Advertisement

Journal of Business and Psychology

, Volume 34, Issue 6, pp 825–845 | Cite as

The Incremental Contribution of Complex Problem-Solving Skills to the Prediction of Job Level, Job Complexity, and Salary

  • Jakob MainertEmail author
  • Christoph Niepel
  • Kevin R. Murphy
  • Samuel Greiff
Original Paper
  • 288 Downloads

Abstract

As work life becomes increasingly complex, higher order thinking skills, such as complex problem-solving skills (CPS), are becoming critical for occupational success. It has been shown that individuals gravitate toward jobs and occupations that are commensurate with their level of general mental ability (GMA). On the basis of the theory of occupational gravitation, CPS theory, and previous empirical findings on the role of CPS in educational contexts, we examined whether CPS would make an incremental contribution to occupational success after controlling for GMA and education. Administering computerized tests and self-reports in a multinational sample of 671 employees and analyzing the data with structural equation modeling, we found that CPS incrementally explained 7% and 3% of the variance in job complexity and salary, respectively, beyond both GMA and education. We found that CPS offered no incremental increase in predicting job level. CPS appears to be linked to job complexity and salary in a range of occupations, and this link cannot be explained as an artifact of GMA and education. Thus, CPS incrementally predicts success, potentially contributes to the theory of job gravitation, and adds to the understanding of complex cognition in the workplace.

Keywords

Complex problem-solving General mental ability Occupational gravitation Job complexity 

Notes

Funding

This research was funded by a grant from the Fonds National de la Recherche Luxembourg (ATTRACT “ASK21”), and the European Union (290683; LLLight’in’Europe). We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Silvia Castellazzi, André Kretzschmar, Jonas Neubert, and Alexander Patt, who aided in collecting the data reported here.

Disclaimer

Samuel Greiff is one of two authors of the commercially available COMPRO-test that is based on the multiple complex systems approach and that employs the same assessment principle as MicroDYN, and he receives royalty fees for COMPRO. The COMPRO test was not used in this study, but its similarities to MicroDYN are substantial. For any research and educational purpose, a free version of MicroDYN is available.

