Predictive Validity of Spatial Ability and Perceptual Speed Tests for Aviator Training

IF 1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED International Journal of Aerospace Psychology Pub Date : 2017-10-02 DOI:10.1080/24721840.2018.1442222
James F. Johnson, Laura G. Barron, T. Carretta, Mark R. Rose
{"title":"Predictive Validity of Spatial Ability and Perceptual Speed Tests for Aviator Training","authors":"James F. Johnson, Laura G. Barron, T. Carretta, Mark R. Rose","doi":"10.1080/24721840.2018.1442222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objective: To present a multistudy examination of spatial ability and perceptual speed tests as predictors of Air Force aviator academic and flying training outcomes. Background: Whereas verbal and math tests are commonly used in academic and pre-employment selection, spatial ability and perceptual speed testing are less common. Spatial ability and perceptual speed tests have been a mainstay in U.S. Air Force aviation training selection batteries for decades, as part of the process for selecting aviation training candidates. Method and Results: Factor analysis (Study 1) of spatial, perceptual speed, and academic aptitude tests shows a 2-factor solution. Meta-analysis results (Study 2) of the predictive validity of spatial and perceptual speed tests relative to verbal, math, and technical knowledge tests show spatial ability, aviation knowledge, and perceptual speed tests are better significant predictors of aviator flying performance, whereas academic aptitude best predicts classroom performance. Incremental validity analyses (Study 3) of spatial and perceptual speed above academic and technical knowledge for academic and pilot trainee flying performance were performed. Although spatial ability lacks incremental validity over academic and technical aptitude, perceptual speed has incremental validity above academic and technical aptitude for predicting pilot trainee flying performance. Conclusion: Perceptual speed, an aspect of spatial ability, can provide incremental predictive validity beyond academic and technical knowledge measures alone for applied science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields like military aviation.","PeriodicalId":41693,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Aerospace Psychology","volume":"27 1","pages":"109 - 120"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/24721840.2018.1442222","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Aerospace Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24721840.2018.1442222","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objective: To present a multistudy examination of spatial ability and perceptual speed tests as predictors of Air Force aviator academic and flying training outcomes. Background: Whereas verbal and math tests are commonly used in academic and pre-employment selection, spatial ability and perceptual speed testing are less common. Spatial ability and perceptual speed tests have been a mainstay in U.S. Air Force aviation training selection batteries for decades, as part of the process for selecting aviation training candidates. Method and Results: Factor analysis (Study 1) of spatial, perceptual speed, and academic aptitude tests shows a 2-factor solution. Meta-analysis results (Study 2) of the predictive validity of spatial and perceptual speed tests relative to verbal, math, and technical knowledge tests show spatial ability, aviation knowledge, and perceptual speed tests are better significant predictors of aviator flying performance, whereas academic aptitude best predicts classroom performance. Incremental validity analyses (Study 3) of spatial and perceptual speed above academic and technical knowledge for academic and pilot trainee flying performance were performed. Although spatial ability lacks incremental validity over academic and technical aptitude, perceptual speed has incremental validity above academic and technical aptitude for predicting pilot trainee flying performance. Conclusion: Perceptual speed, an aspect of spatial ability, can provide incremental predictive validity beyond academic and technical knowledge measures alone for applied science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields like military aviation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
飞行员训练中空间能力和感知速度测试的预测有效性
摘要目的:研究空间能力和感知速度测试对空军飞行员学业和飞行训练结果的预测作用。背景:语言和数学测试通常用于学术和就业前选择,而空间能力和感知速度测试则不太常见。几十年来,空间能力和感知速度测试一直是美国空军航空训练选拔单元的主要内容,作为选拔航空训练候选人过程的一部分。方法与结果:空间、感知速度和学术能力倾向测试的因子分析(研究1)显示了一个双因素解决方案。空间和感知速度测试相对于语言、数学和技术知识测试的预测效度的meta分析结果(研究2)表明,空间能力、航空知识和感知速度测试对飞行员飞行成绩的预测效果更好,而学术能力测试对课堂成绩的预测效果最好。研究3对学术和技术知识以上的空间速度和知觉速度对学员飞行成绩的影响进行了增量效度分析。空间能力对学业和技术能力的预测不具有递增效度,而感知速度对学业和技术能力的预测具有递增效度。结论:感知速度作为空间能力的一个方面,在军事航空等应用科学、技术、工程、数学等领域具有超越学术和技术知识测度的增量预测效度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Qualitative Analysis of General Aviation Pilots’ Aviation Safety Reporting System Incident Narratives Using the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System Effective Monitoring for Early Detection of Hypoxia in Fighter Pilots The Effects of Aeronautical Decision-Making Models on Student Pilots’ Situational Awareness and Cognitive Workload in Simulated Non-Normal Flight Deck Environment The Relationship between Preparation, Impression Management, and Interview Performance in High-Stakes Personnel Selection: A Field Study of Airline Pilot Applicants It Was This Wing Wasn’t It? Identifying the Importance of Verbal Communication in Aviation Maintenance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1