A preview of this full-text is provided by American Psychological Association.
Content available from Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
This
document
is
copyrighted
by
the
American
Psychological
Association
or
one
of
its
allied
publishers.
This
article
is
intended
solely
for
the
personal
use
of
the
individual
user
and
is
not
to
be
disseminated
broadly.
Academic Performance, Career Potential, Creativity, and Job Performance:
Can One Construct Predict Them All?
Nathan R. Kuncel and Sarah A. Hezlett
University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign Deniz S. Ones
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Campus
This meta-analysis addresses the question of whether 1 general cognitive ability measure developed for
predicting academic performance is valid for predicting performance in both educational and work
domains. The validity of the Miller Analogies Test (MAT; W. S. Miller, 1960) for predicting 18
academic and work-related criteria was examined. MAT correlations with other cognitive tests (e.g.,
Raven’s Matrices [J. C. Raven, 1965]; Graduate Record Examinations) also were meta-analyzed. The
results indicate that the abilities measured by the MAT are shared with other cognitive ability instruments
and that these abilities are generalizably valid predictors of academic and vocational criteria, as well as
evaluations of career potential and creativity. These findings contradict the notion that intelligence at
work is wholly different from intelligence at school, extending the voluminous literature that supports the
broad importance of general cognitive ability (g).
Many laypeople, as well as social scientists, subscribe to the
belief that the abilities required for success in the real world differ
substantially from what is needed to achieve success in the class-
room. Yet, this belief is not empirically or theoretically supported.
A century of scientific research has shown that general cognitive
ability, or g, predicts a broad spectrum of important life outcomes,
behaviors, and performances. These include academic achieve-
ment, health-related behaviors, social outcomes, job performance,
and creativity, among many others (see Brand, 1987; Gottfredson,
1997; Jensen, 1998; Lubinski, 2000; Ree & Caretta, 2002;
Schmidt, 2002, for reviews of variables that display important
relations with cognitive ability). A particularly powerful demon-
stration of the influence of gcomes from Jencks et al. (1979) who
showed that even with background and socioeconomic status
(SES) controlled, cognitive ability measured at adolescence pre-
dicted occupational attainment. Cognitive ability “is to psychology
as carbon is to chemistry” (Brand, 1987, p. 257) because it truly
impacts virtually all aspects of our lives.
How is it that many people believe that the abilities required for
success in the real world differ substantially from what is needed
to achieve success in the classroom? Perhaps the fact that tests and
measures are often developed for particular settings (e.g., educa-
tional vs. occupational) has perpetuated this myth. The main
purpose of the current study is to evaluate whether a single test of
cognitive ability that was developed for use in educational settings
is predictive of behaviors, performances, and outcomes in both
educational and occupational settings. We first conduct a series of
meta-analyses to establish that the Miller Analogies Test (MAT;
Miller, 1960) assesses cognitive ability. We then report meta-
analyses examining the validity of the MAT for predicting multi-
ple criteria in academic and work settings, including evaluations of
career potential and creativity. The results address the theoretical
question of whether a single cognitive ability measure is valid for
predicting important criteria across domains. In this article, general
cognitive ability and gare defined as the underlying trait that leads
to the well-documented positive intercorrelation observed between
measures of cognitive behaviors. The phenomenon of ghas been
shown to have important, domain-general relationships with
knowledge, learning, and information processing, and the general
thesis of this article is that tests of general cognitive ability or gare
predictive of success in academic and work settings, regardless of
the setting for which they were developed.
Although our thesis and findings may surprise some readers, it
was our a priori expectation that the MAT would be a valid
predictor of a wide range of academic and work criteria, as well as
creativity and career potential. Our prediction was based on the
enormous literature that unequivocally demonstrates the existence
of a general factor of cognitive ability and its broad importance as
a predictor of numerous life outcomes (for reviews, see, Brand,
1987; Gottfredson, 2002). Therefore, this study builds on and
contributes to the substantial body of research already supporting
the nomological network in which the construct of gis embedded.
Nathan R. Kuncel, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at
Urbana–Champaign; Sarah A. Hezlett, Department of Human Resource
Education, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign; Deniz S. Ones,
Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Campus.
Nathan R. Kuncel gratefully acknowledges the National Science Foun-
dation for indirect support for this project through a graduate research
fellowship and the University of Minnesota for indirect support of this
project through an Eva O. Miller fellowship. We thank John P. Campbell,
Marcus Crede, Mark L. Davison, Ates Haner, Lloyd Humphreys, and
Frank L. Schmidt for their helpful comments and suggestions. We also
thank Barton Adams, Brian Griepentrog, Yoshani Keiski, Jeanette Shelton,
David Sowinski, and John Morton for their assistance in gathering the
articles summarized in this meta-analysis and Jennifer Vannelli and Lisa L.
Thomas for their assistance with manuscript preparation.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Nathan
R. Kuncel, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana–
Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820. E-mail: nkuncel@uiuc.edu
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Copyright 2004 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.
2004, Vol. 86, No. 1, 148–161 0022-3514/04/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.148
148