Psychometric corrections can be crucial for obtaining valid operational results, but concerns are rising about potential overcorrections for general mental ability (GMA) validity coefficients. Our two-part study identifies a source of overprediction: using national norms rather than recent local applicant pool variance for range restriction corrections. Study 1 demonstrates increasing homogeneity in Wonderlic occupational applicant pool variance across four data time waves, suggesting they are no longer interchangeable with the general working population, a divergence attributable to a rise in education. Study 2 employs the Morris meta-analytic approach to gauge the impact of using national norms over occupational ones in range restriction. An analysis of 649 GMA validity coefficients from four time waves of General Aptitude Test Battery and Wonderlic data shows a radical drop in corrected and uncorrected correlations, indicating that historical corrected GMA validity coefficients differ from contemporary ones by up to 16-fold (i.e., an R² of 42.3% vs. 2.6%), and range restriction corrections are now minimal in about 75% of cases. This drop in correlations appears due to the filtering effects of increased education, both due to the demands of the knowledge economy and credentialism, where organizations are using college or university degrees as a proxy for GMA. Credentialism is an incredibly inefficient form of GMA assessment, suggesting an urgent societal need to incorporate selection fundamentals more broadly. Altogether, these results indicate that labor market dynamics have a deeper impact on personnel selection than typically appreciated, meaning that many of our estimates have and will eventually age out. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

对范围限制估计和一般心理能力有效性系数的纵向荟萃分析：更好地解决衰退效应中的过度校正。


心理测量校正对于获得有效的操作结果至关重要，但人们越来越担心一般心理能力 (GMA) 有效性系数可能出现过度校正。我们的研究分为两部分，确定了过度预测的根源：使用国家标准而不是最近的当地申请人库方差来进行范围限制修正。研究 1 表明，四个数据时间波中 Wonderlic 职业申请人池方差的同质性不断增加，表明他们不再与一般工作人群互换，这种差异归因于教育程度的提高。研究 2 采用莫里斯元分析方法来衡量在范围限制中使用国家规范相对于职业规范的影响。对来自 General Aptitude Test Battery 和 Wonderlic 数据的四个时间波的 649 个 GMA 有效性系数进行的分析显示，校正和未校正相关性急剧下降，表明历史校正 GMA 有效性系数与当代有效性系数的差异高达 16 倍（即， R² 为 42.3% vs. 2.6%），并且在大约 75% 的情况下，范围限制修正现在很小。这种相关性的下降似乎是由于教育增加的过滤效应造成的，这既是由于知识经济和证书主义的要求，组织使用学院或大学学位作为 GMA 的代表。证书主义是 GMA 评估的一种极其低效的形式，这表明社会迫切需要更广泛地纳入选拔基本原则。总而言之，这些结果表明，劳动力市场动态对人员选择的影响比通常认为的要大，这意味着我们的许多估计已经并将最终过时。 （PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2024 APA，保留所有权利）。