Criterion‐Related Validity of Statistical Operationalizations of Group General Cognitive Ability as a Function of Task Type: Comparing the Mean, Maximum, and Minimum1

The objective of the present study was to investigate the comparative criterion-related validity of different statistical operationalizations of group general cognitive ability (i.e., mean, maximum, and minimum) as a function of task type based on Steiner’s (1966, 1972) task typology. In contrast to recent investigations, we hypothesized that, regardless of task type, the mean of group members’ general cognitive ability would predict group performance as well as or better than other statistical operationalizations of group general cognitive ability. We conducted a laboratory study where 157 four-person groups worked on 4 tasks that conformed to Steiner’s typology (additive, compensatory, conjunctive, and disjunctive). The results indicate that the mean was the strongest predictor of group performance across all 4 task types and, in particular, was significantly stronger than the maximum and minimum on both the disjunctive and conjunctive tasks. Researchers have used different statistical operationalizations (e.g., mean, maximum, and minimum) in investigations of how group general cognitive ability and personality are related to group performance (e.g., Barrick, Stewart, Neubert, & Mount, 1998; Barry & Stewart, 1997; Neuman, Wagner, & Christiansen, 1999; Neuman & Wright, 1999). In these investigations, researchers frequently discuss the importance of task type to the operationalization of group ability. In contrast, ‘Portions ofthe data were collected as part of Bruce Miyashiro’s doctoral dissertation, completed at Texas A&M University and directed by Winfred Arthur. Data for this study were collected when Eric Day was a visiting professor at Ohio State University. Bryan Edwards is now at Tulane University.

[1]  R. Sternberg,et al.  Group intelligence: Why some groups are better than others , 1988 .

[2]  D. Rousseau.  Issues of level in organizational research: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. , 1985 .

[3]  P. Goodman.  Groups That Work (and Those That Don't)Groups That Work (and Those That Don't) by Hackman Richard. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991, 512 pp. , 1992 .

[4]  Wayne F. Cascio,et al.  Applied psychology in personnel management , 1978 .

[5]  J. Hackman,et al.  The design of work teams , 1987 .

[6]  E. Salas,et al.  Shared mental models in expert team decision making. , 1993 .

[7]  R. Kanter.  The new workforce meets the changing workplace: Strains, dilemmas, and contradictions in attempts to implement participative and entrepreneurial management† , 1986 .

[8]  P. R. Laughlin,et al.  Individual versus dyadic performance on a disjunctive task as a function of initial ability level. , 1975 .

[9]  I. Steiner.  Models for inferring relationships between group size and potential group productivity. , 1966, Behavioral science.

[10]  Patrick R. Laughlin,et al.  Group size, member ability, and social decision schemes on an intellective task. , 1975 .

[11]  Dennis J. Devine,et al.  Do Smarter Teams Do Better , 2001 .

[12]  Philip J. DeLeo,et al.  The effects of continuous and partial schedules of reinforcement on effort, performance, and satisfaction , 1980 .

[13]  M. D. Dunnette.  Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology , 2005 .

[14]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. , 1998 .

[15]  Michael J. Stevens,et al.  Staffing Work Teams: Development and Validation of a Selection Test for Teamwork Settings , 1999 .

[16]  D. Eden,et al.  Effects of crew composition on crew performance: Does the whole equal the sum of its parts? , 1985 .

[17]  G. Stewart,et al.  Composition, process, and performance in self-managed groups: the role of personality. , 1997, The Journal of applied psychology.

[18]  G. O'brien,et al.  Effects of organizational structure on correlations between member abilities and group productivity. , 1969 .

[19]  L. Offermann,et al.  Power and leadership in organizations: Relationships in transition. , 1990 .

[20]  Robert M. Guion,et al.  Personnel assessment, selection, and placement. , 1991 .

[21]  Stephen H. Wagner,et al.  The Relationship between Work-Team Personality Composition and the Job Performance of Teams , 1999 .

[22]  Daniel R. Ilgen,et al.  Effects of individual differences on the performance of hierarchical decision-making teams : Much more than g , 1997 .

[23]  Serge Moscovici,et al.  Toward A Theory of Conversion Behavior , 1980 .

[24]  J. H. Steiger.  Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. , 1980 .

[25]  Warren E. Watson,et al.  Member competence, group interaction, and group decision making: A longitudinal study. , 1991 .

[26]  L. Offermann,et al.  Organizations of the future: Changes and challenges. , 1990 .

[27]  J. Levine,et al.  Progress in Small Group Research , 1990 .

[28]  Serge Moscovici,et al.  Studies in social influence III: Majority versus minority influence in a group , 1976 .

[29]  John M. Levine,et al.  Creating the Ideal Group: Composition Effects at Work , 2018, Understanding Group Behavior.

[30]  J. A. Lepine,et al.  Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance: evidence of differential relationships with big five personality characteristics and cognitive ability. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[31]  J. Davitz,et al.  A survey of studies contrasting the quality of group performance and individual performance, 1920-1957. , 1958, Psychological bulletin.

[32]  M. A. Campion,et al.  The Knowledge, Skill, and Ability Requirements for Teamwork: Implications for Human Resource Management , 1994 .

[33]  M. Goldman.  A COMPARISON OF INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP PERFORMANCE FOR VARYING COMBINATIONS OF INITIAL ABILITY. , 1965, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[34]  Dexter Dunphy,et al.  Teams: Panaceas or Prescriptions for Improved Performance? , 1996 .

[35]  Richard A. Guzzo,et al.  Teams in organizations: recent research on performance and effectiveness. , 1996, Annual review of psychology.

[36]  G. Stasser,et al.  Discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: Solving a problem versus making a judgment. , 1992 .

[37]  R. Moreland.  Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. , 1999 .

[38]  Glenn E. Littlepage.  Effects of Group Size and Task Characteristics on Group Performance: A Test of Steiner's Model , 1991 .

[39]  Linda Argote,et al.  Training People to Work in Groups , 2002 .

[40]  Marshall B. Jones.  Regressing group on individual effectiveness. , 1974 .

[41]  G. Neuman,et al.  Team effectiveness: beyond skills and cognitive ability. , 1999, The Journal of applied psychology.

[42]  J. McGrath.  A view of group composition through a group-theoretic lens. , 1998 .

[43]  W. Wood,et al.  Minority influence: a meta-analytic review of social influence processes. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[44]  Matthew S. O'Connell,et al.  Prediction of Mulitdimensional Criteria: Distinguishing Task and contextual Performance , 1998 .

[45]  Walter C. Borman,et al.  Task Performance and Contextual Performance: The Meaning for Personnel Selection Research , 1997 .

[46]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills , 1975 .

[47]  Paul S. Goodman,et al.  Understanding groups in organizations. , 1987 .