References

  1. Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M. E., & Boyle, M. O. (2005). Working memory and intelligence: The same or different constructs? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 30–60.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Arthur, W., & Day, D. V. (1994). Development of a short form for the raven progressive matrices test. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 394–403.Google Scholar
  3. Autor, D. H., Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2003). The skill content of recent technological change: An empirical exploration. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 1279–1333.  https://doi.org/10.1162/003355303322552801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Autor, D. H., Katz, L. F., & Kearney, M. S. (2006). The polarization of the U.S. labor market. American Economic Review, 96, 189–194.  https://doi.org/10.1257/000282806777212620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bakken, B. E. (1993). Learning and transfer of understanding in dynamic decision environments. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  6. Barnett, W. S. (1995). Long-term effects of early childhood programs on cognitive and school outcomes. The Future of Children, 5, 25–50.Google Scholar
  7. Becker, S. O., Ekholm, K., & Muendler, M.-A. (2013). Offshoring and the onshore composition of tasks and skills. Journal of International Economics, 90, 91-106.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2012.10.005.Google Scholar
  8. Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining 21st century skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 17–66). Dordrecht: Springer. Retrieved from http://www.springerlink.com.
  9. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Brand, C. (1987). The importance of general intelligence. In S. Modgil & C. Brand (Eds.), Arthur Jensen: Consensus and controversy (pp. 251–265). New York, NY: FalmerGoogle Scholar
  11. Bretz, R. D., & Judge, T. A. (1994). Person-organization fit and the theory of work adjustment: Implications for satisfaction, tenure, and career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 44, 32–54.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1994.1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cadle, Adrienne W.(2012), The relationship between rating scales used to evaluate tasks from task inventories for licensure and certification examinations. Graduate theses and dissertations. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/4296
  13. Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A., & Shell, P. (1990). What one intelligence test measures: A theoretical account of the processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices test. Psychological Review, 97, 404–431.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Cascio, W. F. (1995). Whether industrial and organizational psychology in a changing world of work? American Psychologist, 50, 928–939.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.11.928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Conte, J. M., Dean, M. A., Ringenbach, K. L., Moran, S. K., & Landy, F. J. (2005). The relationship between work attitudes and job analysis ratings: Do rating scale type and task discretion matter? Human Performance, 18, 1–21.Google Scholar
  17. Converse, P. D., Piccone, K. A., & Tocci, M. C. (2014). Childhood self-control, adolescent behavior, and career success. Personality and Individual Differences, 59, 65–70.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.11.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Danner, D., Hagemann, D., Schankin, A., Hager, M., & Funke, J. (2011). Beyond IQ. A latent state trait analysis of general intelligence, dynamic decision making, and implicit learning. Intelligence, 39, 323–334.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2011.06.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Desmarais, L. B., & Sackett, P. R. (1993). Investigating a cognitive complexity hierarchy of jobs. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 43, 279–297.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1993.1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ederer, P., Nedelkoska, L., Patt, A., & Castellazzi, S. (2015). What do employers pay for employees’ complex problem solving skills? International Journal of Lifelong Education, 34, 430–447.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2015.1060026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Frensch, P. A., & Funke, J. (1995). Definitions, traditions, and a general framework for understanding complex problem solving. In P. A. Frensch & J. Funke (Eds.), Complex problem solving: The European perspective (p. 14). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  22. Frey, M. C., & Detterman, D. K. (2004). Scholastic assessment org? Psychological Science, 15, 373–378.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Funke, J. (2001). Dynamic systems as tools for analysing human judgement. Thinking & Reasoning, 7, 69–89.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780042000046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Funke, J. (2010). Complex problem solving: A case for complex cognition? Cognitive Processing, 11, 133–142.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-009-0345-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gignac, G. E. (2015). Raven’s is not a pure measure of general intelligence: Implications for g theory and the brief measurement of g. Intelligence, 52, 72–79.Google Scholar
  26. Gonzalez, C., Vanyukov, P., & Martin, M. K. (2005). The use of microworlds to study dynamic decision making. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 273–286.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.02.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Goos, M., Manning, A., & Salomons, A. (2009). Job polarization in Europe. The American Economic Review, 99, 58–63.  https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.99.2.58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gottfredson, L. S. (1986). Occupational aptitude patterns map: Development and implications of a theory of job aptitude requirements. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 29, 254–291.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(86)90008-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gottfredson, L. S. (2002). Where and why g matters: Not a mystery. Human Performance, 15(1–2), 25–46.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2002.9668082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gottfredson, L. S. (2003). g, jobs and life. In H. Nyborg (Ed.), The scientific study of general intelligence: Tribute to Arthur R. Jensen (pp. 293-342). Amsterdam: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  31. Greiff, S., Wüstenberg, S., & Funke, J. (2012). Dynamic problem solving: A new assessment perspective. Applied Psychological Measurement, 36, 189–213.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621612439620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Greiff, S., Fischer, A., Wüstenberg, S., Sonnleitner, P., Brunner, M., & Martin, R. (2013a). A multitrait-multimethod study of assessment instruments for complex problem solving. Intelligence, 41, 579–596.