scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life

01 Jan 1997-Intelligence (JAI)-Vol. 24, Iss: 1, pp 79-132
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide evidence that intelligence has pervasive utility in work settings because it is essentially the ability to deal with cognitive complexity, in particular, with complex information processing, and the more complex a work task, the greater the advantages that higher g confers in performing it well.
About: This article is published in Intelligence.The article was published on 1997-01-01 and is currently open access. It has received 1300 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Everyday life & Cognitive complexity.

Summary (1 min read)

Why g Matters: The Complexity of Everyday Life

  • This article provides evidence that g has pervasive utility in work settings because it is essentially the ability to deal with cognitive complexity, in particular, with complex information processing.
  • Few claims in the social sciences are backed by such massive evidence but remain so hotly contested in public discourse.
  • Besides demonstrating that g is important in practical affairs, I seek to demonstrate why intelligence has such surprisingly pervasive importance in the lives of individuals.
  • I then use both the employment and literacy data to sketch a portrait of life’s challenges and opportunities at different levels of intelligence.

WHAT DOES “IMPORTANT” MEAN?

  • The nature of the job and its context seem to determine whether g has any direct effect on task proficiency, net of job knowlege.
  • As is well known in psychometrics (see also Gordon, 1997), the fact that an individual passes or fails any single test item says little about that person’s general intelligence level.

INFLUENCE OF INTELLIGENCE ON OVERALL LIFE OUTCOMES

  • The effects of intelligence-like other psychological traits-are probabilistic, not deterministic.
  • White adults in this range marry, work, and have children (Hermstein & Murray, 1994), but, as Table 10 shows, they are nonetheless at great risk of living in poverty (30%), bearing children out of wedlock (32%), and becoming chronic welfare dependents (31%).
  • At this IQ level, fewer than half the high school graduates and none of the dropouts meet the military’s minimum AFQT enlistment standards.
  • Most occupations are within reach cognitively, because these individuals learn complex material fairly easily and independently.
  • Such as divorce, illness, and occasional unemployment, they rarely become trapped in poverty or social pathology.

THE FUTURE

  • Complexity enriches social and cultural life, but it also risks leaving some individuals behind.
  • Society has become more complex-and g loaded-as the authors have entered the information age and postindustrial economy.
  • Accordingly, organizations are “flatter” (have fewer hierarchical levels), and increasing numbers of jobs require high-level cognitive and interpersonal skills (Camevale, 1991; Cascio, 1995; Hunt, 1995; Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills, 1991).
  • There is evidence that increasing proportions of individuals with below-average IQs are having trouble adapting to their increasingly complex modern life (Granat & Granat, 1978) and that social inequality along IQ lines is increasing (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994).
  • As the military experience also illustrates, however, what is good pedagogy for the low-aptitude learner may be inappropriate for the high-aptitude person.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Grit demonstrated incremental predictive validity of success measures over and beyond IQ and conscientiousness, suggesting that the achievement of difficult goals entails not only talent but also the sustained and focused application of talent over time.
Abstract: The importance of intellectual talent to achievement in all professional domains is well established, but less is known about other individual differences that predict success. The authors tested the importance of 1 noncognitive trait: grit. Defined as perseverance and passion for long-term goals, grit accounted for an average of 4% of the variance in success outcomes, including educational attainment among 2 samples of adults (N=1,545 and N=690), grade point average among Ivy League undergraduates (N=138), retention in 2 classes of United States Military Academy, West Point, cadets (N=1,218 and N=1,308), and ranking in the National Spelling Bee (N=175). Grit did not relate positively to IQ but was highly correlated with Big Five Conscientiousness. Grit nonetheless demonstrated incremental predictive validity of success measures over and beyond IQ and conscientiousness. Collectively, these findings suggest that the achievement of difficult goals entails not only talent but also the sustained and focused application of talent over time.

4,470 citations


Cites background from "Why g matters: The complexity of ev..."

  • ...Talent and Achievement Intelligence is the best-documented predictor of achievement (Gottfredson, 1997; Hartigan & Wigdor, 1989)....

    [...]

  • ...Intelligence is the best-documented predictor of achievement (Gottfredson, 1997; Hartigan & Wigdor, 1989)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined the implica- tions of individual differences in performance for each of the four explanations of the normative/descriptive gap, including performance errors, computational limitations, the wrong norm being applied by the experi- menter, and a different construal of the task by the subject.
Abstract: Much research in the last two decades has demon- strated that human responses deviate from the performance deemed normative according to various models of decision mak- ing and rational judgment (e.g., the basic axioms of utility theory). This gap between the normative and the descriptive can be inter- preted as indicating systematic irrationalities in human cognition. However, four alternative interpretations preserve the assumption that human behavior and cognition is largely rational. These posit that the gap is due to (1) performance errors, (2) computational limitations, (3) the wrong norm being applied by the experi- menter, and (4) a different construal of the task by the subject. In the debates about the viability of these alternative explanations, attention has been focused too narrowly on the modal response. In a series of experiments involving most of the classic tasks in the heuristics and biases literature, we have examined the implica- tions of individual differences in performance for each of the four explanations of the normative/descriptive gap. Performance er- rors are a minor factor in the gap; computational limitations un- derlie non-normative responding on several tasks, particularly those that involve some type of cognitive decontextualization. Un- expected patterns of covariance can suggest when the wrong norm is being applied to a task or when an alternative construal of the task should be considered appropriate.

