Cargando…
What Can We Learn from “Not Much More than g”?
A series of papers showing that measures of general cognitive ability predicted performance on the job and in training and that measures of specific cognitive abilities rarely made an incremental contribution to prediction led to a premature decline in research on the roles of specific abilities in...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6526477/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31162399 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence5010008 |
_version_ | 1783419902841847808 |
---|---|
author | Murphy, Kevin |
author_facet | Murphy, Kevin |
author_sort | Murphy, Kevin |
collection | PubMed |
description | A series of papers showing that measures of general cognitive ability predicted performance on the job and in training and that measures of specific cognitive abilities rarely made an incremental contribution to prediction led to a premature decline in research on the roles of specific abilities in the workplace. Lessons learned from this research include the importance of choosing the right general cognitive measures and variables, the relative roles of prediction vs. understanding and the need for a wide range of criteria when evaluating the contribution of specific skills such as complex problem solving. In particular, research published since the “not much more than g” era suggests that distinguishing between fluid and crystallized intelligence is important for understanding the development and the contribution of complex problem solving. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6526477 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65264772019-05-29 What Can We Learn from “Not Much More than g”? Murphy, Kevin J Intell Article A series of papers showing that measures of general cognitive ability predicted performance on the job and in training and that measures of specific cognitive abilities rarely made an incremental contribution to prediction led to a premature decline in research on the roles of specific abilities in the workplace. Lessons learned from this research include the importance of choosing the right general cognitive measures and variables, the relative roles of prediction vs. understanding and the need for a wide range of criteria when evaluating the contribution of specific skills such as complex problem solving. In particular, research published since the “not much more than g” era suggests that distinguishing between fluid and crystallized intelligence is important for understanding the development and the contribution of complex problem solving. MDPI 2017-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6526477/ /pubmed/31162399 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence5010008 Text en © 2017 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 | Article Murphy, Kevin What Can We Learn from “Not Much More than g”? |
title | What Can We Learn from “Not Much More than g”? |
title_full | What Can We Learn from “Not Much More than g”? |
title_fullStr | What Can We Learn from “Not Much More than g”? |
title_full_unstemmed | What Can We Learn from “Not Much More than g”? |
title_short | What Can We Learn from “Not Much More than g”? |
title_sort | what can we learn from “not much more than g”? |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6526477/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31162399 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence5010008 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT murphykevin whatcanwelearnfromnotmuchmorethang |