Cognitive and noncognitive predictors of success

Abstract

When predicting success, how important are personal attributes other than cognitive ability? To address this question, we capitalized on a full decade of prospective, longitudinal data from n = 11,258 cadets entering training at the US Military Academy at West Point. Prior to training, cognitive ability was negatively correlated with both physical ability and grit. Cognitive ability emerged as the strongest predictor of academic and military grades, but noncognitive attributes were more prognostic of other achievement outcomes, including successful completion of initiation training and 4-y graduation. We conclude that noncognitive aspects of human capital deserve greater attention from both scientists and practitioners interested in predicting real-world success.

Integrating Models of Self-Regulation

“…Is it possible that the various processes thought to underlie and describe self-regulation (e.g., choosing the best means to achieve a goal; overcoming short-term temptations) are actually different aspects of intelligence? This departs from the way self-regulation has been discussed in the past; and we don't want to overstate things-trait studies have indicated that both cognitive and noncognitive factors are important (Duckworth et al, 2019). Nonetheless, we believe that the overlap between intelligence and self-regulation has been underemphasized, and we prescribe better integration of these concepts in the future.…”

“…At the trait level, there is a long history of examining and comparing trait measures of self-regulation (e.g., conscientiousness) and intelligence on various beneficial life outcomes, such as academic achievement, health, and occupational status (e.g., Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2008;Duckworth et al, 2019;Duckworth, Weir, Tsukayama, & Kwok, 2012). From these analyses, two themes emerge.…”

“…First, both cognitive ability and self-regulation (so-called non-cognitive factors) independently predict life outcomes. That is, both the ability to doggedly pursue goals and the ability to reason and learn are important longitudinal predictors of success (e.g., Duckworth et al, 2019). Second, empirical study after empirical study has shown near zero or even negative associations between traditional measures of cognitive ability or intelligence and self-regulation (Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2008;Moutafi, Furnham, & Paltiel, 2004;Zajenkowski & Stolarski, 2015).…”

“…Here, we wonder if some corners of the field committed the Jangle fallacy by thinking that self-regulation was being studied when in fact what was being studied was actually intelligence (e.g., Mischel, Shoda, & Rodriguez, 1989). After all, both self-regulation and intelligence independently predict important life outcomes (Duckworth et al, 2019), yet they mostly appear unrelated, at least at the trait level (e.g., Zajenkowski & Stolarski, 2015).…”

“…Despite its widespread appeal, however, there is growing sense that cognitive control (or executive function) might be indistinguishable from general intelligence or the broad abilities (e.g., processing speed, memory) that comprise general intelligence (Conway, Kane, & Engle, 2003;Engelhardt et al, 2016;Jewsbury, Bowden, & Strauss, 2016). If cognitive control is indistinguishable from intelligence, even at the level of genetic overlap (Engelhardt et al, 2016), it should perhaps be treated independently from self-regulation, the so-called non-cognitive factors important for success (Duckworth et al, 2019).…”