Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) is one of the most frequently used gifted identification tools. In this meta-analytic study, we investigated empirical evidence of the validity of CogAT, in relation to different types of instruments. After reviewing 1,480 studies, a total of 24 with 33 effect sizes were included in the meta-analysis. According to our findings, the average effect size of r was found to be .63 with a 95% confidence interval [.57, .69]. Based on the heterogeneity test, significant variation due to the systematic between-study differences exists among the included correlations. Egger’s test for funnel plot asymmetry also indicates that no obvious publication bias exists in our study pool, which indicates there might not be a serious threat to alter the obtained results with publication bias. The moderator analysis revealed Lohman’s authorship and publication type influenced the effect size differences among studies. CogAT’s overall correlation with other identification tools (.63) might suggest using at least one more identification tool besides CogAT.

中文翻译：

---

荟萃分析评估：调查认知能力测试有效性的证据


认知能力测试 （CogAT） 是最常用的天才识别工具之一。在这项荟萃分析研究中，我们调查了 CogAT 有效性与不同类型仪器相关的经验证据。在回顾了 1,480 项研究后，荟萃分析共纳入了 24 项研究，具有 33 个效应量。根据我们的研究结果，发现 r 的平均效应量为 .63，置信区间为 95% [.57， .69]。基于异质性检验，由于系统性研究间差异，所包含的相关性之间存在显着差异。漏斗图不对称性的 Egger 检验也表明，我们的研究池中不存在明显的发表偏倚，这表明通过发表偏倚改变获得的结果可能不会有严重的威胁。主持人分析显示 Lohman 的作者和出版物类型影响了研究之间的效应量差异。CogAT 与其他识别工具的总体相关性 （.63） 可能表明除了 CogAT 之外，至少还要使用一种识别工具。