Intelligence and Safety

Henig, Max S.

doi:10.1080/00220671.1927.10879768

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We were able to locate only two rather outdated studies that addressed a narrow aspect of counterproductivity, namely accidents. Eighty years ago, Henig (1927) examined the relationship between cognitive ability (measured by the Army Alpha) and proneness to accidents among a sample of 164 boys at a New Jersey vocational school. Although the sample and measures employed were limited, results were promising, showing clearly that the liability for accidents decreased with increased cognitive capacity.…”

Section: The Forgotten Trait: Cognitive Abilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive ability predicts objectively measured counterproductive work behaviors.

Dilchert

Ones

Davis

et al. 2007

Journal of Applied Psychology

163

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past 2 decades, increasing attention has been directed at the relationship between individual differences and counterproductive work behaviors (CWB). However, most of this research has focused on personality variables as potential predictors of CWB; surprisingly little research has investigated the link between counterproductivity and cognitive ability. This study presents the first focal investigation of the cognitive ability-CWB relationship. The authors measured organizational and interpersonal CWB using organizational records of formally recorded incidents (e.g., destruction of property, physical violence). In a predictive study, for a large sample of law enforcement job applicants, a standardized psychometric test of cognitive ability predicted CWB, whereas educational attainment did not.

show abstract

Section: The Forgotten Trait: Cognitive Abilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive ability predicts objectively measured counterproductive work behaviors.

Dilchert

Ones

Davis

et al. 2007

Journal of Applied Psychology

163

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Two studies from the first half of the 20th century reviewed by Dilchert et al (2007) both related GMA to accident rates (Brown & Ghiselli, 1947;Henig, 1927), yet differed in their conclusions. Whereas Henig (1927) concluded that participants low in GMA are highly prone to be involved in accidents, Brown and Ghiselli (1947), on the basis of a correlation of À.05, stated that their findings did not ''show any promise for the prediction [. .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship of GMA to counterproductive work behavior revisited

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research reported that general mental ability (GMA) predicted counterproductive work behavior (CWB), whereas some previous studies failed to find such a relationship. We tested occupational homogeneity of the sample and criterion measurement as two potential explanations for these inconsistencies. Study 1 replicated major design features of one previous study, which found no GMA–CWB relation in a heterogeneous sample, with occupationally homogeneous groups. Results confirmed previous null findings, indicating no effect of sample homogeneity. In Study 2, using a controlled laboratory setting, GMA was again unrelated to self‐reported CWB, but partially predicted observed CWB negatively. Combined findings suggest that GMA is consistently unrelated to CWB self‐reports but may predict objectively measured CWB independently of the likelihood of being caught. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

“…In a recent search for studies of this type, Schmidt, Shaffer, and Oh (2008) were only able to locate a very small number of studies that examined these variables. Henig (1927), Dilchert, Ones, Davis, and Rostow (2007) Research has demonstrated that much of the variance in performance ratings is due to idiosyncratic rater effects (Mount, Judge, Scullen, Sytsma, & Hezlett, 1998;Scullen, Mount, & Goff, 2000;Viswesvaran et al, 2005). Differences may also occur based on whether performance is objectively or subjectively measured.…”

Section: Moderators Relevant To Job Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Fluid ability, crystallized ability, and performance across multiple domains

Postlethwaite¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive ability is one of the most frequently investigated individual differences in management and psychology. Countless studies have demonstrated that tests measuring cognitive ability or intelligence predict a number of important real-world outcomes such as academic performance, vocational training performance, and job performance. Although the relationship between intelligence and real-world performance is well established, there is a lack of consensus among scholars with regard to how intelligence should be conceptualized and measured. Of the more traditional theories of intelligence, two perspectives are particularly dominant: the Cattell-Horn model of fluid and crystallized intelligence and the theory of General Cognitive Ability (GCA or g).Fluid ability (Gf) represents novel or abstract problem solving capability and is believed to have a physiological basis. In contrast, crystallized ability (Gc) is associated with learned or acculturated knowledge. Drawing on recent research in neuroscience, as well as research on past performance, the nature of work, and expert performance, I argue that compared to measures of fluid ability, crystallized ability measures should more strongly predict real-world criteria in the classroom as well as the workplace.This idea was meta-analytically examined using a large, diverse set of over 400 primary studies spanning the past 100 years. With regard to academic performance, measures of fluid ability were found to positively predict learning (as measured by grades). However, as hypothesized, crystallized ability measures were found to be superior predictors of academic performance compared to their fluid ability counterparts.This finding was true for both high school and college students. v Likewise, similar patterns of results were observed with regard to both training performance and job performance. Again, crystallized ability measures were found to be better predictors of performance than fluid measures. This finding was consistent at the overall level of analysis as well as for medium complexity jobs. These findings have important implications for both intelligence theory and selection practice.Contemporary intelligence theory has placed great emphasis on the role of fluid ability, and some researchers have argued that Gf and g are essentially the same construct. However, the results of this study, which are based on criterion-related validities rather than factor-analytic evidence, demonstrate that Gc measures are superior predictors in comparison to Gf measures. This is contrary to what one would expect if Gf and g were indeed the same construct. Rather, the findings of this study are more consistent with General Cognitive Ability theory, which predicts that Gc indicators will be the best predictors of future learning and performance.Given that Gc measures demonstrate higher criterion-related validities than Gf measures, Gc measures are likely to be preferred for selection purposes. Further, Gf scores are known to decline with age while Gc scores remain relatively s...

show abstract

Intelligence and Safety

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Cognitive ability predicts objectively measured counterproductive work behaviors.

Cognitive ability predicts objectively measured counterproductive work behaviors.

The relationship of GMA to counterproductive work behavior revisited

Fluid ability, crystallized ability, and performance across multiple domains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About