ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META-ANALYSIS

The cognitive ability levels of different ethnic groups have interested psychologists for over a century. Many narrative reviews of the empirical literature in the area focus on the Black‐White differences, and the reviews conclude that the mean difference in cognitive ability (g) is approximately 1...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Personnel psychology 2001-06, Vol.54 (2), p.297-330
Hauptverfasser: ROTH, PHILIP L., BEVIER, CRAIG A., BOBKO, PHILIP, SWITZER III, FRED S., TYLER, PEGGY
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 330
container_issue 2
container_start_page 297
container_title Personnel psychology
container_volume 54
creator ROTH, PHILIP L.
BEVIER, CRAIG A.
BOBKO, PHILIP
SWITZER III, FRED S.
TYLER, PEGGY
description The cognitive ability levels of different ethnic groups have interested psychologists for over a century. Many narrative reviews of the empirical literature in the area focus on the Black‐White differences, and the reviews conclude that the mean difference in cognitive ability (g) is approximately 1 standard deviation; that is, the generally accepted effect size is about 1.0. We conduct a meta‐analytic review that suggests that the one standard deviation effect size accurately summarizes Black‐White differences for college application tests (e.g., SAT) and overall analyses of tests of g for job applicants in corporate settings. However, the 1 standard deviation summary of group differences fails to capture many of the complexities in estimating ethnic group differences in employment settings. For example, our results indicate that job complexity, the use of within job versus across job study design, focus on applicant versus incumbent samples, and the exact construct of interest are important moderators of standardized group differences. In many instances, standardized group differences are less than 1 standard deviation. We conduct similar analyses for Hispanics, when possible, and note that Hispanic‐White differences are somewhat less than Black‐White differences.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00094.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_220141723</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>74812158</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4347-4733702806b720e5dffed23efca00138c8c813710466f039462dc96340716ad93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkF1r2zAYhcVoYenHfxC9t_fqI5Ldm-I5iitw5LRWNnIlXEeGpN3S2SlL__1kUno_6UJwdM55eR-EbgjEJJxvu5hIziMxlRBTABIfngAg5fHxC5p8fp2hCQAj0TSh4iu6GIZdMAHlyQR5Ze-NznHxWK2WeKbnc_WoTK5qrA3Oq8Joq38onH3XpbbrUVSLZVmtF8pYnJkZVrNVnlldmazEtbJWm6K-xRleKJtFWVDXta6v0HnXvAz--uO9RKu5svl9VFaFzrMyajnjMuKSMQk0AfEkKfjppuv8hjLftU3YjSVtuIRJAlyIDljKBd20qWAcJBHNJmWX6ObU-9rv_7z54eB2-7f-dxjpKAXCiaQsmG5PprbfD0PvO_fab381_bsj4EaqbudGdG5E50aq7oOqO4bw3Sn8d_vi3_8j6ZZqWdNUhobo1LAdDv742dD0z05IJqfupykce5gtktqkTrJ_4LmDzQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>220141723</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META-ANALYSIS</title><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>EBSCOhost Education Source</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>ROTH, PHILIP L. ; BEVIER, CRAIG A. ; BOBKO, PHILIP ; SWITZER III, FRED S. ; TYLER, PEGGY</creator><creatorcontrib>ROTH, PHILIP L. ; BEVIER, CRAIG A. ; BOBKO, PHILIP ; SWITZER III, FRED S. ; TYLER, PEGGY</creatorcontrib><description>The cognitive ability levels of different ethnic groups have interested psychologists for over a century. Many narrative reviews of the empirical literature in the area focus on the Black‐White differences, and the reviews conclude that the mean difference in cognitive ability (g) is approximately 1 standard deviation; that is, the generally accepted effect size is about 1.0. We conduct a meta‐analytic review that suggests that the one standard deviation effect size accurately summarizes Black‐White differences for college application tests (e.g., SAT) and overall analyses of tests of g for job applicants in corporate settings. However, the 1 standard deviation summary of group differences fails to capture many of the complexities in estimating ethnic group differences in employment settings. For example, our results indicate that job complexity, the use of within job versus across job study design, focus on applicant versus incumbent samples, and the exact construct of interest are important moderators of standardized group differences. In many instances, standardized group differences are less than 1 standard deviation. We conduct similar analyses for Hispanics, when possible, and note that Hispanic‐White differences are somewhat less than Black‐White differences.