Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:07:51.015Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pervasiveness of Dominant General Factors in Organizational Measurement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2015

Malcolm James Ree ,
Thomas R. Carretta  and
Mark S. Teachout
Malcolm James Ree*
Affiliation:
Department of Leadership Studies, School of Business and Leadership, Our Lady of the Lake University
Thomas R. Carretta
Affiliation:
Air Force Research Laboratory, Warfighter Interface Division, Supervisory Control and Cognition Branch, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio
Mark S. Teachout
Affiliation:
H-E-B School of Business and Administration, University of the Incarnate Word
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Malcolm James Ree, School of Business and Leadership, Our Lady of the Lake University, 411 Southwest 24th Street, San Antonio, TX 78207. E-mail: malcolmree@att.net
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

General factors are found in the measurement of many human traits. The concept of dominant general factors (DGFs) is introduced to represent the magnitude of general factors within numerous content domains. DGFs are defined as coming from the largest sources of reliable variance and influencing every variable measuring the construct. Although these factors are most frequently found in measures of cognitive ability, they are not limited to cognitive abilities. Examples are provided for a variety of construct and content domains along with estimates of their DGF percentages, ranging from 38% to 92%. Several reasons for these results are offered, and a call for concerted research is made. Research that ignores DGFs by treating specific factors or constructs within a domain as if they were distinct and uncorrelated can lead to errors in interpretation.

Keywords

general factorsdominant general factors
Type
Focal Article
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , September 2015 , pp. 409 - 427
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2015 

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.)

