Harrison J. Kell

Creativity and Technical Innovation Spatial Ability’s Unique Role

In the late 1970s, 563 intellectually talented 13-year-olds (identified by the SAT as in the top 0.5% of ability) were assessed on spatial ability. More than 30 years later, the present study evaluated whether spatial ability provided incremental validity (beyond the SAT’s mathematical and verbal reasoning subtests) for differentially predicting which of these individuals had patents and three classes of refereed publications. A two-step discriminant-function analysis revealed that the SAT subtests jointly accounted for 10.8% of the variance among these outcomes (p < .01); when spatial ability was added, an additional 7.6% was accounted for—a statistically significant increase (p < .01). The findings indicate that spatial ability has a unique role in the development of creativity, beyond the roles played by the abilities traditionally measured in educational selection, counseling, and industrial-organizational psychology. Spatial ability plays a key and unique role in structuring many important psychological phenomena and should be examined more broadly across the applied and basic psychological sciences.

Who Rises to the Top? Early Indicators

Youth identified before age 13 (N = 320) as having profound mathematical or verbal reasoning abilities (top 1 in 10,000) were tracked for nearly three decades. Their awards and creative accomplishments by age 38, in combination with specific details about their occupational responsibilities, illuminate the magnitude of their contribution and professional stature. Many have been entrusted with obligations and resources for making critical decisions about individual and organizational well-being. Their leadership positions in business, health care, law, the professoriate, and STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) suggest that many are outstanding creators of modern culture, constituting a precious human-capital resource. Identifying truly profound human potential, and forecasting differential development within such populations, requires assessing multiple cognitive abilities and using atypical measurement procedures. This study illustrates how ultimate criteria may be aggregated and longitudinally sequenced to validate such measures.

Life Paths and Accomplishments of Mathematically Precocious Males and Females Four Decades Later

Two cohorts of intellectually talented 13-year-olds were identified in the 1970s (1972–1974 and 1976–1978) as being in the top 1% of mathematical reasoning ability (1,037 males, 613 females). About four decades later, data on their careers, accomplishments, psychological well-being, families, and life preferences and priorities were collected. Their accomplishments far exceeded base-rate expectations: Across the two cohorts, 4.1% had earned tenure at a major research university, 2.3% were top executives at “name brand” or Fortune 500 companies, and 2.4% were attorneys at major firms or organizations; participants had published 85 books and 7,572 refereed articles, secured 681 patents, and amassed

Measuring Relationships between Personality, Knowledge, and Performance Using Single‐Response Situational Judgment Tests

358 million in grants. For both males and females, mathematical precocity early in life predicts later creative contributions and leadership in critical occupational roles. On average, males had incomes much greater than their spouses’, whereas females had incomes slightly lower than their spouses’. Salient sex differences that paralleled the differential career outcomes of the male and female participants were found in lifestyle preferences and priorities and in time allocation.

Spatial Ability: A Neglected Talent in Educational and Occupational Settings

We report two studies that investigate single‐response situational judgment tests (SJTs) as measures of job knowledge. Study 1 examines relationships between job knowledge measured by a single‐response SJT, personality, and performance for museum tour guides. Study 2 extends Study 1s findings with a sample of volunteers using a single‐response SJT about volunteerism. In both studies, personality was related to knowledge, and knowledge predicted performance. In Study 2, knowledge accounted for incremental variance in performance beyond personality, but personality added no incremental variance beyond knowledge. Results suggest that knowledge of effective behavior and knowledge of ineffective behavior are separate constructs. These studies demonstrate the validity of single‐response SJTs and provide evidence that knowing what to do and what not to do are separate domains.

When Lightning Strikes Twice: Profoundly Gifted, Profoundly Accomplished

For over 60 years, longitudinal research on tens of thousands of high ability and intellectually precocious youth has consistently revealed the importance of spatial ability for hands-on creative accomplishments and the development of expertise in science, technology, engineering, and mathematical (STEM) disciplines. Yet, individual differences in spatial ability are seldom assessed for educational counseling and selection. Students especially talented in spatial visualization relative to their status on mathematical and verbal reasoning are particularly likely to be underserved by our educational institutions. Evidence for the importance of assessing spatial ability is reviewed and ways to utilize information about individual differences in this attribute in learning and work settings are offered. The literature reviewed stresses the importance of spatial ability in real-world settings and constitutes a rare instance in the social sciences where more research is not needed. What is needed is the incorporation of spatial ability into talent identification procedures and research on curriculum development and training, along with other cognitive abilities harboring differential—and incremental—validity for socially valued outcomes beyond IQ (or, g, general intelligence).

