An experimental investigation of the Social Intelligence Test in relation to general intelligence and employment success prediction

294 55 4MB

English Pages 87

Report DMCA / Copyright


Polecaj historie

An experimental investigation of the Social Intelligence Test in relation to general intelligence and employment success prediction

Citation preview


A Project Presented to the Faculty of the School of Education The University of Southern California

In Partial Fulfillment ?*v

of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Education

by Thomas Cornelius Keedy, Jr. August 1950

UMI Number: EP46399

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI Dissertation Publishing

UMI EP46399 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code

uest ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346

EfL '*/

1C- Pr-oJ

This project report, written under the direction of the candidate's adviser and approved by him, has been presented to and accepted by the Fac u lty of the School of Education in p a rtia l fu lfillm e n t of the requirements f o r the degree of M a s te r of Science in Education.



D ean



PROBLEMS AND P R O C E D U R E S ........................ The p r o b l e m ..................................


Statement of the problem ...................


Importance of the problem





General intelligence .......................


Social intelligence


Definitions of terms used


Employment success ..........................


Limitations of study ..........................


Scope of problem


Weaknesses of the investigation






Organization by chapters .....................


REVIEW OP THE L I T E R A T U R E .......................


S u m m a r y ......................................




Selection of the p o p u l a t i o n .................


Description of the p o p u l a t i o n ...............


Employment success evaluation questionnaire



Intelligence t e s t ............................


Social intelligence test .....................


Administration of tests



S u m m a r y ....................................... IV.


RESULTS OF THE I N V E S T I G A T I O N ...................

35 36

i i i


PAGE Intelligence test r e s u l t s ............


Social intelligence test results



Employment success evaluation questionnaire V.


SUMMARY AND C O N C L U S I O N S ....................

42 46

Summary and results of the investigation . . . General summary



T e s t i n g ................................. Statistical methods

46 46



Analysis of r e s u l t s .................... Conclusions and recommendations




B I B L I O G R A P H Y .......................................


A P P E N D I X E S ..........................................


Appendix A.

Employment success evaluation questionnaire



Appendix B.

Otis Employment Tests 2A* Test 2-Form A


Appendix C.

Social Intelligence Test


Appendix D.

Manuals for directions for social


intelligence and intelligence tests




PAGE Intelligence test scores for population showing the standard deviation and population for each s u b - g r o u p ...............



Number of men evaluated and mean score of questionnaires evaluated by each s u p e r v i s o r ....................................


Means and standard deviations of scores on social intelligence and intelligence tests . .




Coefficient of correlation of ungrouped scores of social intelligence and intelligence t e s t s .........................................



Means and standard deviations of scores of social intelligence test and employment .success e v a l u a t i o n ............................



Coefficient of correlation of ungrouped scores of social Intelligence and employment success evaluation



CHAPTER I PROBLEMS AND PROCEDURES Today In industry, in the armed forces, in the school system, and in fact in practically every sort of organization which must employ the services of fairly large numbers of men, there exists more than ever before a great need to be able to make adequate personnel selections.


major contributing factor of this situation is the increasing cost of labor and the subsequent Increased costs of training men to hold specialized positions. The organizations recognizing this increased personnel selection need have in part turned to the use of various types of psychological tests to assist in the solving of their problem. The basic assumption of all personnel testing programs is that the test or battery of tests will be able to predict employment success more accurately and more quickly than a subjective supervisor’s evaluation.


technique which is usually followed in the setting up of a personnel testing program is first, the testing of numbers of employees who are considered to be successful in a given position; second, the comparison of the test results of new men wishing employment to those in similar positions; and


third, the drawing of subsequent predictive conclusions regarding the future success of those men in those or similar positions.



Statement of the problem.

The purpose of this study

is to determine the relationship of the Social Intelligence Test to general intelligence and employment success evaluation for the purpose of finding the nature and predictive value of the Social Intelligence Test.


determine the answer to this problem, a group of one hundred and fifty-seven men to whom an intelligence test and a Social Intelligence Test had been given was selected.


were sent to the immediate supervisors of the men selected for an employment success evaluation.

One hundred and

fourteen of the questionnaires from the group of one hundred and fifty-seven were returned. The Social Intelligence Test scores were used to determine the social intelligence of the group of one hundred and fifty-seven men.-1-

1 P. A. Moss, T. Hunt, and K. T. Omwake, Social Intelligence Test, Revised Form, First Edition, (George Washington University, Washington, D. C.: Center for Psychological Service, 1930).


Otis Employment Tests 2 A , Test _2— Form A scores were

used to determine the general mental ability or general

intelligence of the group of one hundred and fifty-seven m e n .2 To determine the employment success of the group, a questionnaire was constructed.

The conclusions drawn were

determined by the relationships of the results. Importance of the problem.

Several investigations of

a somewhat similar nature have been made using the Social Intelligence Test, but the results are not too conclusive. Itis felt that ability to predict

employment success

and social intelligence toa high degree of accuracy

is one

of the most important problems facing personnel bureaus today. It would be of great value to school administrators, to office managers, and other employers to know whether or not a prospective employee has the desired level of social insight, is able to cooperate with fellow workers, and is able to deal with people in general on an adequate level.


