Test Batteries (TBs) have a long history of use in pilot selection. The extent to which TBs predict future pilot performance has important implications. The existing pilot‐related psychometric meta‐analyses have focused primarily on scores of individual ability tests, rather than the combined scores composited from multiple ability tests. The objective of this study was to investigate the predictive validity of TBs' composite scores for several criteria of pilot performance. Informed by the Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory, we proposed a classification scheme of six categories representing the most common composite scores in selection assessment: Acquired Knowledge, Perceptual Processing, Motor Abilities, Controlled Attention, General Ability, and Work Sample. For overall pilot performance, based on 267 correlations from 118 independent samples, results showed that the six categories of TBs are valid predictors (Meanr = .10–.34), and at least five of them have validity that is likely to generalize across selection contexts.

Abstract. The Air Force Qualifying Test (AFOQT) has been the primary selection test battery for officer candidates in the US Air Force since 1953. Despite a wealth of literature on the validity of the AFOQT in predicting pilot performance, there is less evidence on its validity generalization. This study investigated the predictive validity of 16 AFOQT subtests and its Pilot composite via psychometric meta-analytic procedures. Based on 32 independent samples from 26 studies, results indicated that pilot performance is best predicted by subtests indicative of perceptual speed, aviation-related aptitude and knowledge, and quantitative ability constructs, and least predicted by subtests indicative of verbal ability construct. Evidence for validity generalization of AFOQT subtests is presented, and implications for practical use are discussed.

Cognitive abilities are related to job performance. However, there is less agreement about the relative contribution of general versus specific cognitive abilities to job performance. Similarly, it is not clear how cognitive abilities operate in the context of complex occupations. This study assessed the role of cognitive abilities on the performance of three aviation-related jobs: flying, navigation, and air battle management (ABM). Correlated-factor and bifactor models were used to draw a conclusion about the predictive relations between cognitive abilities and job performance. Overall, the importance of particular cognitive abilities tends to vary across the three occupations, and each occupation has different sets of essential abilities. Importantly, the interplay of general versus specific abilities is different across occupations, and some specific abilities also show substantial predictive power.

The Air Force Officer Qualifying Test (AFOQT) is the primary selection tool for officer applicants in the U.S. Air Force (USAF) for nearly seven decades. The AFOQT is revised and modified periodically, with rigorous equating and linking effort to ensure comparability and connectivity across forms. The most recent version of AFOQT is Form T that includes 10 cognitive ability and knowledge subtests. Despite the continuing validation effort of the AFOQT across forms, it was mostly directed to the general population of officer applicants, but not to any specific subpopulation. The current investigation reported three studies in an attempt to provide evidence for factor structure and criterion-related validity of AFOQT Form T for pilot applicants via four analytical approaches: meta-analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and structural equation modeling (SEM). The results suggested that AFOQT Form T data are best represented by a bifactor model with a general ability and four specific abilities, and that each latent construct has a distinct predictive utility for pilot performance criteria.

No abstract