A gap in the conceptual development of the work experience construct was addressed by creating a framework specifying two dimensions along which work experience measures can vary. The dimensions of measurement mode (amount, time, and type) and level of specificity (task, job, organizational) formed nine separate categories of measures of work experience. The usefulness of the conceptual framework was tested by conducting a meta‐analytic review of the existing literature on work experience using the dimensions in the framework as potential moderators of the experience‐performance relationship. Results of the meta‐analysis (N= 25,911; K= 44) revealed an estimated population correlation of 27 between experience and performance after correcting for sampling error and criterion unreliability. In addition, the results showed that amount (Mp̂= .43) and task‐level (Mp̂= .41) measures of work experience had the highest correlations with measures of job performance. In addition, work experience had the highest correlations with hard (e.g. work samples) as opposed to soft (e.g. ratings) measures of job performance (Mp̂= .39 vs. Mp̂= .24). Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

The roles of general cognitive ability (g) and specific abilities or knowledge (s) were investigated as predictors of work sample job performance criteria in 7 jobs for U.S. Air Force enlistees. Both gand s (the interaction of general ability and experience) were defined by scores on the first and subsequent principal components of the enlistment selection and classification test (the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery). Multiple regression analyses, when corrected for range restriction, revealed that g was the best predictor of all criteria and that i added a statistically significant but practically small amount to predictive efficiency. These results are consistent with those of previous studies, most notably Army Project A (

A causal model of the role of general cognitive ability and prior job knowledge in subsequent job-knowledge acquisition and work-sample performance during training was developed. Participants were 3,428 U.S. Air Force officers in pilot training. The measures of ability and prior job knowledge came from the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test. The measures of job knowledge acquired during training were derived from classroom grades. Work-sample measures came from check flight ratings. The causal model showed that ability directly influenced the acquisition of job knowledge. General cognitive ability influenced work samples through job knowledge. Prior job knowledge had almost no influence on subsequent job knowledge but directly influenced the early work sample. Early training job knowledge influenced subsequent job knowledge and work-sample performance. Finally, early work-sample performance strongly influenced subsequent work-sample performance.Several studies have shown the effectiveness of general cognitive ability (g) as a predictor of numerous occupational criteria (e.g., McHenry, Hough, Toquam, Hanson, & Ashworth, 1990;McNemar, 1964;Ree & Earles, 1992). McNemar (1964) and Ree and Earles (1991) demonstrated that g accounted for almost all of the validity of multiple aptitude batteries for predicting training success, whereas McHenry et al. (1990) andTeachout (1994) demonstrated that g was the best predictor of core technical job performance. Hunter (1986) provided a major summary article demonstrating that "general cognitive ability has high validity predicting performance ratings and training success in all jobs" (p. 359).Furthermore, Olea and Ree (1994) extended the aforementioned findings in a large-scale study of about 5,400

We used hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis to test alternative latent structures underlying performance in multiple dimensions as measured by work samples and three rating sources. The model receiving strongest support was one that specified multidimensional trait (performance dimension) and measurement method second-order factors (SOFs). This model exhibited significant convergent and discriminant validity, showed significant measurement method effects, and indicated that different measurement methods assess somewhat different aspects of the total criterion construct space. Significant correlations between measurement method SOFs and performance predictors suggest the need to reconsider the interpretation of method factors, not as bias, but as possibly representing different overall perspectives on performance.

No abstract