The Effect of Factor Analytic Method on the Interpretation of the Changing Abilities Requirements Model: An Example of the Tools-to-Theory Hypothesis

Barrett, Gerald V.; Alexander, Ralph A.

doi:10.1207/s15327043hup0601_2

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the prediction of Individual differences in task performance has had a relatively long history, there appears to be some recent disagreement about the stability of ability-performance relationships over time (e.g., Austin, Humphreys, & Hulin, 1989;Barrett, Morris, & Alexander, 1993;Ranges, Schneider, & Miles, 1990;Hulin, Henry, & Noon, 1990). One of the problems with previous literature investigating this issue has been the use of relatively simple information processing tasks which have been critiqued as being non-representative of real world complex tasks .…”

Section: Stability Of Ability-performance Relationships As a Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skill decay: A comparative assessment of training protocols and individual differences in the loss and reacquisition of complex skills

Arthur¹,

Bennett²,

Day³

et al. 2002

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public repoiling burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, ir^cluding the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing dsta sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing 4tiis collection of information .Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense. Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Mormation SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Air Force Research Laboratory Human Effectiveness Directorate Warfighter Training Research Division 6030 South Kent Street MesaAZ 85212-6061 SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)AFRL; AFRL/HEA SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S) AFRL-HE-AZ-TR-2002-000412. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 13, SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE^Air Force Research Laborattfiy Technical Monitor: Dr. Winston Bennett, (480) 988-6561 Ext. 297, DSN 474-6297 ABSTRACTIt has been consistently demonstrated that the active interlocked modeling (AIM) protocol, a dyadic training protocol developed by Shebilske, Regian, Arthur, and Jordan (1992), achieves a 100% increase In training efficiency over a control individual-trainee based condition. TTie purpose of the present study was to replicate this finding as well as to investigate its robustness In terms of skill loss and reacquisition. Thus, we compared the AIM-dyad training protocol to a standard individual protocol regarding the acquisition of a complex skill (i.e.. Space Fortress; cf . More importantly, skill loss after an 8-week non-practice interval and skill re-acqulsition was also investigated. Despite half as much hands-on practice, the performance of dyadic trainees did not differ from that of individuals on tests of skill acquisition, loss, and re-acquisition. These findings provide strong support and justification for the ongoing use of innovative dyadic protocols for the training of pilots and navigators in both military an non-military settings.

show abstract

Section: Stability Of Ability-performance Relationships As a Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skill decay: A comparative assessment of training protocols and individual differences in the loss and reacquisition of complex skills

Arthur¹,

Bennett²,

Day³

et al. 2002

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, in some of Fleishman's later studies (see Fleishman and Mumford 1989, for examples), the reference test battery was factored separately, and then the loadings of the trial stages were projected on these factors using Dwyer's extension technique (Dwyer 1937). Finally, although re-analyses by Barrett, Morris andAlexander (1993) of Fleishman's andHempel's work (i.e., Fleishman 1960;Hempel 1954, 1955) produced a different pattern of results than those described by Fleishman, the re-analyses did not eliminate the central effects of changing ability correlations with practice on a criterion task.…”

Section: Research In Laboratory Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, Sackett, Gruys and Ellingson (1998) have offered strong evidence that two personality variables (need for achievement and dependability) do not interact with cognitive ability but have an additive effect on performance. Additional research is needed to examine potential interactions involving other personality factors (see Barrick andMount 1991, Digman 1990;Fiske 1949;Goldberg 1993;Hogan 1991;John, Angleitner and Ostendorf 1988;Norman 1963;Christal 1961, 1992 for discussions of personality factors and the Big Five model; see Block 1995 for a contrarian view).…”

Section: Implications Of Ability Construct Operationalizationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These have been referred to by Campbell and Pritchard (1976, p. 65) as facilitating and inhibiting conditions not under the control of the individual. Although these factors have received attention in the areas of personality (Barrick and Mount 1993;Frink and Ferris, in press;Robie and Ryan, in press) and human factors (see Chapanis 1976; Howell 1991 for reviews), contextual factors in the organization have received little research attention in I/O psychology.…”

Section: Organizational Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Review and Extension of Current Models of Dynamic Criteria

Steele-Johnson

Osburn

Pieper

2000

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An important issue in personnel selection and test validation has been the nature of performance criteria and more specifically the existence of dynamic criteria. There is a continuing debate regarding the extent to which performance and validity coefficients remain stable over time. We examine research within work, laboratory, and academic settings and evaluate existing models of dynamic criteria. Building on previous models, we propose an integrative model of dynamic criteria that identifies important issues for ability and performance constructs and discusses how variables related to the task, job, and organization can affect the temporal stability of criterion performance and the ability-performance relationship.

show abstract

The Effect of Factor Analytic Method on the Interpretation of the Changing Abilities Requirements Model: An Example of the Tools-to-Theory Hypothesis

Cited by 2 publications

References 25 publications

Skill decay: A comparative assessment of training protocols and individual differences in the loss and reacquisition of complex skills

Skill decay: A comparative assessment of training protocols and individual differences in the loss and reacquisition of complex skills

A Review and Extension of Current Models of Dynamic Criteria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About