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2013.07.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Greiff, S., Holt, D. V., & Funke, J. (2013b). Perspectives on problem solving in educational assessment: Analytical, interactive, and collaborative problem solving. Journal of Problem Solving, 5, 71–91.  https://doi.org/10.7771/1932-6246.1153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gustafsson, J.- E. (1988). Hierarchical models of individual differences in cognitive abilities. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 4, pp. 35–71). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  35. Gustafsson, J. E. (2002). Measurement from a hierarchical point of view. In H. L. Braun, D. G. Jackson, & D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement (pp. 73–95). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  36. Guthrie, P., Dumay, A., Massingham, P., & Tam, L. (2015). The relationship between human capital, value creation and employee reward. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16, 390–418.  https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-06-2014-0075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Haier, R. J. (2014). Increased intelligence is a myth (so far). Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 8, 34.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Hampel, F. R. (1974). The influence curve and its role in robust estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 69, 383–393.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1974.10482962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hertzog, C., & Schaie, K. W. (1988). Stability and change in adult intelligence: 2. Simultaneous analysis of longitudinal means and covariance structures. Psychology and Aging, 3, 122–130.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Hoffman, B. (2016). The Changing Nature of Work: Evidence and Implications. Symposium Presentation at The 31st Annual Society of Industrial and Organisational Psychology (SIOP) Conference in Anaheim, CA, US, 14.04. - 16.04.2016.Google Scholar
  41. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. International Labour Office. (2012). International Standard Classification of Occupations: ISCO-08. Geneva: International Labour Office.Google Scholar
  43. Jaskolka, G., Beyer, J. M., & Trice, H. M. (1985). Measuring and predicting managerial success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 26, 189–205.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(85)90018-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jensen, A. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  45. Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor and the design of education. In R. J. Sternberg & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Intelligence, instruction, and assessment. Theory into practice (pp. 111–131). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  46. Jensen, E. (2005). Learning and transfer from a simple dynamic system. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 46, 119–131.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2005.00442.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Judge, T. A., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2012). General and specific measures in organizational behavior research: Considerations, examples, and recommendations for researchers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 161–174.Google Scholar
  48. Judge, T. A., Klinger, R. L., & Simon, L. S. (2010). Time is on my side: Time, general mental ability, human capital, and extrinsic career success. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 92–107.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017594.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Kell, H. J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2013). Who rises to the top? Early indicators. Psychological Science, 24, 648–659.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Kretzschmar, A., & Süß, H.-M. (2015). A study on the training of complex problem solving competence. Journal of Dynamic Decision Making, 1, 1–16.  https://doi.org/10.11588/jddm.2015.1.15455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kretzschmar, A., Neubert, J. C., Wüstenberg, S., & Greiff, S. (2016). Construct validity of complex problem solving: A comprehensive view on different facets of intelligence and school grades. Intelligence, 54, 55–69.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.11.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kvist, A. V., & Gustafsson, J.- E. (2008). The relation between fluid intelligence and the general factor as a function of cultural background: A test of Cattell’s investment theory. Intelligence, 36, 422–436.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2007.08.004.Google Scholar
  53. Leys, C., Ley, C., Klein, O., Bernard, P., & Licata, L. (2013). Detecting outliers: Do not use standard deviation around the mean, use absolute deviation around the median. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 764–766.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.03.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lievens, F., & Patterson, F. (2011). The validity and incremental validity of knowledge tests, low-fidelity simulations, and high-fidelity simulations for predicting job performance in advanced-level high-stakes selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 927–940.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023496.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Lievens, F., & Reeve, C. L. (2012). Where I-O psychology should really (re)start its investigation of intelligence constructs and their measurement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 5, 153–158.Google Scholar
  56. Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. LLLight in Europe Project. (2015a). Complex problem solving: A promising candidate for facilitating the acquisition of job skills. Retrieved from http://www.lllightineurope.com/policy-briefs.
  58. LLLight in Europe Project. (2015b). Enterprises are greatly important for lifelong learning activities. Retrieved from http://www.lllightineurope.com/policy-briefs.
  59. LLLight in Europe Project. (2015c). Synthesis report. Retrieved from http://www.lllightineurope.com/reports/
  60. Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., & Kell, H. J. (2014). Life paths and accomplishments of mathematically precocious males and females four decades later. Psychological Science, 25, 2217–2232.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Makel, M. C., Kell, H. J., Lubinski, D., Putallaz, M., & Benbow, C. P. (2016). When lightning strikes twice: Profoundly gifted, profoundly accomplished. Psychological Science, 27, 1004–1018.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. McCormick, E. J., Jeanneret, P. R., & Mecham, R. C. (1972). A study of job characteristics and job dimensions as based on the Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ). Journal of Applied Psychology, 56(4), 347–368.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. McCormick, E. J., DeNisi, A. S., & Shaw, J. B. (1979). Use of the position analysis questionnaire for establishing the job component validity of tests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 51–56.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.64.1.51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. McGrew, K. S. (2005). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities: Past, present, and future. In D. P. Flanagan & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, test, and issues (2nd ed., pp. 136–181). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  65. McGrew, K. S. (2009). CHC theory and the human cognitive abilities project: Standing on the shoulders of the giants of psychometric intelligence research. Intelligence, 37, 1–10.Google Scholar
