IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intell/v104y2024ics0160289624000291.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowledge, attention, and psychomotor ability: A latent variable approach to understanding individual differences in simulated work performance

Author

Listed:
  • Mashburn, Cody A.
  • Burgoyne, Alexander P.
  • Tsukahara, Jason S.
  • Pak, Richard
  • Coyne, Joseph T.
  • Sibley, Ciara
  • Foroughi, Cyrus
  • Engle, Randall W.

Abstract

We compare the validity of personnel selection measures and novel tests of attention control for explaining individual differences in synthetic work performance, which required participants to monitor and complete multiple ongoing tasks. In Study 1, an online sample of young adults (N = 474, aged 18–35) based in the United States completed three-minute tests of attention control and two tests that primarily measure acquired knowledge, the Wonderlic and the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT). Structural equation modeling revealed that acquired knowledge tests did not predict simulated work performance beyond attention control, whereas attention control did predict simulated work performance controlling for other measures. In Study 2, an in-lab sample of young adults from Georgia Tech and the greater Atlanta community (N = 321, aged 18–35) completed tests of attention control, processing speed, working memory capacity, and versions of two U.S. Military selection tests, one assessing acquired knowledge (the AFQT) and one assessing psychomotor ability (the Performance-Based Measures assessment from the Aviation Selection Test Battery). Structural equation modeling revealed that attention control fully mediated the relationship between the Performance Based Measures and simulated work performance, but the AFQT and processing speed retained unique prediction. We also explore possible gender differences. Collectively, these results suggest that tests of attention control may be a useful supplement to existing personnel selection measures when complex cognitive tasks are the criterion variable of interest.

Suggested Citation

  • Mashburn, Cody A. & Burgoyne, Alexander P. & Tsukahara, Jason S. & Pak, Richard & Coyne, Joseph T. & Sibley, Ciara & Foroughi, Cyrus & Engle, Randall W., 2024. "Knowledge, attention, and psychomotor ability: A latent variable approach to understanding individual differences in simulated work performance," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:104:y:2024:i:c:s0160289624000291
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2024.101835
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289624000291
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intell.2024.101835?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Burgoyne, Alexander P. & Mashburn, Cody A. & Engle, Randall W., 2021. "Reducing adverse impact in high-stakes testing," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    2. Burgoyne, Alexander P. & Mashburn, Cody A. & Tsukahara, Jason S. & Engle, Randall W., 2022. "Attention control and process overlap theory: Searching for cognitive processes underpinning the positive manifold," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bruner, Emiliano & Colom, Roberto, 2022. "Can a Neandertal meditate? An evolutionary view of attention as a core component of general intelligence," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    2. Haier, Richard J., 2021. "Are we thinking big enough about the road ahead? Overview of the special issue on the future of intelligence research," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:104:y:2024:i:c:s0160289624000291. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.