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0031-5826</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1744-6570</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00094.x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Ability tests ; Achievement tests ; African Americans ; Applicants ; Cognition &amp; reasoning ; Cognitive ability ; Cognitive Measurement ; Cognitive Tests ; College Applicants ; Decision making ; Differences ; Educational Opportunities ; Effect Size ; Employment ; Estimates ; Ethnic Groups ; Hiring ; Hispanic Americans ; Job Applicants ; Job performance ; Mathematical Aptitude ; Meta Analysis ; Minority &amp; ethnic groups ; Minority Groups ; Ratios ; Resistance (Psychology) ; Sampling ; Standard deviation ; Studies ; Systematic review ; Test Bias ; Whites</subject><ispartof>Personnel psychology, 2001-06, Vol.54 (2), p.297-330</ispartof><rights>Copyright Personnel Psychology, Inc. Summer 2001</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4347-4733702806b720e5dffed23efca00138c8c813710466f039462dc96340716ad93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4347-4733702806b720e5dffed23efca00138c8c813710466f039462dc96340716ad93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1744-6570.2001.tb00094.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1744-6570.2001.tb00094.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>ROTH, PHILIP L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BEVIER, CRAIG A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BOBKO, PHILIP</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SWITZER III, FRED S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>TYLER, PEGGY</creatorcontrib><title>ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META-ANALYSIS</title><title>Personnel psychology</title><description>The cognitive ability levels of different ethnic groups have interested psychologists for over a century. Many narrative reviews of the empirical literature in the area focus on the Black‐White differences, and the reviews conclude that the mean difference in cognitive ability (g) is approximately 1 standard deviation; that is, the generally accepted effect size is about 1.0. We conduct a meta‐analytic review that suggests that the one standard deviation effect size accurately summarizes Black‐White differences for college application tests (e.g., SAT) and overall analyses of tests of g for job applicants in corporate settings. However, the 1 standard deviation summary of group differences fails to capture many of the complexities in estimating ethnic group differences in employment settings. For example, our results indicate that job complexity, the use of within job versus across job study design, focus on applicant versus incumbent samples, and the exact construct of interest are important moderators of standardized group differences. In many instances, standardized group differences are less than 1 standard deviation. We conduct similar analyses for Hispanics, when possible, and note that Hispanic‐White differences are somewhat less than Black‐White differences.</description><subject>Ability tests</subject><subject>Achievement tests</subject><subject>African Americans</subject><subject>Applicants</subject><subject>Cognition &amp; reasoning</subject><subject>Cognitive ability</subject><subject>Cognitive Measurement</subject><subject>Cognitive Tests</subject><subject>College Applicants</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Differences</subject><subject>Educational Opportunities</subject><subject>Effect Size</subject><subject>Employment</subject><subject>Estimates</subject><subject>Ethnic Groups</subject><subject>Hiring</subject><subject>Hispanic Americans</subject><subject>Job Applicants</subject><subject>Job performance</subject><subject>Mathematical Aptitude</subject><subject>Meta Analysis</subject><subject>Minority &amp; ethnic groups</subject><subject>Minority Groups</subject><subject>Ratios</subject><subject>Resistance (Psychology)</subject><subject>Sampling</subject><subject>Standard deviation</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Test Bias</subject><subject>Whites</subject><issn>0031-5826</issn><issn>1744-6570</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqVkF1r2zAYhcVoYenHfxC9t_fqI5Ldm-I5iitw5LRWNnIlXEeGpN3S2SlL__1kUno_6UJwdM55eR-EbgjEJJxvu5hIziMxlRBTABIfngAg5fHxC5p8fp2hCQAj0TSh4iu6GIZdMAHlyQR5Ze-NznHxWK2WeKbnc_WoTK5qrA3Oq8Joq38onH3XpbbrUVSLZVmtF8pYnJkZVrNVnlldmazEtbJWm6K-xRleKJtFWVDXta6v0HnXvAz--uO9RKu5svl9VFaFzrMyajnjMuKSMQk0AfEkKfjppuv8hjLftU3YjSVtuIRJAlyIDljKBd20qWAcJBHNJmWX6ObU-9rv_7z54eB2-7f-dxjpKAXCiaQsmG5PprbfD0PvO_fab381_bsj4EaqbudGdG5E50aq7oOqO4bw3Sn8d_vi3_8j6ZZqWdNUhobo1LAdDv742dD0z05IJqfupykce5gtktqkTrJ_4LmDzQ</recordid><startdate>200106</startdate><enddate>200106</enddate><creator>ROTH, PHILIP L.</creator><creator>BEVIER, CRAIG A.</creator><creator>BOBKO, PHILIP</creator><creator>SWITZER III, FRED S.