Knowledge, attention, and psychomotor ability: A latent variable approach to understanding individual differences in simulated work performance

IF 3.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Cody A. Mashburn , Alexander P. Burgoyne , Jason S. Tsukahara , Richard Pak , Joseph T. Coyne , Ciara Sibley , Cyrus Foroughi , Randall W. Engle
{"title":"Knowledge, attention, and psychomotor ability: A latent variable approach to understanding individual differences in simulated work performance","authors":"Cody A. Mashburn ,&nbsp;Alexander P. Burgoyne ,&nbsp;Jason S. Tsukahara ,&nbsp;Richard Pak ,&nbsp;Joseph T. Coyne ,&nbsp;Ciara Sibley ,&nbsp;Cyrus Foroughi ,&nbsp;Randall W. Engle","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2024.101835","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We compare the validity of personnel selection measures and novel tests of attention control for explaining individual differences in synthetic work performance, which required participants to monitor and complete multiple ongoing tasks. In Study 1, an online sample of young adults (<em>N</em> = 474, aged 18–35) based in the United States completed three-minute tests of attention control and two tests that primarily measure acquired knowledge, the Wonderlic and the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT). Structural equation modeling revealed that acquired knowledge tests did not predict simulated work performance beyond attention control, whereas attention control did predict simulated work performance controlling for other measures. In Study 2, an in-lab sample of young adults from Georgia Tech and the greater Atlanta community (<em>N</em> = 321, aged 18–35) completed tests of attention control, processing speed, working memory capacity, and versions of two U.S. Military selection tests, one assessing acquired knowledge (the AFQT) and one assessing psychomotor ability (the Performance-Based Measures assessment from the Aviation Selection Test Battery). Structural equation modeling revealed that attention control fully mediated the relationship between the Performance Based Measures and simulated work performance, but the AFQT and processing speed retained unique prediction. We also explore possible gender differences. Collectively, these results suggest that tests of attention control may be a useful supplement to existing personnel selection measures when complex cognitive tasks are the criterion variable of interest.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289624000291","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We compare the validity of personnel selection measures and novel tests of attention control for explaining individual differences in synthetic work performance, which required participants to monitor and complete multiple ongoing tasks. In Study 1, an online sample of young adults (N = 474, aged 18–35) based in the United States completed three-minute tests of attention control and two tests that primarily measure acquired knowledge, the Wonderlic and the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT). Structural equation modeling revealed that acquired knowledge tests did not predict simulated work performance beyond attention control, whereas attention control did predict simulated work performance controlling for other measures. In Study 2, an in-lab sample of young adults from Georgia Tech and the greater Atlanta community (N = 321, aged 18–35) completed tests of attention control, processing speed, working memory capacity, and versions of two U.S. Military selection tests, one assessing acquired knowledge (the AFQT) and one assessing psychomotor ability (the Performance-Based Measures assessment from the Aviation Selection Test Battery). Structural equation modeling revealed that attention control fully mediated the relationship between the Performance Based Measures and simulated work performance, but the AFQT and processing speed retained unique prediction. We also explore possible gender differences. Collectively, these results suggest that tests of attention control may be a useful supplement to existing personnel selection measures when complex cognitive tasks are the criterion variable of interest.

知识、注意力和心理运动能力:用潜在变量法理解模拟工作表现中的个体差异
我们比较了人员选拔措施和新型注意力控制测试在解释合成工作绩效个体差异方面的有效性,合成工作绩效要求参与者监控并完成多个持续性任务。在研究 1 中,美国的年轻成人在线样本(N = 474,年龄在 18-35 岁之间)完成了三分钟的注意力控制测试和两个主要测量后天知识的测试,即 Wonderlic 和武装部队资格测试 (AFQT)。结构方程模型显示,后天知识测试并不能预测注意力控制之外的模拟工作绩效,而注意力控制却能预测模拟工作绩效,并能控制其他测量指标。在研究 2 中,来自佐治亚理工学院和大亚特兰大社区的实验室内年轻成年人样本(N = 321,年龄在 18-35 岁之间)完成了注意力控制、处理速度、工作记忆能力以及两个美国军事选拔测试版本的测试,其中一个测试评估后天知识(AFQT),另一个评估精神运动能力(航空选拔测试电池中基于性能的措施评估)。结构方程模型显示,注意力控制完全调节了 "基于表现的测量 "与模拟工作表现之间的关系,但 AFQT 和处理速度保留了独特的预测功能。我们还探讨了可能存在的性别差异。总之,这些结果表明,当复杂的认知任务是我们关注的标准变量时,注意力控制测试可能是对现有人员选拔措施的有益补充。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Intelligence
Intelligence PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
13.30%
发文量
64
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: This unique journal in psychology is devoted to publishing original research and theoretical studies and review papers that substantially contribute to the understanding of intelligence. It provides a new source of significant papers in psychometrics, tests and measurement, and all other empirical and theoretical studies in intelligence and mental retardation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信