A Meta-Analytic Study of General Mental Ability Validity for Different Occupations in the European Community.

Abstract

A comprehensive meta-analysis of the validity of general mental ability (GMA) measures across 12 occupational categories in the European Community (EC) is presented. GMA measures showed that there is validity generalization and large operational validities for job performance and training success in 11 occupational groups. Results also showed that job complexity moderated the magnitude of the operational validity of GMA tests across three levels of job complexity: low, medium, and high. In general, results were similar to those found in the United States, although the European findings showed a slightly larger magnitude of operational validity in some cases. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings for personnel selection are discussed. ((c) 2003 APA, all rights reserved)

Worklife Across the Lifespan

“…They also found similar moderate to large relations between cognitive ability and job performance ( ps range from .24 [police] to .67 [manager]; and training success (ps range from .25 [police] to .74 [engineer]). As with American studies, job complexity moderated the relation to both outcomes, in that more cognitively complex positions yielded a stronger relation (Salgado et al, 2003). Job knowledge is also predictive of job performance and training performance, especially in conditions of high job-test similarity (ps = .62, .76) (Borman et al, 2003).…”

Un modelo explicativo de la adaptación subacuática

“…Indeed, based on metaanalyses on the prevailing psychological models of individual differences (Costa & McCrae, 1995;Horn & McArdle, 2007;John et al, 2008;McGrew & Wendling, 2010), three variables with greater explanatory power of human behavior and performance are identified. General mental ability (Gottfredson, 2002;Hunter & Hunter, 1984;Ones et al, 2005a;Ree et al, 1994;Salgado et al, 2003;Schmidt & Hunter, 1998 and the dimensions of conscientiousness and emotional stability (Barrick & Mount, 1991Barrick et al, 2001;Hogan & Holland, 2003;Hough & Furnham, 2003;Hurtz & Donovan, 2000;Ones et al, 2005b;Salgado, 1997Salgado, , 1998Salgado, , 2004Salgado & De Fruyt, 2005;Tett, Jackson, & Rothstein, 1991) are the best predictors in the civil and military fields.…”

“…32, nº 2 (mayo) a basis for the identification of significant psychological variables in any professional activity, using the dimensions of the general performance model as criteria (Campbell, McCloy, Oppler, & Sager, 1993;Pulakos, Arad, Donovan, & Plamondon, 2000). The importance of intellectual ability in predicting job performance has been tested in civil and military fields, and has been proved to be the best predictor when analyzing training effectiveness or global job performance (Gottfredson, 2002;Ones, Viswesvaran, & Dilchert, 2005a;Ree, Earles, & Teachout, 1994;Salgado et al, 2003;Schmidt & Hunter, 2004). In parallel, the less predictive capacity of personality traits has been verified, although their validity increases when the performance is estimated in terms of other important components of the work (effort, discipline, teamwork, etc.)…”

Current Status and Future Directions

“…A drawback of prior research was that it did not factor in this relation between predictor and criterion. Prior studies concentrated either solely on the generalizability of selection predictors across countries (e.g., Salgado et al, 2003a;2003b) or solely on the generalizability of job performance ratings (e.g., Ployhart, Wiechmann, Schmitt, Sacco, & Rogg, 2003).…”