3,068 citations

Book
01 Jan 1998
TL;DR: A pesar de la relativamente corta historia de la Psicologia como ciencia, existen pocos constructos psicologicos que perduren 90 anos despues de their formulación and continuen plenamente vigentes in la actualidad as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: A pesar de la relativamente corta historia de la Psicologia como ciencia, existen pocos constructos psicologicos que perduren 90 anos despues de su formulacion y que, aun mas, continuen plenamente vigentes en la actualidad. El factor «g» es sin duda alguna uno de esos escasos ejemplos y para contrastar su vigencia actual tan solo hace falta comprobar su lugar de preeminencia en los modelos factoriales de la inteligencia mas aceptados en la actualidad, bien como un factor de tercer orden en los modelos jerarquicos o bien identificado con un factor de segundo orden en el modelo del recientemente desaparecido R.B.Cattell.

2,573 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A survey of factor analytic studies of human cognitive abilities can be found in this paper, with a focus on the role of factor analysis in human cognitive ability evaluation and cognition. But this survey is limited.
Abstract: (1998). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies. Gifted and Talented International: Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 97-98.

2,388 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is concluded that it is possible to improve Gf without practicing the testing tasks themselves, opening a wide range of applications.
Abstract: Fluid intelligence (Gf) refers to the ability to reason and to solve new problems independently of previously acquired knowledge. Gf is critical for a wide variety of cognitive tasks, and it is considered one of the most important factors in learning. Moreover, Gf is closely related to professional and educational success, especially in complex and demanding environments. Although performance on tests of Gf can be improved through direct practice on the tests themselves, there is no evidence that training on any other regimen yields increased Gf in adults. Furthermore, there is a long history of research into cognitive training showing that, although performance on trained tasks can increase dramatically, transfer of this learning to other tasks remains poor. Here, we present evidence for transfer from training on a demanding working memory task to measures of Gf. This transfer results even though the trained task is entirely different from the intelligence test itself. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the extent of gain in intelligence critically depends on the amount of training: the more training, the more improvement in Gf. That is, the training effect is dosage-dependent. Thus, in contrast to many previous studies, we conclude that it is possible to improve Gf without practicing the testing tasks themselves, opening a wide range of applications.

2,024 citations

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a meta-analysis of the cumulative research on various predictors of job performance shows that for entry-level jobs there is no predictor with validity equal to that of ability, which has a mean validity of.53.
Abstract: Meta-analysis of the cumulative research on various predictors of job performance shows that for entry-level jobs there is no predictor with validity equal to that of ability, which has a mean validity of .53. For selection on the basis of current job performance, the work sample test, with mean validity of .54, is slightly better. For federal entry-level jobs, substitution of an alternative predictor would cost from $3.12 billion (job tryout) to $15.89 billion per year (age). Hiring on ability has a utility of $15.61 billion per year, but affects minority groups adversely. Hiring on ability by quotas would decrease this utility by 5%. A third strategy—using a low cutoff score—would decrease utility by 83%. Using other predictors in conjunction with ability tests might improve validity and reduce adverse impact, but there is as yet no data base for studying this possibility.

2,099 citations

Book
01 Jan 1980
TL;DR: Jensen as discussed by the authors argued that standardized tests are not biased against English-speaking minority groups and described the uses of such tests in education and employment, and proposed methods for assessing bias in commonly used I.Q., aptitude, and achievement tests.
Abstract: Illuminating detailed methods for assessing bias in commonly used I.Q., aptitude, and achievement tests, Jensen argues that standardized tests are not biased against Englishspeaking minority groups and describes the uses of such tests in education and employment.

1,917 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, four fundamental task attributes are identified and distinguished from other attributes usually associated with this concept, and a typology of complex tasks is derived from the identified attributes, and the implications of the analysis for both basic and applied research are considered.
Abstract: In an attempt to identify those qualities that make a task complex, four fundamental task attributes are identified and are distinguished from other attributes usually associated with this concept. A typology of complex tasks is derived from the identified attributes. Finally, the implications of the analysis for both basic and applied research are considered.

1,485 citations


"Why g matters: The complexity of ev..." refers background in this paper

  • ...However, the nature of objective task complexity has drawn attention in the fields of information processing, decision making, and goal setting (Campbell, 1988)....

    [...]