References

Ackerman, P. L., & Cianciolo, A. T. (2000). Cognitive, perceptual-speed, and psychomotor determinants of individual differences in skill acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6, 259–290.Google ScholarPubMed
Ahmetoglu, G., Leutner, F., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2011). EQ-nomics: Understanding the relationship between individual differences in trait emotional intelligence and entrepreneurship. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 1028–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asch, S. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290.Google Scholar
Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2004). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire manual and sample set (3rd ed.). Menlo Park, CA: Mindgarden.Google Scholar
Barbuto, J. E., & Wheeler, D. W. (2006). Scale development and construct clarification of servant leadership. Group & Organizational Management, 31, 300–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, K. G., Le, H., & Schmidt, F. L. (2006). Specific aptitude theory revisited: Is there incremental validity for training performance? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 87–100.Google Scholar
Campbell, J. P., McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H., & Sager, C. E. (1993). A theory of performance. In Schmitt, N. & Borman, W. C. (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 35–70). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Campbell, J. P., McHenry, J. J., & Wise, L. L. (1990). Modeling job performance in a population of jobs. Personnel Psychology, 43, 313–333.Google Scholar
Carretta, T. R., PerryD. C., Jr. D. C., Jr., & Ree, M. J. (1996). Prediction of situational awareness in F-15 pilots. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 6, 21–41.Google Scholar
Carretta, T. R., & Ree, M. J. (1996). Factor structure of the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test: Analysis and comparison. Military Psychology, 8, 29–42.Google Scholar
Carretta, T. R., & Ree, M. J. (1997). Expanding the nexus of cognitive and psychomotor abilities. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 5, 149–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caspi, A., Houts, R. M., Belsky, D. W., Goldman-Mellor, S. J., Harrington, H., Israel, S., . . . Moffitt, T. E. (2014). The p factor: One general psychopathology factor in the structure of psychiatric disorders? Clinical Psychological Science, 2, 119–137.Google Scholar
Castro, S. L., Scandura, T. A., & Williams, E. A. (2004). Validity of Scandura and Ragins’ (1993) multidimensional mentoring measure: An evaluation and refinement. Management Faculty and Papers 7. Retrieved from http://scholarlyrepository.miami.edu/management_articles/7Google Scholar
Chan, K.-Y., & Drasgow, F. (2001). Toward a theory of individual differences and leadership: Understanding the motivation to lead. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 481–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, W. H. (1981). Ubiquitous halo. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 218–244.Google Scholar
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and application. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 98–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical & modern test theory. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. L. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drasgow, F., Nye, C. D., Carretta, T. R., & Ree, M. J. (2010). Factor analysis of the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test Form S: Analysis and comparison with previous forms. Military Psychology, 22, 68–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, B. D., Bell, S. T., Arthur, W., & Decuir, A. D. (2008). Relationships between job satisfaction and task and contextual performance. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57, 441–465.Google Scholar
Fiori, M., & Antonakis, J. (2011). The ability model of emotional intelligence: Searching for valid measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 329–334.Google Scholar
Fleishman, E. A. (1964). The structure and measurement of physical fitness. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Fleishman, E. A. (1972). Structure and measurement of psychomotor abilities. In Singer, R. N. (Ed.), The psychomotor domain: Movement behavior. Philadelphia, PA: Lea and Febiger.Google Scholar
Fleishman, E. A. (1975). Toward a taxonomy of human performance. American Psychologist, 30, 1127–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleishman, E. A., Quaintance, M. K., & Broedling, K. A. (1994). Taxonomies of human performance: The description of human tasks. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Giacalone, R. A., & Rosenfeld, P. (1989). Impression management in the organization. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Gorsuch, R. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gulliksen, H. (1950). Theory of mental tests. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Hart, S., & Staveland, L. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In Hancock, P. & Meshkati, N. (Eds.), Human mental workload (pp. 139–183). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: North Holland.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. E. (2003). A user's guide to principal components. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Erez, A., Bono, J. E., & Thoresen, C. J. (2002). Are measures of self-esteem, neuroticism, locus of control, and generalized self-efficacy indicators of a common core construct? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 693–710.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Erez, A., Bono, J. E., & Thoresen, C. J. (2003). The Core Self-Evaluation Scale: Development of a measure. Personnel Psychology, 56, 303–331.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Van Vianen, A. E. M., & De Pater, I. E. (2004). Emotional stability, core self-valuations, and job outcomes: A review of the evidence and an agenda for future research. Human Performance, 17, 325–346.Google Scholar
Just, C. (2011). A review of literature on the general factor of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 765–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, D. E., Kersting, M., Heggestad, E. D., & ThorntonG. C., III G. C., III. (2006). Incremental validity of assessment center ratings over cognitive ability tests: A study at the executive management level. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 360–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyllonen, P. C. (1993). Aptitude testing inspired by information processing: A test of the four sources model. The Journal of General Psychology, 120, 375–405.Google Scholar
Lance, C. E., Teachout, M. S., & Donnelly, T. M. (1992). Specification of the criterion construct space: An application of hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 437–452.Google Scholar
Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24, 43–72.Google Scholar
Mathias, J. L. (2011). A study of the relationship of citizenship status and other correlates with the self-reported leadership behaviors of Spanish-speaking adults in central Texas (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Our Lady of the Lake University, San Antonio, Texas.Google Scholar
Mensh, I. N., & Wishner, J. (1947). Asch on “Forming impressions of personality”: Further evidence. Journal of Personality, 16, 188–191.Google Scholar
Murphy, K. R. (2009a). Content validation is useful for many things, but validity isn't one of them. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2, 453–464.Google Scholar
Murphy, K. R. (2009b). Is content-related evidence useful in validating selection tests? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2, 517–526.Google Scholar
