A Reappraisal of the Ability Determinants of Individual Differences in Skilled Performance

Summary The prediction of individual differences in skilled performance has been a source of substantial theory and empirical research over the past 100 years. Developments in the statistical evaluation of individual differences data, and progress in the investigation of a wide range of human abilities (such as general, perceptual speed, and psychomotor abilities) have contributed to a better understanding of the role of ability in the acquisition of skills. This article presents a reappraisal of the theoretical and empirical approaches to questions regarding the ability determinants of skilled performance, describes progress that has been made, and discusses enduring problems and future challenges. Key words: ability determinants, skilled performance. Background In the late 1800s, some psychologists turned their attention from private experiences, such as those illuminated by introspection to issues of performance -- specifically in the domain of learning and skill acquisition. One of the first major studies concerned the acquisition of telegraphy skills (Bryan & Harter, 1899) -- that is, sending and receiving messages by telegraph using Morse Code (an archaic task, by current standards of satellite-linked video transmissions and high-speed Internet electronic mail). Although the technology has changed by leaps and bounds over the past century, basic issues of human skill acquisition have not changed much in the same time frame. Indeed, it has frequently been stated that limitations of human sensation, perception, and responding are more important today then they were in the early 1900s, given the increasing speed of human-controlled transportation (automobiles, trains, airplanes). That is, while a performance error in an airplane early in the 1900s might have killed the pilot and perhaps some onlookers, a performance error in a Boeing 747 might result in hundreds of casualties (e.g., see Reason & Mycielska, 1982). It is therefore reasonable to assert that predicting individual differences in performance in the real world may indeed be more important today than it was 100 or so years ago. The history of modern psychology bears witness to this point -- the number of articles published in the past 50 years on the topic of individual differences in performance vastly outstrips the number of articles published in the first 50 years of the century. Given the increased attention of psychology researchers to this topic, it is appropriate to provide a reappraisal of the literature, and to identify what has been learned and what problems and challenges still remain. The aim of this article is to focus on the relations between abilities and individual differences in performance before, during, and subsequent to skill acquisition. A brief historical review will be presented below, but the main focus is on the progress that has been made in the past 30 or so years. Early Research Historical treatises have been presented on the various research programs that have focused on the ability determinants of individual differences in skill acquisition (e.g., Ackerman, 1987; Adams, 1987). In the early part of the 1900s (Thorndike, 1908) to about the 1930s (Reed, 1931), the main focus of research in this field was to answer a straightforward question, namely: Do individuals become more alike or more different in their performance after task practice or training? While this may sound like a relatively simple question, it took until a reanalysis in the 1980s for the controversy surrounding this issue to be settled in any sort of comprehensive manner (Ackerman, 1987). The main reason for the controversy was that in the early 1900s, researchers did not have any standardized methods for assessing the magnitude of individual differences, nor did they have a full understanding of the difference between reaction time (RT) (or completion time) and attainment measures of performance. That is, until the use of the `standard deviation' became standard, researchers used measures that were confounded with mean performance (such as the `mean deviation'). …