Testing for Independent Effects of Prosocial Knowledge and Technical Knowledge on Skill and Performance

The educational, occupational, and creative accomplishments of the profoundly gifted participants (IQs ⩾ 160) in the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY) are astounding, but are they representative of equally able 12-year-olds? Duke University’s Talent Identification Program (TIP) identified 259 young adolescents who were equally gifted. By age 40, their life accomplishments also were extraordinary: Thirty-seven percent had earned doctorates, 7.5% had achieved academic tenure (4.3% at research-intensive universities), and 9% held patents; many were high-level leaders in major organizations. As was the case for the SMPY sample before them, differential ability strengths predicted their contrasting and eventual developmental trajectories—even though essentially all participants possessed both mathematical and verbal reasoning abilities far superior to those of typical Ph.D. recipients. Individuals, even profoundly gifted ones, primarily do what they are best at. Differences in ability patterns, like differences in interests, guide development along different paths, but ability level, coupled with commitment, determines whether and the extent to which noteworthy accomplishments are reached if opportunity presents itself.

Automatic Scoring of Monologue Video Interviews Using Multimodal Cues.

This study extended previous research (Motowidlo, Borman, & Schmit, 1997) on antecedents of job performance by testing for independent effects of prosocial and technical knowledge in a sample of 208 medical students. Results show that prosocial knowledge is uncorrelated with technical knowledge and that it contributes incremental variance to clinical performance in Primary Care after accounting for technical knowledge and clinical skill. Findings indicate Agreeableness is an important correlate of prosocial knowledge but not of technical knowledge. Unexpectedly, cognitive ability is not significantly related to either kind of knowledge or clinical performance. These results reinforce the idea that knowledge is a primary determinant of performance and that one type of knowledge, prosocial, has roots in Agreeableness, whereas a different type of knowledge, technical, does not.

Unifying vocational psychology’s trait and social–cognitive approaches through the cognitive-affective personality system.

Job interviews are an important tool for employee selection. When making hiring decisions, a variety of information from interviewees, such as previous work experience, skills, and their verbal and nonverbal communication, are jointly considered. In recent years, Social Signal Processing (SSP), an emerging research area on enabling computers to sense and understand human social signals, is being used develop systems for the coaching and evaluation of job interview performance. However this research area is still in its infancy and lacks essential resources (e.g., adequate corpora). In this paper, we report on our efforts to create an automatic interview rating system for monologuestyle video interviews, which have been widely used in today’s job hiring market. We created the first multimodal corpus for such video interviews. Additionally, we conducted manual rating on the interviewee’s personality and performance during 12 structured interview questions measuring different types of jobrelated skills. Finally, focusing on predicting overall interview performance, we explored a set of verbal and nonverbal features and several machine learning models. We found that using both verbal and nonverbal features provides more accurate predictions. Our initial results suggest that it is feasible to continue working in this newly formed area.

Measuring Procedural Knowledge More Simply with a Single-Response Situational Judgment Test

Vocational psychology is divided between two conflicting paradigms: Trait-based, exemplified by Hollands (1997) theory, and social–cognitive, exemplified by Social-Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT). Scientifically, this division is problematic, as scientific truth is partially determined by consensus among experts (Kuhn, 1970). We propose that the trait-based and social–cognitive perspectives can be integrated—not by subsuming SCCT into Hollands (1997) model as suggested by Armstrong and Vogel (2009, 2010) but by reinterpreting traits in terms of social–cognitive units. SCCT lacks the scope and explanatory power to accomplish this task partially because, as we detail, the theory relies on many trait constructs itself. To accomplish our integration, we introduce an influential theory from the personality literature: The Cognitive-Affective Personality System (CAPS; Mischel & Shoda, 1995). We describe CAPS and highlight its parallels with SCCT. We then explain how trait-based accounts of vocational interests and cognitive abilities can be translated into CAPS units. We conclude by describing how trait constructs can still be viable within the CAPS framework and by calling for empirical research to put our propositions to the test.