- Top of page
- 1. Introduction
- 2. What is the meaning of content validity evidence for cognitive tests?
- 3. What is unique about the prediction inference supported by Schmidt's analysis?
- 4. A recommendation
- 5. Do all empirical results for GCA tests generalize to content valid skill/aptitude tests? A caution
This commentary describes practical implications of Schmidt's (International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 20, 1–13 (2012)) rationale supporting content validity evidence for cognitive tests. These implications include descriptions of the meaning of six key inferences about local, specific cognitive tests, four of which are supported by the traditional methods of content evidence, and two of which are not. These help clarify the important incremental inference from Schmidt's proposed methodology that cognitive tests supported by content evidence will also be predictive of job performance in the local setting. A caution is raised that content evidence does not support a general inference that local, specific cognitive tests will take on all empirical properties of general cognitive measures. An additional job analysis step is recommended to strengthen the linkage between the specific cognitive job skills/behaviors and the more general theory of general cognitive ability.