The validity of general cognitive ability predicting job-specific performance is stable across different levels of job experience.

IF 9.4 1区心理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Journal of Applied Psychology Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-16 DOI:10.1037/apl0001150

David Z Hambrick, Alexander P Burgoyne, Frederick L Oswald

{"title":"The validity of general cognitive ability predicting job-specific performance is stable across different levels of job experience.","authors":"David Z Hambrick, Alexander P Burgoyne, Frederick L Oswald","doi":"10.1037/apl0001150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Decades of research in industrial-organizational psychology have established that measures of general cognitive ability (g) consistently and positively predict job-specific performance to a statistically and practically significant degree across jobs. But is the validity of g stable across different levels of job experience? The present study addresses this question using historical large-scale data across 31 diverse military occupations from the Joint-Service Job Performance Measurement/Enlistment Standards Project (N = 10,088). Across all jobs, results of our meta-analysis find near-zero interactions between Armed Forces Qualification Test score (a composite of math and verbal scores) and time in service when predicting job-specific performance. This finding supports the validity of g for predicting job-specific performance even with increasing job experience and provides no evidence for diminishing validity of g. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings, along with directions for personnel selection research and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001150","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Decades of research in industrial-organizational psychology have established that measures of general cognitive ability (g) consistently and positively predict job-specific performance to a statistically and practically significant degree across jobs. But is the validity of g stable across different levels of job experience? The present study addresses this question using historical large-scale data across 31 diverse military occupations from the Joint-Service Job Performance Measurement/Enlistment Standards Project (N = 10,088). Across all jobs, results of our meta-analysis find near-zero interactions between Armed Forces Qualification Test score (a composite of math and verbal scores) and time in service when predicting job-specific performance. This finding supports the validity of g for predicting job-specific performance even with increasing job experience and provides no evidence for diminishing validity of g. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings, along with directions for personnel selection research and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文本刊更多论文

一般认知能力预测特定工作表现的有效性在不同工作经验水平上是稳定的。

几十年来，工业组织心理学的研究已经证实，一般认知能力（g）的衡量标准在统计和实际意义上一致、积极地预测了不同工作的具体表现。但是，g的有效性在不同级别的工作经验中是稳定的吗？本研究使用来自联合军种工作表现测量/入伍标准项目（N=10088）的31种不同军事职业的历史大规模数据来解决这个问题。在所有工作中，我们的荟萃分析结果发现，在预测特定工作表现时，武装部队资格考试成绩（数学和语言成绩的组合）与服役时间之间的互动几乎为零。这一发现支持了g在工作经验增加的情况下预测特定工作绩效的有效性，并且没有提供降低g有效性的证据。我们讨论了这些发现的理论和实践意义，以及人员选择研究和实践的方向。（PsycInfo数据库记录（c）2023 APA，保留所有权利）。

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

Journal of Applied Psychology Multiple-

CiteScore

17.60

自引率

6.10%

发文量

175

期刊介绍： The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including: 1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses). 2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research. 3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.