I__. - International Military Testing Association

atings for the incumbents given in Table 1 are repeated in Table 2.
Table 2. Comparison of incumbents' mean ability ratings across joo specific
duties and mean overall ability ratings, by job family.
Job Specific Holistic
Mean S.D. 1
Business, Finance & Management Occupations
Verbal Comprehension 4.01 (.77) 2288
General Reasoning 3.99 (.65) 2287
Number Facility 3.22 (.85) 2250
Logical Reasoning ,I 3.59 (.80) 2246
Perceptual Speed 2.57 (.91) 2101
Spatial Orientation 1.96 (.96) 1737
Visualization 2.38 (1.08) 1897
Personnel, Administration & Computer Occupations
Verbal Comprehension 4.12 (.75) 1197
General Reasoning 4.11 (.62) 1194
Number Facility 2.66 (.94) 1155
Logical Reasoning 3.74 (.77) 1174
Perceptual Speed 2.20 t.96) 1048
Spatial Orientation 1.73 (.88) 899
Visualization 2.08 (1.05) 938
S.D. Mean a
4.40 (1.10) 2306
4.13 (1.13) 2306
3.54 (1.27) 2306
3.59 (1.29) 2305
2.72 (1.33) 2306
1.57 (1.29) 2306
1.95 (1.46) 2306
4.51 (1.03) 1197
4.25 (1.07) 1197
3.07 (1.31) 1197
3.59 (1.29) 1197
2.72 (1.33) 1197
1.57 (1.29) 1197
1.95 (1.46) 1197
The average estimate of reliability (Cronbach's alpha) of the ratings across
the six job families was .80 for the incumbents' ratings across duties and .84
for the incumbents' holistic ratings.
There was very high agreement between the incumbents holistic ratings and
the average job-specific duty ratings in terms of relative importance. The
product-moment correlations among the mean ability ratings from the two types
of ratings ranged from .98 to .99 and rank order correlations ranged from .85
to 1.00.
In terms of the absolute importance ratings given to the abilities, tests
of the significance of the difference between the means for -ti-,e two types of
ratings revealed tilat, in all but one case, the pairs of means were statistically
different.
When the mean ratings for both types of ratings were dichotomized into those
determined to be important (again, equal to or greater than 3.0--"Important" on
the five-point scale) and those determined not to be important (less than 3.0
on the five-point scale), the two types of ratings were found to be in agreement
in all but three instances.
Study 3
Data' Collection: As part of the five-section inventory, incumbents were asked
to rate 57 generalized
work behaviors (GWB'S) developed specifically for the 113
professional and administrative occupations (See O'Leary, Rheinstein, and
McCauley, 1990 for a detailed discussion of the development of the GWB's). The
GWB's were rated for relative importance and relative time spent. Incumbents
were first asked to check the GWB's they perform. Then, they rated the ones they
checked using a 5-point relative importance scale ranging from "1 - Unimportant"
to "5 - Crucial" and a 5-point relative time spent scale ranging from "1 - Very
much below average time" to "5 - Very much above average time." Each of the
55