A meta-analysis of the relationship between general mental ability and nontask performance.

verifiedrich profile · Journal of Applied Psychology · 2014

Gonzalez-Mulé, Erik; Mount, Michael K.; Oh, In-Sue

10.1037/a0037547 · CrossRef: verified

How this was studied

paradigm: positivistpurpose: explanatory causaldesign: meta analytic synthesisidentification: nonetime: cross sectionaldata: quantitative survey

A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.

analysis: meta analysis · validity (validity): internal unclear · external addressed · construct addressed · statistical addressed · classifier confidence 0.85

What this article reports

The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.

general mental ability gmacounterproductive work behaviours

r = -0.02 · k=35 · grade A · unverified

general mental ability gmaorganizational citizenship behavior ocb

r = 0.23 · k=43 · grade A · unverified

Models this article informs

The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.

In the authors’ words

The article’s own abstract.

Although one of the most well-established research findings in industrial-organizational psychology is that general mental ability (GMA) is a strong and generalizable predictor of job performance, this meta-analytically derived conclusion is based largely on measures of task or overall performance. The primary purpose of this study is to address a void in the research literature by conducting a meta-analysis to determine the direction and magnitude of the correlation of GMA with 2 dimensions of nontask performance: counterproductive work behaviors (CWB) and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB). Overall, the results show that the true-score correlation between GMA and CWB is essentially 0 (-.02, k = 35), although rating source of CWB moderates this relationship. The true-score correlation between GMA and OCB is positive but modest in magnitude (.23, k = 43). The 2nd purpose of this study is to conduct meta-analytic relative weight analyses to determine the relative importance of GMA and the five-factor model (FFM) of personality traits in predicting nontask and task performance criteria. Results indicate that, collectively, the FFM traits are substantially more important for CWB than GMA, that the FFM traits are roughly equal in importance to GMA for OCB, and that GMA is substantially more important for task and overall job performance than the FFM traits. Implications of these findings for the development of optimal selection systems and the development of comprehensive theories of job performance are discussed along with study limitation and future research directions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).

What the literature says about it

Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.

3 supporting2 disputing

disputesFirst, Gonzalez-Mulé et al. (2014) report a meta-analytic summary of the relationship between general cognitive ability and task performance, organizational citizenship behavior, and counterproductive work behavior (CWB), showing strong relationships with task performance, weaker with citizenship, and near-zero with CWB. We note that rating measures can differ in the degree to which they emphasize each of these. Second, Sackett et al. (2017) compared the criterion measures used in meta-analyses of cognitive ability and assessment centers, finding a near-total criterion focus on task performance in the data base on cognitive ability, and amuch broader criterion focus for assessment centers.

Revisiting meta-analytic estimates of validity in personnel selection: Addressing systematic overcorrection for restriction of range. (2021) · CCBYNCND

Ancillary research

Neighbouring works in the citation graph around this article.

Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.