An individual's job performance ability relies on an array of factors that include but not limited to, physical ability, interpersonal aptitude, and cognitive capability. Cognitive traits such as memory, processing speed, spatial skills, and verbal comprehension have been valued by the traditionalists that evaluate the cognitive ability and link it to job performance in the organization. According to Harder, Rash, and Wagner (2014, p. 257), there are five domains of human ability that are sensory perception, psychomotor, physical knowledge, cognitive skills, and interpersonal competence. According to Harder, Rash, and Wagner (2014), these abilities are the key to a better or poor performance in the organization. From their definition, Harder, Rash, and Wagner (20140, defines cognitive ability as the ability that consistently differentiates individuals on mental skills regardless of the cognitive task or test.
There have been numerous controversies concerning this topic. Some consider the use of cognitive ability test in the organization to select employees as discriminative. However, others also claim that the organization needs the best performers. The cognitive test thus gives them the best opportunity to select such people within the crowd of applicants. The discussion focuses on the concept of cognitive ability as it applies in the workplace. Majorly, the paper highlights the merits and demerits of the cognitive ability tests in addition to the context within which the test may either be appropriate or inappropriate. The discussion concludes by presenting and briefly describing three common instruments of general cognitive ability that people normally use in the assessment of potential job candidates and identification of prospective candidates for promotion.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The concept of Cognitive Ability and Job Performance
Cognitive ability is the foundation of the individual differences that make them outperform each other. Different researchers have had a significant interest in the concept of general intelligence or general mental ability. By definition, general intelligence is the concept that refers to cognitive ability as a single factor. Thus, it depends on the findings that people's performance on different tests of mental strength tends to correlate positively. According to Onyango, cognitive ability is the best predictor of job performance (Pennycook et al., 2016). Further, the authors assert that cognitive skills and ability links to success in tasking taking and performance as well as productivity. It is as a result of such findings that most employers turn to cognitive test to determine the capability of a potential employee to get the job done in the best manner possible.
In any organization, job performance needs skills and knowledge to accomplish it in the best manner possible. During job recruitments and selection, there are a lot of tests such as interview and screening, all to try and get the best candidate. "Cognitive ability tests typically make use of questions or problems to assess a candidate's ability to learn quickly, logic, reasoning, reading comprehension and other enduring mental abilities that are critical to success in various jobs" (Schneider & Newman, 2015).
Merits and demerits of the tests in the workplace
The first advantage of a cognitive test is productivity. The organization is in a position to predetermine the productivity rate of a candidate by using these tests. Such an entity is thus in a better position to recruit the best and the most productive candidate available among the pool of potential employees. Other than that, "tests of cognitive ability have been established to produce valid inferences for several organizational outcomes such as performance and success in training" (Schneider & Newman, 2015). In this sense, these tests have been approved to predict job performance, especially for more complex and complicated jobs. It implies that organizations that use these tests are in a position to recruits the best performer for a particular position. Lastly, the organization also has the advantage of assessing many people within a short period because these natures of tests can be computerized to enhance the assessment of many people within a particular time.
However, numerous disadvantages also come alongside these tests. First, these tests may be discriminative as they deny other people a chance to occupy a position even though they are qualified to take the job positions. Wyer Jr (2019) further asserts that these tests sometimes give inaccurate outcome mostly with races and gender factors in consideration. That is, non-minorities predictably score one standard deviation higher than minorities, which results in adverse impact. Additionally," males and females differences in ability scores also negatively impact the scores of the female applicant" (Pennycook et al., 2016). Lastly, these tests are time-consuming and are generally not considered as the best way to assess the people's capabilities to perform better in particular job positions.
Circumstances when Using a Test of Cognitive Ability in the Workplace Would Be Appropriate and When Not Appropriate
Tests for cognitive ability are essential or appropriate for an organization as long as they aid the entity achieves its specific objectives. In this sense, these tests are necessary when an entity can use them to assess an individual's job performances and come up with strategies to help then boost their performance. Further, these tests are appropriate to an organization in a situation where it needs to use the tests to meet specific performance for a job. For instance, there are situations where the organization has no choice but to make the right decision for a particular job position and context. In such cases, there is no need to gamble but to select the best performing employee out of the rest. In this sense, the cognitive ability tests are the best predictors of whoever the organization can select to accomplish such a task. Notable, selecting a top candidate in some job position links with the ability for great improvements or productivity. Finally, the use of tests for cognitive ability is also appropriate in circumstances where the organization must select or identify the best candidate for promotion. In this sense, the test for cognitive ability increases fairness and objective selection for the firm to promote a new person to a more complex position within an entity.
