On the myth and the reality of the temporal validity degradation of general mental ability test scores

Reeve, Charlie L.; Bonaccio, Silvia

doi:10.1016/j.intell.2011.06.009

Cited by 28 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 122 publications

(171 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, GPAs are not without shortcoming. It has been shown that GPAs obtained from later on in the education do not reflect differences between students as well as GPAs obtained earlier on (Reeve & Bonaccio, 2011). This might be due to individual differences in course choices and/or grading standards across and within institutions, which can lead to an underestimation of predictive validity of determinants of academic achievement (e.g.…”

Section: Defining and Measuring Academic Achievementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ackerman et al, 2011;Reeve & Bonaccio, 2011) already noted that sometimes less effort is invested in defining and measuring criterion variables than in defining and measuring predictor variables. For example, GPAs seem to be the predominant criterion variable for academic achievement.…”

Section: Defining and Measuring Academic Achievementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This might be due to individual differences in course choices and/or grading standards across and within institutions, which can lead to an underestimation of predictive validity of determinants of academic achievement (e.g. Ackerman et al, 2011;Berry & Sackett, 2009;Didier, Kreiter, Buri, & Solow, 2006;Elliot & Strenta, 1988;Reeve & Bonaccio, 2011). When considering GPAs, it therefore seems appropriate to examine GPAs of different academic years separately.…”

Section: Defining and Measuring Academic Achievementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…. Although its predictive utility seems to be highest for academic achievement measured after the first academic year (0.34 ≤ ρ ≤ 0.45 Reeve & Bonaccio, 2011), g continues to predict academic achievement up until the very end of tertiary education (0.20 ≤ ρ ≤ 0.24 . Several authors (e.g.…”

Section: Cognitive Determinants Of Academic Achievementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several authors (e.g. Ackerman et al, 2011;Reeve & Bonaccio, 2011) argued that this decrease in the predictive utility of g may be attributable to an increase in individual differences in course choices and differential grading standards over the academic years. Thus, grades obtained later on in tertiary education are more confounded by construct-irrelevant variance, which subsequently decreases the predictive utility of g.…”

Section: Cognitive Determinants Of Academic Achievementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Using Personality Measures for Selection Decisions: Predictive Utility and Applicants' Faking Behaviour (Thesis)

Krammer¹

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim of this publication-based dissertation was to scrutinize the use of personality measures for selection decisions. This was done in three studies examining personality measures used for selection decisions to teacher education. First, Study 1 evaluated the predictive utility of personality measures for differentiated facets of academic achievement. In accordance with a large body of research, personality measures retained their predictive utility over and above other determinants of academic achievement. With Study 1 supporting the usefulness of personality measures for predicting future academic achievement in the academic field examined, Study 2 then addressed the prevalence of applicants' faking behaviour on the personality scales used for selection decisions. Study 2 showed that applicants increased their raw mean test scores in nearly all personality scales examined, and that applicants' faking behaviour could detrimentally affect applicants' rank order. Based on the findings of Study 2, Study 3 aimed to shed light on the effects of applicants' faking behaviour on the psychometric properties of the personality scales. Measurement invariance analyses revealed that applicants primarily faked by increasing their responses to selected items. The more heterogeneously the responses were increased, the more measurement properties were detrimentally affected. As the synopsis of the three studies, theoretical and practical implications for the use of personality measures for selection decisions are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Defining and Measuring Academic Achievementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Defining and Measuring Academic Achievementmentioning

confidence: 99%