Survey of Opinions on the Primacy of "g" and Social Consequences of Ability Testing: A Comparison of Expert and Non-Expert Views

Autor/inn/en	Reeve, Charlie L.; Charles, Jennifer E.
Titel	Survey of Opinions on the Primacy of "g" and Social Consequences of Ability Testing: A Comparison of Expert and Non-Expert Views
Quelle	In: Intelligence, 36 (2008) 6, S.681-688 (8 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0160-2896
DOI	10.1016/j.intell.2008.03.007
Schlagwörter	Race; Psychologists; Testing; Predictive Validity; Cognitive Ability; Surveys; Expertise; Cognitive Science; Social Environment; Attitudes; Intelligence Tests; Cognitive Measurement; Thinking Skills; Predictive Measurement; Racial Bias; Racial Differences; Evaluation Problems; Testing Problems; Test Bias; Test Use + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Rasse; Abstammung; Psychologist; Psychologe; Psychologin; Testdurchführung; Testen; Denkfähigkeit; Survey; Umfrage; Befragung; Expert appraisal; Kognitionswissenschaft; Soziales Umfeld; Attitude; Einstellung; Verhalten; Intelligence test; Intelligenztest; Racial discrimination; Rassismus; Rassenunterschied; Testkritik; Testanwendung
Abstract	The current study examines the views of experts in the science of mental abilities about the primacy and uniqueness of "g" and the social implications of ability testing, and compares their responses to the views of a group of non-expert psychologists. Results indicate expert consensus that "g" is an important, non-trivial determinant (or at least predictor) of important real world outcomes for which there is no substitute, and that tests of "g" are valid and generally free from racial bias. Experts did not reach consensus on issues such as the degree to which specific abilities or combinations of non-cognitive traits can yield predictive validities comparable to that of "g" alone, the predictive validity of "g" for non-technical work outcomes (e.g., contextual performance), and the nature and implications of race differences in intelligence. Second, a comparison of responses from experts and a group of applied psychologists reveals several discrepant beliefs between these groups, primarily dealing with the primacy of "g," susceptibility of ability tests to racial bias, and the potential value of ability testing. Results are discussed in terms of directions for future research and shared responsibility for various groups of researchers to enhance dissemination of research to relevant audiences. (Contains 1 table.) (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Elsevier. 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL 32887-4800. Tel: 877-839-7126; Tel: 407-345-4020; Fax: 407-363-1354; e-mail: usjcs@elsevier.com; Web site: http://www.elsevier.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10