However, there are some situations where relying on cognitive ability tests may not be the appropriate decision for the organization. For instance, it is not appropriate to rely on these tests in a situation where the result may be discriminatory to some employees. There are situations where the outcomes of the test are unfair to some candidate with specific demographic traits. In such cases, using these tests may not be appropriate. Further, it would be inappropriate for an organization to rely on these tests in situations where the result is less objective or do not result to fair results to all employees (Pennycook et al., 2016). Besides, it would not be appropriate for the organization to use the cognitive ability tests situations where it would plunge the organization into some legal issues. For instance, Title IV of the constitution demands that an organization must not discriminate any employee based on race, gender, and or age. In a situation where these tests would result in discrimination of any kind, it would lead in a legal issue, and thus, it would be inappropriate for the organization (Schneider & Newman, 2015).
The Potential Adverse Impacts That Might Affect the Results of Such Tests of Cognitive Ability
Lack of validity and reliability of the cognitive tests are some of the issues that may impact on the test outcome. As reported by Harder, Rash & Wagner (2014), "it has been observed since the 1920's that different applications of the same general cognitive ability test resulted in different validity results. It means the magnitude of the relationship between the test and job performance varied" (Pennycook et al., 2016). In this case, the issue of reliability of cognitive test comes to question. In these cases, the authors suspect that some environmental factors define the outcome of job performance in one place that differs from other places when people apply the tests in both cases. Persons refer to this speculation as a situational hypothesis. Other scholars also found that the result of the test was somehow inconstant when applied to different people from diverse ethnic and racial background. Other situations such as random sampling error are the reason behind the inconsistent results when the tests are applied. Range restrictions are also other factors that are mentioned to result to result in inconsistency when using these natures of tests (Román-González, Pérez-González, & Jiménez-Fernández, C. (2017).
Instruments of Assessment of General Cognitive Ability
There are numerous instruments that an employer can use to predetermine the cognitive ability of an employee to hire the best among them. There is the General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB). The test has nine aptitude scores which include form perception, clerical perception, intelligence, spatial aptitude, motor coordination, verbal aptitude, numerical aptitude, and finger dexterity as well as a manual skill which are used to assess cognitive ability. This test targets all job applicants with no specific education level and demographic traits. "From validation studies spanning over 30 years with a population (N) of 32,124 workers, this instrument was established to have high reliability and validity. With regards to reliability, the GABT was found to have a stability coefficient of 0.81(Corrected) while, in terms of validity, the instruments convergent validity for subtests ranged from 0.50-0.89" (Pennycook et al., 2016). The advantage is that it is valid and applies to the applicant of varied demographic traits. Its disadvantage is the use of the test raises concerns about its vulnerability and discrimination that are links to lower score among the African America and Hispanic Americans. It is cost-effective to administer.
The next test is The Slosson Intelligence Test-Revised (SIT-R). The test evaluates the general mental ability, and people mainly use it for screening candidates. The test assesses numerous domains such as vocabulary, quantitative aptitude, general knowledge, and auditory memory. The proof is valid, and it standardized on 1,854 individuals in the United States. "Calculating the instruments' internal consistency using the Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20) the reliability coefficients determined by age level ranged from 0.88 to 0.97, with a median of .945 indicating a high level of internal consistency, the test-retest reliability was found to be .96" (Pennycook et al., 2016). Its advantages are high validity and reliability score. It targets all candidates with varied demographic traits. It is also a cost and time-effective.
The last test is the Wonderlic Cognitive Ability Test. It assesses you construct cognitive ability, mostly problem-solving skills. It is a 12 minutes problem-solving test that has been approved by many scholars as one of the best of its kind. "The reliability of this test has been examined in many studies with the alpha reliabilities ranging from .82 to .94. The alternate form reliabilities have ranged from .73 to .95, and split-half reliabilities range from 0.88 to .94" (Harder, D. G., Rash, J., & Wagner, 2014). Its critical strengths are that it caters from hiring and visually impaired applicants. It is also language diverse in addition to being cost and time effective. However, it is discriminate to a specific group and thus can result in numerous ethical and legal issues.
In conclusion, it is evident that cognitive ability tests both have strength and weaknesses, and organizations must be careful before deciding to use any of them. Though their use in the organization has become prevalent, it is evident from the discussion that some of them are less accurate, and this raises the issue of discrimination. It is thus critical for numerous factors to be considered by an organization that authorizes the use of such tests to avoid legal problems.
References
Harder, D. G., Rash, J., & Wagner, S. (2014). Mental Illness in the Workplace: Psychological Disability Management. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2016). Is the cognitive reflection test a measure of both reflection and intuition?. Behavior Research Methods , 48 (1), 341-348.
Román-González, M., Pérez-González, J. C., & Jiménez-Fernández, C. (2017). Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? Criterion validity of the Computational Thinking Test. Computers in Human Behavior , 72 , 678-691.
Schneider, W. J., & Newman, D. A. (2015). Intelligence is multidimensional: Theoretical review and implications of specific cognitive abilities. Human Resource Management Review , 25 (1), 12-27.
Wyer Jr, R. S. (2019). Cognitive organization and change: An information-processing approach . Psychology Press.
