Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:54:43.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

I–O 2.0 From Intelligence 1.5: Staying (Just) Behind the Cutting Edge of Intelligence Theories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Frederick L. Oswald  and
Leaetta Hough
Frederick L. Oswald*
Affiliation:
Rice University
Leaetta Hough
Affiliation:
The Dunnette Group, Ltd.
*
E-mail: [email protected], Address: 6100 Main St., MS25, Houston, TX 77063
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. 172 - 175
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.)

References

Ackerman, P. L. (1996). A theory of adult intellectual development: Process, personality, interest, and knowledge. Intelligence, 22, 227–257.Google Scholar
Beier, M. E., & Beal, D. J. (2010, April). The importance of job characteristics in the relation between age and job performance. Paper presented at the 25th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Converse, P. D., & Oswald, F. L. (2004). The effects of data type of job classification and its purposes. Psychology Science, 46, 99–127.Google Scholar
Detterman, D. K., & Daniel, M. H. (1989). Correlations of mental tests with each other and with cognitive variables are highest for low IQ groups. Intelligence, 13, 349–359.Google Scholar
Fleishman, E. A., & Quaintance, M. K. (1984). Taxonomies of human performance: The description of human tasks. San Francisco, CA: Academic Press, Inc.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, L. (1997a). Mainstream science on intelligence: An editorial with 52 signatories, history, and bibliography. Intelligence, 24, 13–23.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, L. (1997b). Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence, 24, 79–132.Google Scholar
Hough, L. M., Oswald, F. L., & Ployhart, R. E. (2001). Determinants, detection, and amelioration of adverse impact in personnel selection procedures: Issues, evidence, and lessons learned. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 152–194.Google Scholar
Hunter, J. E. (1983). The dimensionality of the General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB) and the dominance of general factors over specific factors in the prediction of job performance for the U.S. Employment Service. USES Test Research Report No. 44. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor. Google Scholar
Hunter, J. E. (1986). Cognitive ability, cognitive aptitudes, job knowledge, and job performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 29, 340–362.Google Scholar
Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 657–690.Google Scholar
Kuhl, J. (1985). Volitional mediators of cognitive-behavior-consistency; self-regulatory processes and action versus state orientation. In Kuhl, J. & Beckmann, J. (Eds.), Action control. From cognition to behavior (pp. 101–128). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. Google Scholar
Legree, P. J., Pifer, M. E., & Grafton, F. C. (1996). Correlations among cognitive abilities are lower for higher ability groups. Intelligence, 23, 45–57.Google Scholar
Murphy, K. R. (1989). Is the relationship between cognitive ability and job performance stable over time? Human Performance, 2, 183–200.Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N. R., Shiner, R., Caspi, A., & Goldberg, L. (2007). The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 313–345.Google Scholar
Schaie, K. W., & Strother, C. R. (1968). The cross-sequential study of age changes in cognitive behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 671–680.Google Scholar
Scherbaum, C., Goldstein, H., Yusko, K., Ryan, R., & Hanges, P. (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. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work: Occupational attainment and job performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 162–173.Google Scholar
Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2005). Creativity and occupational accomplishments among intellectually precocious youth: An age 13 to age 33 longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 484–492.Google Scholar
Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over fifty years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 817–835.Google Scholar