Reducing Black-White Racial Differences on Intelligence Tests Used in Hiring for Public Safety Jobs.

This paper explores whether a diversity and inclusion strategy focused on using modern intelligence tests can assist public safety organizations in hiring a talented diverse workforce. Doing so may offer strategies for mitigating the issues of systematic racism with which these occupations have historically struggled. Past meta-analytic research shows that traditional forms of intelligence tests, which are often used in this sector, have not consistently demonstrated predictive validity but have negatively impacted Black candidates. As an alternative, we examine a modern intelligence test that consists of novel unfamiliar cognitive problems that test takers must solve without relying on their prior experience. Across six studies of varying public safety jobs (e.g., police, firefighter) in different organizations, we found a pattern of results that supports the criterion-related validity of the modern intelligence test. In addition to consistently predicting job performance and training success, the modern intelligence test also substantially mitigated the observed Black-White group differences. The implications of these findings are discussed in terms of how to alter the legacy of I/O psychology and human resource fields when it comes to our impact on facilitating employment opportunities for Black citizens, particularly in public safety positions.

Exploring the Relationship between Cognitive Ability Tilt and Job Performance.

Most of the work examining the relationship between intelligence and job performance has conceptualized intelligence as g. Recent findings, however, have supported the claim that more specific factors of intelligence contribute to the prediction of job performance. The present study builds upon prior work on specific cognitive abilities by investigating the relationship between ability tilt, a measure representing differential strength between two specific abilities, and job performance. It was hypothesized that ability tilt would differentially relate to job performance based on whether or not the tilt matched the ability requirements of the job, and that ability tilt would provide incremental validity over g and specific abilities for predicting performance when the tilt matched job requirements. Hypotheses were tested using a large sample from the General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB) database. Ability tilt related with job performance in the expected direction for 27 of the 36 tilt-job combinations examined, with a mean effect size of .04 when the tilt matched job requirements. The mean incremental validities for ability tilt were .007 over g and .003 over g and specific abilities, and, on average, tilt explained 7.1% of the total variance in job performance. The results provide limited evidence that ability tilt may be a useful predictor in addition to ability level, and contribute to our understanding of the role of specific abilities in the workplace.

Mood and the market: can press reports of investors' mood predict stock prices?

We examined whether press reports on the collective mood of investors can predict changes in stock prices. We collected data on the use of emotion words in newspaper reports on traders' affect, coded these emotion words according to their location on an affective circumplex in terms of pleasantness and activation level, and created indices of collective mood for each trading day. Then, by using time series analyses, we examined whether these mood indices, depicting investors' emotion on a given trading day, could predict the next day's opening price of the stock market. The strongest findings showed that activated pleasant mood predicted increases in NASDAQ prices, while activated unpleasant mood predicted decreases in NASDAQ prices. We conclude that both valence and activation levels of collective mood are important in predicting trend continuation in stock prices.

Examining faking on personality inventories using unfolding item response theory models.

A concern about personality inventories in diagnostic and decision-making contexts is that individuals will fake. Although there is extensive research on faking, little research has focused on how perceptions of personality items change when individuals are faking or responding honestly. This research demonstrates how the delta parameter from the generalized graded unfolding item response theory model can be used to examine how individuals' perceptions about personality items might change when responding honestly or when faking. The results indicate that perceptions changed from honest to faking conditions for several neuroticism items. The direction of the change varied, indicating that faking can operate to increase or decrease scores within a personality factor.

The assessment of attitudes toward individuals with disabilities in the workplace.

The authors conducted 2 studies to develop and test measures that assess beliefs about what constitutes a disability, affective reactions to working with individuals with disabilities, and beliefs about the reasonableness of workplace accommodations, in general and within the context of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). The results of these 2 studies showed substantial differences in what was considered to be a disability. In general, more physical and sensory-motor conditions were considered disabilities than were psychological conditions. Furthermore, the conditions believed to be disabilities did not necessarily match what is covered by the ADA. Gender and experience with individuals who are disabled were also found to predict affective reactions and the reasonableness of accommodations. Implications for organizations are discussed.