Abstract
This comment argues that an important issue in intelligence research is to identify constructs with validity beyond g, and that non-g residuals of tests represent a promising target.
Highlights
IntroductionI thank Paul De Boeck for the opportunity to contribute a comment to the special issue
I thank Paul De Boeck for the opportunity to contribute a comment to the special issue.My comment provides a short and long answer to the questions posed by Paul [1]
Non-g factors of tests, obtained after removing g, have been found to contribute trivially to predictive validity. These findings suggest that the predictive validity of tests is attributable to “not much more than g” [3]
Summary
I thank Paul De Boeck for the opportunity to contribute a comment to the special issue. Non-g factors of tests, obtained after removing g, have been found to contribute trivially to predictive validity. These findings suggest that the predictive validity of tests is attributable to “not much more than g” [3]. In contrast to this claim, non-g factors of some tests, based on non-g residuals, have been shown to predict outcomes beyond g [4,5]. These non-g factors can be obtained with widely used tests (SAT and ACT), and are relevant to theories of intelligence
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call