General cognitive ability has moderate positive relations with work performance, with meta-analytic validity coefficients in the 0.4 to 0.6 range across many job types¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2012 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Meta-analyses beginning in the 1980s estimated validity coefficients for general cognitive ability in the 0.4 to 0.6 range across many types of jobs. → Salthouse 2012

Evidence¶

Salthouse 2012¶

Salthouse, T. (2012). Consequences of Age-Related Cognitive Declines. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 201-226. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100328

q3 · i? · review · r2

Narrative review summarizing the Hunter-Schmidt meta-analytic tradition in industrial-organizational psychology. The review reports that meta-analyses adjusting for measurement unreliability "resulted invalidities for general cognitive ability in the 0.4 to 0.6 range across many types of jobs", replicated in other datasets and countries.

"The new procedures resulted invalidities for general cognitive ability in the 0.4 to 0.6 range across many types of jobs"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• General Cognitive Ability — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Meta-analyses reveal little or no systematic relation between age and job performance, with a meta-analytic correlation of 0.06 — related
• Mathematics achievement correlates more strongly with learners' knowledge, skills and cognitive abilities than with their personality traits, goals or emotions — related
• Executive functions and working memory correlate moderately to strongly with mathematics achievement (r = .28 to .40), from preschool through elementary school — related