  66. Middleton, H. (2002). Complex problem solving in a workplace setting. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 67–84.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(02)00022-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Milkovich, G. T., Newman, J. M., & Gerhart, B. (2013). Compensation (11th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  68. Molnár, G., Greiff, S., & Csapó, B. (2013). Inductive reasoning, domain specific and complex problem solving: Relations and development. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 9, 35–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2013.03.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Murphy, K. R. (1989). Is the relationship between cognitive ability and job performance stable over time? Human Performance, 2, 183–200.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup0203_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Murphy, K. R. (1996). Individual differences and behavior in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  71. Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (1998-2014). Mplus 7.1. [computer software]. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  72. National Research Council (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. (J. W. Pellegrino, & M. L. Hilton, Eds.). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  73. Neal, D., & Rosen, S. (2000). Theories of the distribution of earnings. In A. B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (Eds.), Handbook of income distribution (Vol. 1, pp. 379–427). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Retrieved from http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S157400560080010X.Google Scholar
  74. Nedelkoska, L., Patt, A., & Ederer, P. (2015). Learning by problem solving. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2673990
  75. Neubert, J. C., Kretzschmar, A., Wüstenberg, S., & Greiff, S. (2014). Extending the assessment of complex problem solving to finite state automata—embracing heterogeneity. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 31, 181–194.  https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Neubert, J. C., Mainert, J., Kretzschmar, A., & Greiff, S. (2015). The assessment of 21st century skills in industrial and organizational psychology: Complex and collaborative problem solving. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8, 238–268.  https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2015.14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2010). Human capital and objective indicators of career success: The mediating effects of cognitive ability and conscientiousness. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 207–235.  https://doi.org/10.1348/096317909X414584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Ng, T. W. H., Eby, L. T., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2005). Predictors of objective and subjective career success: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 58, 367–408.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00515.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. OECD. (2012). Better skills, better jobs, better lives. In A strategic approach to skills policies. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  80. OECD. (2013a). OECD skills outlook 2013: First results from the survey of adult skills. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  81. OECD. (2013b). PISA 2012 assessment and analytical framework. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  82. OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 results: Creative problem solving. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  83. Ohlott, P. J. (2004). Job assignments. In C. D. McCauley & E. Van Velsor (Eds.), The Center for Creative Leadership handbook of leadership development (pp. 151–182) (2nd ed.)). San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  84. Osman, M. (2010). Controlling uncertainty: A review of human behavior in complex dynamic environments. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 65–86.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017815.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Raven, J. (2000). Psychometrics, cognitive ability, and occupational performance. Review of Psychology, 7, 51–74.Google Scholar
  86. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998). Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales: Section 4. The standard progressive matrices. Oxford: Oxford Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  87. Ree, M. J., Earles, J. A., & Teachout, M. S. (1994). Predicting job performance: Not much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 518–524.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.4.518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Ree, M. J., Caretta, T. R., & Teachout, M. S. (2015). Pervasiveness of dominant general factors in organizational measurement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 8, 409–427.  https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2015.16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Reeve, C. L., Scherbaum, C., & Goldstein, H. (2015). Manifestations of intelligence: Expanding the measurement space to reconsider specific cognitive abilities. Human Resource Management Review, 25, 28–37.Google Scholar
  90. Rhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P. É., & Savalei, V. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17, 354–373.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029315.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Rocha, M. (2012). Transferable skills representations in a Portuguese college sample: Gender, age, adaptability and vocational development. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 27, 77–90.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-011-0067-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Rohrbach-Schmidt, D., & Hall, A. (2013). BIBB/BAuA employment survey 2012. In BIBB-FDZ data and methodological reports, Nr. 1/2013. Bonn, Germany: Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training.Google Scholar
  93. Rönnlund, M., Sundström, A., & Nilsson, L. (2015). Interindividual differences in general cognitive ability from age 18 to age 65 years are extremely stable and strongly associated with working memory capacity. Intelligence, 53, 59–64.Google Scholar
