Cargando…

Non-g Factors Predict Educational and Occupational Criteria: More than g

In a prior issue of the Journal of Intelligence, I argued that the most important scientific issue in intelligence research was to identify specific abilities with validity beyond g (i.e., variance common to mental tests) (Coyle, T.R. Predictive validity of non-g residuals of tests: More than g. Jou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Coyle, Thomas R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6480787/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31162470
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence6030043
_version_ 1783413645997244416
author Coyle, Thomas R.
author_facet Coyle, Thomas R.
author_sort Coyle, Thomas R.
collection PubMed
description In a prior issue of the Journal of Intelligence, I argued that the most important scientific issue in intelligence research was to identify specific abilities with validity beyond g (i.e., variance common to mental tests) (Coyle, T.R. Predictive validity of non-g residuals of tests: More than g. Journal of Intelligence 2014, 2, 21–25.). In this Special Issue, I review my research on specific abilities related to non-g factors. The non-g factors include specific math and verbal abilities based on standardized tests (SAT, ACT, PSAT, Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery). I focus on two non-g factors: (a) non-g residuals, obtained after removing g from tests, and (b) ability tilt, defined as within-subject differences between math and verbal scores, yielding math tilt (math > verbal) and verbal tilt (verbal > math). In general, math residuals and tilt positively predict STEM criteria (college majors, jobs, GPAs) and negatively predict humanities criteria, whereas verbal residuals and tilt show the opposite pattern. The paper concludes with suggestions for future research, with a focus on theories of non-g factors (e.g., investment theories, Spearman’s Law of Diminishing Returns, Cognitive Differentiation-Integration Effort Model) and a magnification model of non-g factors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6480787
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64807872019-05-29 Non-g Factors Predict Educational and Occupational Criteria: More than g Coyle, Thomas R. J Intell Commentary In a prior issue of the Journal of Intelligence, I argued that the most important scientific issue in intelligence research was to identify specific abilities with validity beyond g (i.e., variance common to mental tests) (Coyle, T.R. Predictive validity of non-g residuals of tests: More than g. Journal of Intelligence 2014, 2, 21–25.). In this Special Issue, I review my research on specific abilities related to non-g factors. The non-g factors include specific math and verbal abilities based on standardized tests (SAT, ACT, PSAT, Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery). I focus on two non-g factors: (a) non-g residuals, obtained after removing g from tests, and (b) ability tilt, defined as within-subject differences between math and verbal scores, yielding math tilt (math > verbal) and verbal tilt (verbal > math). In general, math residuals and tilt positively predict STEM criteria (college majors, jobs, GPAs) and negatively predict humanities criteria, whereas verbal residuals and tilt show the opposite pattern. The paper concludes with suggestions for future research, with a focus on theories of non-g factors (e.g., investment theories, Spearman’s Law of Diminishing Returns, Cognitive Differentiation-Integration Effort Model) and a magnification model of non-g factors. MDPI 2018-09-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6480787/ /pubmed/31162470 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence6030043 Text en © 2018 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Commentary
Coyle, Thomas R.
Non-g Factors Predict Educational and Occupational Criteria: More than g
title Non-g Factors Predict Educational and Occupational Criteria: More than g
title_full Non-g Factors Predict Educational and Occupational Criteria: More than g
title_fullStr Non-g Factors Predict Educational and Occupational Criteria: More than g
title_full_unstemmed Non-g Factors Predict Educational and Occupational Criteria: More than g
title_short Non-g Factors Predict Educational and Occupational Criteria: More than g
title_sort non-g factors predict educational and occupational criteria: more than g
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6480787/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31162470
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence6030043
work_keys_str_mv AT coylethomasr nongfactorspredicteducationalandoccupationalcriteriamorethang