Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:59:40.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

g 2.0: Factor Analysis, Filed Findings, Facts, Fashionable Topics, and Future Steps

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Jeffrey M. Cucina ,
Ilene F. Gast  and
Chihwei Su
Jeffrey M. Cucina*
Affiliation:
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Ilene F. Gast
Affiliation:
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Chihwei Su
Affiliation:
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
*
E-mail: jeffrey.cucina@dhs.gov, Address: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1400 L Street, NW, 7th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1145
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , June 2012 , pp. 166 - 171
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The authors would like to thank Mary Anne Nester for her valuable comments and suggestions on this article.

References

Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1995). Book review. Assessment of cognitive processes: The PASS theory of intelligence. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 13, 397–409.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1971). Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Google Scholar
Colberg, M. (1984). Towards a taxonomy of verbal tests based on logic. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44, 113–120.Google Scholar
Colberg, M. (1985). Logic-based measurement of verbal reasoning: A key to increased validity and economy. Personnel Psychology, 38, 347–359.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
Hayes, T. L., McElreath, J. M., & Reilly, S. M. (2003). The criterion-related validity of logic-based measurement and reasoning tests in public sector merit-based selection systems. Report No. 03-01. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Google Scholar
Horn, J. L. (1998). A basis for research on age differences in cognitive abilities. In McArdle, J. J. & Woodcock, R. W. (Eds.), Human cognitive abilities in theory and practice (pp. 57–92). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
Hunter, J. E. (1980). Validity generalization for 12,000 jobs: An application of synthetic validity and validity generalization to the General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB). Washington, DC: U.S. Employment Service, U.S. Department of Labor. Google Scholar
Hunter, J. E., & Hunter, R. F. (1984). Validity and utility of alternative predictors of job performance. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 72–98.Google Scholar
Keith, T. Z., & Kranzler, J. H. (1999). The absence of structural fidelity precludes construct validity: Rejoinder to Naglieri on what the cognitive assessment system does and does not measure. School Psychology Review, 28, 303–321.Google Scholar
Keith, T. Z., Kranzler, J. H., & Flanagan, D. P. (2001). What does the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS) measure? Joint confirmatory factor analysis of the CAS and the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Ability (3rd ed.). School Psychology Review, 30, 89–119.Google Scholar
Keith, T. Z., & Reynolds, M. R. (2010). Cattell-Horn-Carroll abilities and cognitive tests: What we’ve learned from 20 years of research. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 635–650.Google Scholar
Kobrin, J. L., Patterson, B. F., Shaw, E. J., Mattern, K. D., & Barbuti, S. M. (2008). Validity of the SAT® for predicting first-year college grade point average. Report No. 2008-5. New York, NY: The College Board. Google Scholar
Kranzler, J. H., & Keith, T. Z. (1999). Independent confirmatory factor analysis of the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS): What does the CAS measure? School Psychology Review, 28, 117–144.Google Scholar
Kranzler, J. H., Keith, T. Z., & Flanagan, D. P. (2000). Independent examination of the factor structure of the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS): Further evidence challenging the construct validity of the CAS. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 18, 143–159.Google Scholar
Kranzler, J. H., & Weng, L. J. (1995). Factor structure of the PASS cognitive tasks: A reexamination of Naglieri et al. (1991). Journal of School Psychology, 33, 143–157.Google Scholar
Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2004). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 148–161.Google Scholar
Lyons, T. J., Bayless, J. A., & Park, R. K. (2001). Relationship of cognitive, biographical, and personality measures with the training and job performance of detention enforcement officers in a federal government agency. Applied HRM Research, 6, 67–70.Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Hartman, N. S., Whetzel, D. L., & Grubb, W. L. (2007). Situational judgment tests, response instructions, and validity: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60, 63–91.Google Scholar
McGrew, K. S. (2005). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities: Past, present, and future. In Flanagan, D. P. & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (2nd ed., pp. 136–181). New York, NY: Guilford. Google Scholar
Naglieri, J. A., & Das, J. P. (1997). Cognitive assessment system: Interpretive handbook. Itasca, IL: Riverside.Google Scholar
O’Boyle, E. H. Jr., & McDaniel, M. A. (2008). Criticisms of employment testing: A commentary. In Phelps, R. (Ed.), Correcting fallacies about educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Google Scholar
Pearlman, K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1980). Validity generalization results for tests used to predict training success and job proficiency in clerical occupations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 373–406.Google Scholar
Pollack, L., Simons, C., & Patel, R. (1999). Federal professional and administrative occupations: An application of the Multipurpose Occupational Systems Analysis Inventory–Closed-ended (MOSAIC) (PRDC-99-01). Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Google Scholar
Ree, M. J., Carretta, T. R., & Teachout, M. S. (1994). Predicting job performance: Not much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 518–524.Google Scholar
Ree, M. J., & Earles, J. A. (1991). Predicting training success: Not much more than g. Personnel Psychology, 44, 321–332.Google Scholar
Robertson, I. T., & Downs, S. (1989). Work-sample tests of trainability: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 402–410.Google Scholar
Sackett, P. R., Borneman, M., & Connelly, B. S. (2008). High stakes testing in education and employment: Evaluating common criticisms regarding validity and fairness. American Psychologist, 63, 215–227.Google Scholar
Scherbaum, C. A., Goldstein, H. W., Yusko, K. P., Ryan, R., & Hanges, P. J. (2012). Intelligence 2.0: Reestablishing a research program on g in I–O psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 128–148.Google Scholar
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J.E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262–274.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. W., & Nester, M. A. (2000, June). The content domain of the reasoning construct as found in law enforcement job-content materials. Presentation at the International Personnel Management Association Assessment Council (IPMAAC) Conference, Washington, DC. Retrieved from www.ipacweb.org/conf/00/simpson.pdf.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. W., Nester, M. A., & Palmer, E. (2007, June). The validity of logic-based tests. Presentation at the International Personnel Management Association Assessment Council (IPMAAC) Conference, St. Louis, MO. Retrieved from http://www.ipacweb.org/conf/07/simpson3.pdf.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1904). “General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–293.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man: Their nature and measurement. New York, NY: Macmillan. Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence,. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Whetzel, D. L., McCloy, R. A., Hooper, A., Russell, T. L., Waters, S. D., Campbell, W. J., & Ramos, R. A. (2011). Meta-analysis of clerical performance predictors: Still stable after all these years. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19, 41–50.Google Scholar
Wiesen, J. P. (2009). Possible reasons for the black-white mean score differences seen with many cognitive ability tests: Informal notes to file. Working draft manuscript. Retrieved from http://appliedpersonnelresearch.com/papers/adimpact.pdf.Google Scholar
Zickar, M. J., & Highhouse, S. (2001). Measuring prestige of journals in industrial-organizational psychology. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 38, 29–36.Google Scholar