  94. Sala, G., & Gobet, F. (2017). Does far transfer exist? Negative evidence from chess, music and working memory training. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 515–520.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  95. Salgado, J., Anderson, N., Moscoso, S., Bertua, C., de Fruyt, F., & Rolland, J. P. (2003). A meta-analytic study of general mental ability validity for different occupations in the European community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1068–1081.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.1068.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. Scherbaum, C. A., Goldstein, H. W., Yusko, K. P., Ryan, R., & Hanges, P. J. (2012). Intelligence 2.0: Reestablishing a research program on g in I-O Psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5, 128–148.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2012.01419.x.Google Scholar
  97. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262–274.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work: Occupational attainment and job performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 162–173.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.162.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437–454.Google Scholar
  100. Schneider, W. J., & Newman, D. A. (2015). Intelligence is multidimensional: Theoretical review and implications of specific cognitive abilities. Human Resource Management Review, 25, 12–27.Google Scholar
  101. Schneider, B., Goldstein, H. W., & Smith, D. B. (1995). The ASA framework: An update. Personnel Psychology, 48, 747–773.Google Scholar
  102. Schooler, C., Mulatu, M. S., & Oates, G. (1999). The continuing effects of substantively complex work on the intellectual functioning of older workers. Psychology and Aging, 14, 483–506.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.14.3.483.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. Schweizer, F., Wüstenberg, S., & Greiff, S. (2013). Validity of the MicroDYN approach: Complex problem solving predicts school grades beyond working memory capacity. Learning and Individual Differences, 24, 42–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.12.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Sheridan, J. E., Slocum, J. W., & Buda, R. (1997). Factors influencing the probability of employee promotions: A comparative analysis of human capital, organization screening and gender/race discrimination theories. Journal of Business and Psychology, 11, 373-380.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02195900 Google Scholar
  105. Smart, E. L., Gow, A. J., & Deary, I. J. (2014). Occupational complexity and lifetime cognitive abilities. Neurology, 83, 2285–2291.  https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000001075.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  106. Sonnleitner, P., Keller, U., Martin, R., & Brunner, M. (2013). Students’ complex problem-solving abilities: Their structure and relations to reasoning ability and educational success. Intelligence, 41, 289–305.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2013.05.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Sorjonen, K., Hemmingsson, T., Deary, I. J., & Melin, B. (2015). Mediation of the gravitational influence of intelligence on socio-economic outcomes. Intelligence, 53, 8–15.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.08.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Stadler, M., Becker, N., Gödker, M., Leutner, D., & Greiff, S. (2015). Complex problem solving and intelligence: A meta-analysis. Intelligence, 53, 92–101.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.09.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Stadler, M. J., Becker, N., Greiff, S., & Spinath, F. M. (2015). The complex route to success: Complex problem-solving skills in the prediction of university success. Higher Education Research & Development, 35, 1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1087387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Tharenou, P., Latimer, S., & Conroy, D. (1994). How do you make it to the top? An examination of influences on women's and men's managerial advancement. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 899-931.  https://doi.org/10.2307/256604.Google Scholar
  111. Thornton III, G. C., & Rupp, D. (2006). Assessment centers in human resource management: Strategies for prediction, diagnosis, and development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  112. Tomic, W. (1995). Training in inductive reasoning and problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 483–490.  https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1995.1036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2012). International standard classification of education: ISCED 2011. Montreal, Quebec: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.Google Scholar
  114. Weinert, F. E. (2001). Concept of competence: A conceptual clarification. In D. S. Rychen & L. H. Salganik (Eds.), Defining and selecting key competencies (pp. 45–65). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  115. Wiggins, J. S. (1973). Personality and prediction: Principles of personality assessment. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  116. Wilk, S. L., Desmarais, L. B., & Sackett, P. R. (1995). Gravitation to jobs commensurate with ability: Longitudinal and cross-sectional tests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 79–85.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.80.1.79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Wilk, S. L., & Sackett, P. R. (1996). Longitudinal analysis of ability-job complexity fit and job change. Personnel Psychology, 49, 937–967.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb02455.x.Google Scholar
  118. Williams, J. E., & McCord, D. M. (2006). Equivalence of standard and computerized versions of the Ravens progressive matrices test. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 791–800.Google Scholar
  119. Wonderlic. (2002). Wonderlic personnel test and scholastic level exam: User’s manual. Libertyville, IL: Wonderlic, Inc.Google Scholar
  120. World Bank. (2015). PPP conversion factor, GDP (LCU per international $). Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/PA.NUS.PPP
  121. Wüstenberg, S., Greiff, S., & Funke, J. (2012). Complex problem solving—more than reasoning? Intelligence, 40, 1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2011.11.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Zaccaro, S. J., Connelly, S., Repchick, K. M., Daza, A. I., Young, M. C., Kilcullen, R. N., & Bartholomew, L. N. (2015). The influence of higher order cognitive capacities on leader organizational continuance and retention: The mediating role of developmental experiences. The Leadership Quarterly, 26, 342–358.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.03.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Zinbarg, R. E., Revelle, W., Yovel, I., & Li, W. (2005). Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, and Mcdonald’s ωH: Their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Psychometrika, 70, 123–133.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-003-0974-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Luxembourg, Institute of Cognitive Science and AssessmentEsch-sur-AlzetteLuxembourg
  2. 2.University of LimerickLimerickIreland

Personalised recommendations