</creator><creator>TYLER, PEGGY</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200106</creationdate><title>ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META-ANALYSIS</title><author>ROTH, PHILIP L. ; BEVIER, CRAIG A. ; BOBKO, PHILIP ; SWITZER III, FRED S. ; TYLER, PEGGY</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4347-4733702806b720e5dffed23efca00138c8c813710466f039462dc96340716ad93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Ability tests</topic><topic>Achievement tests</topic><topic>African Americans</topic><topic>Applicants</topic><topic>Cognition &amp; reasoning</topic><topic>Cognitive ability</topic><topic>Cognitive Measurement</topic><topic>Cognitive Tests</topic><topic>College Applicants</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Differences</topic><topic>Educational Opportunities</topic><topic>Effect Size</topic><topic>Employment</topic><topic>Estimates</topic><topic>Ethnic Groups</topic><topic>Hiring</topic><topic>Hispanic Americans</topic><topic>Job Applicants</topic><topic>Job performance</topic><topic>Mathematical Aptitude</topic><topic>Meta Analysis</topic><topic>Minority &amp; ethnic groups</topic><topic>Minority Groups</topic><topic>Ratios</topic><topic>Resistance (Psychology)</topic><topic>Sampling</topic><topic>Standard deviation</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Test Bias</topic><topic>Whites</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>ROTH, PHILIP L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BEVIER, CRAIG A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BOBKO, PHILIP</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SWITZER III, FRED S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>TYLER, PEGGY</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>Global News &amp; ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Personnel psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>ROTH, PHILIP L.</au><au>BEVIER, CRAIG A.</au><au>BOBKO, PHILIP</au><au>SWITZER III, FRED S.</au><au>TYLER, PEGGY</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META-ANALYSIS</atitle><jtitle>Personnel psychology</jtitle><date>2001-06</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>54</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>297</spage><epage>330</epage><pages>297-330</pages><issn>0031-5826</issn><eissn>1744-6570</eissn><abstract>The cognitive ability levels of different ethnic groups have interested psychologists for over a century. Many narrative reviews of the empirical literature in the area focus on the Black‐White differences, and the reviews conclude that the mean difference in cognitive ability (g) is approximately 1 standard deviation; that is, the generally accepted effect size is about 1.0. We conduct a meta‐analytic review that suggests that the one standard deviation effect size accurately summarizes Black‐White differences for college application tests (e.g., SAT) and overall analyses of tests of g for job applicants in corporate settings. However, the 1 standard deviation summary of group differences fails to capture many of the complexities in estimating ethnic group differences in employment settings. For example, our results indicate that job complexity, the use of within job versus across job study design, focus on applicant versus incumbent samples, and the exact construct of interest are important moderators of standardized group differences. In many instances, standardized group differences are less than 1 standard deviation. We conduct similar analyses for Hispanics, when possible, and note that Hispanic‐White differences are somewhat less than Black‐White differences.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00094.x</doi><tpages>34</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0031-5826
ispartof Personnel psychology, 2001-06, Vol.54 (2), p.297-330
issn 0031-5826
1744-6570
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_220141723
source Business Source Complete; EBSCOhost Education Source; Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects Ability tests
Achievement tests
African Americans
Applicants
Cognition & reasoning
Cognitive ability
Cognitive Measurement
Cognitive Tests
College Applicants
Decision making
Differences
Educational Opportunities
Effect Size
Employment
Estimates
Ethnic Groups
Hiring
Hispanic Americans
Job Applicants
Job performance
Mathematical Aptitude
Meta Analysis
Minority & ethnic groups
Minority Groups
Ratios
Resistance (Psychology)
Sampling
Standard deviation
Studies
Systematic review
Test Bias
Whites
title ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META-ANALYSIS
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T03%3A34%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=ETHNIC%20GROUP%20DIFFERENCES%20IN%20COGNITIVE%20ABILITY%20IN%20EMPLOYMENT%20AND%20EDUCATIONAL%20SETTINGS:%20A%20META-ANALYSIS&rft.jtitle=Personnel%20psychology&rft.au=ROTH,%20PHILIP%20L.&rft.date=2001-06&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=297&rft.epage=330&rft.pages=297-330&rft.issn=0031-5826&rft.eissn=1744-6570&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00094.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E74812158%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=220141723&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true