Murphy, K. R., Deckart, P. J., Kinney, T. B., & Kung, M. C. (2013). Subject matter expert judgments regarding the relative importance of competencies are not useful for choosing test batteries that best predict performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 21, 419–429.Google Scholar
Musek, J. (2007). A general factor of personality: Evidence for the big one in the five-factor model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 1213–1233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nosofsky, R. M., & Stanton, R. D. (2005). Speeded classification in a probabilistic category structure contrasting exemplar retrieval, decision-boundary, and prototype models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 508–629.Google Scholar
Ojo, A. (2008). Leadership style and leadership power (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Our Lady of the Lake University, San Antonio, Texas.Google Scholar
Paloutzian, R. F., & Ellison, C. W. (1991). Manual for the Spiritual Well-Being Scale. Nyack, NY: Life Advance.Google Scholar
Parker, J., Keefer, K., & Wood, L. (2011). Toward a brief multidimensional assessment of emotional intelligence: Properties of the Emotional Quotient Inventory—Short Form. Psychological Assessment, 23, 762–777.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. M., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method variance in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.Google Scholar
Rahim, M. A., & Magner, N. R. (1995). Confirmatory factor analysis of the styles of handling interpersonal conflict: First-order factor model and its invariance across groups. Journal of Applied Psycyology, 80, 122–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rahman, U., Sulaiman, W. S. W., Nasir, R., & Omar, F. (2013). Analyzing the construct validity of Organizational Citizenship Behavior Scale using confirmatory factor analysis with Indonesian samples. Asian Social Science, 9, 85–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raijmakers, M. E. J. (2006). A dynamic model of general intelligence: The positive manifold of intelligence by mutualism. Psychological Review, 113, 842–861.Google Scholar
Ree, M. J., & Carretta, T. R. (1994a). The correlation of general cognitive ability and psychomotor tracking tests. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 2, 209–216.Google Scholar
Ree, M. J., & Carretta, T. R. (1994b). Factor analysis of ASVAB: Confirming a Vernon-like model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 459–463.Google Scholar
Ree, M. J., & Carretta, T. R. (1998). General cognitive ability and occupational performance. In Cooper, C. L. & Robertson, I. T. (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 159–184). Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley.Google Scholar
Ree, M. J., & Carretta, T. R. (2011). The observation of incremental validity does not always mean unique contribution to prediction. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19, 276–279.Google Scholar
Ree, M. J., & Earles, J. A. (1991a). Predicting training success: Not much more than g. Personnel Psychology, 44, 321–332.Google Scholar
Ree, M. J., & Earles, J. A. (1991b). The stability of convergent estimates of g. Intelligence, 15, 271–278.Google Scholar
Ree, M. J., & Earles, J. A. (1992). Intelligence is the best predictor of job performance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 86–89.Google Scholar
Ree, M. J., Earles, J. A., & Teachout, M. S. (1994). Predicting job performance: Not much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 518–524.Google Scholar
Ree, M. J., Teachout, M. S., & Carretta, T. R. (2013). Against all evidence: General and specific ability in human resource management. In Svantek, D. J. & Mahoney, K. T. (Eds.), Received wisdom: Kernels of truth and boundary conditions in organizational studies (pp. 181–199). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.Google Scholar
Reeve, C. L., & Blacksmith, N. (2009). Equivalency and reliability of vectors of g-loadings across different methods of estimation and sample size. Personality and Individual Difference, 47, 968–972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 192–233.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, P., Giacalone, R. A., & Riordan, C. (2002). Impression management: Building and enhancing reputations at work. London, United Kingdom: Thompson Learning.Google Scholar
Rushton, J. P., & Irwing, P. (2008). A general factor of personality (GFP) from two meta-analyses of the Big Five: Digman (1997) and Mount, Barrick, Scullen, and Rounfs (2005). Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 679–683.Google Scholar
Rushton, J. P., & Irwing, P. (2011). The general factor of personality: Normal and abnormal. In Chamoroo-Prernuzic, T., von Stumm, S., & Furnham, A. (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of individual differences (pp. 134–163). Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Smith, P. C., & Kendall, L. M. (1963). Retranslation of expectations: An approach to the construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47, 149–155.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1904). “General intelligence” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–293.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1923). The nature of “intelligence” and the principles of cognition. London, United Kingdom: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man: Their nature and measurement. New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Stanley, J. C. (1971). Reliability. In Thorndike, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
Stauffer, J. M., Ree, M. J., & Carretta, T. R. (1996). Cognitive components tests are not much more than g: An extension of Kyllonen's analyses. Journal of General Psychology, 123, 193–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teachout, M. S., Ree, M. J., Barto, E., King, R. E., & Carretta, T. R. (2014). Joint analysis of two ability tests: Two theories, one outcome (Report No. AFRL-RH-WP-TR-2014-0014). Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Air Force Research Laboratory, Decision Making Division.Google Scholar
Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 25–29.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Psychometric Monographs, 1. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
van der Maas, H. L., Dolan, C. V., Grasman, R., Wicherts, J. M., Huizenga, H. M., & Raijmakers, M. (2006). A dynamical model of general intelligence: The positive manifold of intelligence by mutualism. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 842–861.Google Scholar
van Dierendonck, D., & Nuijten, I. (2011). The Servant Leadership Survey: Development and validation of a multidimensional measure. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26, 249–267.Google Scholar
Vickers, R. R., Hodgon, J. A., & Beckett, M. B. (2008). Physical ability-task performance models: Assessing the risk of omitted variable bias (Technical Report 09-04). San Diego, CA: Naval Health Research Center.Google Scholar
Viswesvaran, C., Schmidt, F. L., & Ones, D. S. (2005). Is there a general factor in ratings of job performance? A meta-analysis framework for disentangling substantive and error influences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 108–131.Google Scholar
Wayne, S. J., & Liden, R. C. (1995). Effects of impression management on performance ratings: A longitudinal study. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 232–260.Google Scholar
Wheeler, J. L., & Ree, M. J. (1997). The role of general and specific psychomotor tracking ability in validity. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 5, 128–136.Google Scholar