study and show that a latent variable model and a network model both provide an adequate fit to the WAIS-IV. We therefore argue that model preference should be determined by theory compatibility. Theories of intelligence that posit a general mental ability (general intelligence) are compatible with latent variable models. More recent approaches, such as mutualism and process overlap theory, reject the notion of general mental ability and are therefore more compatible with network models, which depict the structure of intelligence as an interconnected network of cognitive processes sampled by a battery of tests. We emphasize the importance of compatibility between theories and models in scientific research on intelligence.

Quick Word Test Validity with Adults

1967 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 488-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arden Grotelueschen ◽  
Thomas J. Lyons
Keyword(s):  
Test Validity ◽  
Mental Ability ◽  
Valid Measure ◽  
General Mental Ability ◽  
Word Test ◽  
Iq Scores

Quick Word Test (QWT) total and part scores for 178 adults were correlated with WAIS IQ scores. Pearson rs of .77 and .74 were found between total QWT scores and WAIS verbal and total IQ scores, respectively. Data indicate that the QWT appears to be a valid measure of general mental ability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document