2 A. S. Otis, Otis Employment Tests 2A, Test 2— Form (Yonkers-on-Hudson, New York: World Book Company, 19^3)•


II. 1•


General Intelligence.

degree of plasticity.

The power to learn, or

The power to solve problems.


capacity to develop skills in abstract thinking.^ 2. that

Social Intelligence.

The combined attributes

an individual can possess which accrue from existing in

asocial environment and which

are expressed and are

observable as judgment in social situations, as recognition of mental states of others, as the extent to which human behavior is observed, and as the extent to which an interest in others is taken. 3.

Employment Success.

The adequate assumption of

responsibility to fellow workers, supervisors, and company. This includes the quantity and quality of workmanship, cooperation, ability, motivation, mental alertness, persistence, and dealing with people on an adequate level.



Scope of problem.


investigation was carried out

3 Edward B. Greene, Measurements of Human Behavior. (The Odyssey Press, New York:19^1) / P • 771.


in Los Angeles, California.

The tests were administered to

one hundred and fifty-seven males, as part of a battery of f o u r .psychological tests, who remained in the hire of the company studied for two years or m ore.

The employment

success evaluation was given to a representative sample of the one hundred and fifty-seven males, the rating being made by the individual's immediate supervisor.

The rated group

consists of one hundred and fourteen male workers, including twenty-three clerks, twenty-six supervisors, and sixty-five salesmen. Weaknesses of the investigation.

(l) There is the

possibility that the questions were not clear to some of the supervisors.

(2) It is possible that individual differences

in supervisors would result in an inaccurate evaluation. (3) There exists the tendency to check the average choice on each factor.

(A) Due to the fact that the company has

several branch offices and a number of departments the only way to have the employees rated was to resort to the use of separate evaluators; there were twenty evaluators. An attempt was made in the construction of the questionnaire to minimize the tendency to check the average choice on each factor by mixing up the choices.

The means

of the evaluation are score totals presented for each evaluator in an attempt to demonstrate the consistency of evaluation.




Chapter I contains a statement of the problem, its worth, and weaknesses.

Definitions of terms are also

presented. A discussion of the literature pertinent to this investigation may be found in summary form in the second chapter. Chapter III contains the experimental techniques and methods used in this study.

There is also to be found there

a description of the tests used and the population sampled. The fourth chapter contains an analysis and a discussion of the results of the investigation. Chapter V contains the summary, the conclusions, and recommendations for further investigation. The appendix and bibliography follow the fifth and final chapter.

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The combined attributes that an individual can possess which accrue from existing in a social environment and which are expressed and are observable as judgment in social situations, as recognition of mental states of others, as the extent to which human behavior is observed, and as the extent to which an interest in others is taken are referred to as social intelligence.

The theory of social

intelligence is rather well presented by E . L. Thorndike .1 Thorndike believes that there are three types of intelligence, abstract or academic, mechanical, and social.

He presents

the theory that academic or abstract intelligence is the ability to understand and manage abstract concepts, that mechanical intelligence is the ability to understand and manage things which exist in the concrete environment, and that social intelligence is the ability to understand and manage people.

These are considered to be separate mental

abilities and it is further stated that whereas it is reasonably simple to establish criteria to measure the

1 E. L. Thorndike, "Intelligence and Its Uses," Harper's Magazine, 1920, 140:227-235*


academic and mechanical intelligence, the establishment of criteria to measure the social intelligence ability is relatively difficult.

However he believed that if something

exists at all it can be measured. It will be found in the following pages that the measuring of social intelligence is a rather difficult thing to do.

The results of experimentation on this topic are not


For example, a few of the researchers concluded

from their investigations that abstract and social intelligence are not separate abilities.

Other experimenters

could not determine whether they were one or two.


others concluded that social intelligence is entirely different from academic ability. M. E. Broom 2 investigated the validity of the Social Intelligence Test.

A college group at San Diego State

Teacher’s College was used.

The group was administered a

Social Intelligence Test, and the Thorndike Intelligence Examination, Series of 1925-1929*

The Social Intelligence

Test scores were studied in relation to the total battery of tests in the Thorndike Intelligence Examination and part III of the intelligence examination.

The study of the paired

2 M. E. Broom, ,fA Further Study of the Validity of a Test of Social Intelligence," Journal of Educational Research, 1930, 22:403-405.


scores revealed that reading comprehension and academic intelligence are important factors in the earning of a score on the Social Intelligence Test.

Broom believed further that

he had established* by his evidence* that social and academic intelligence were two different variables.

He felt that the

error in acquiring a high correlation between two different variables* such as social and academic intelligence* was to be found in the crude attempts of measuring and certainly not in the theoretical conception. Two other investigators* H. E. Garrett and ¥. W. K e l l o g g * 3 working with a slightly different problem which

employed the Social Intelligence Test as one of the various measures* came to the conclusion that the Social Intelligence Test is a test of verbal intelligence as well as social intelligence.

The major efforts of these men were directed

in the field of body types as compared to personality.


their investigation* which used a Thorndike Intelligence Test for the high school level* it was found that it correlated with the Social Intelligence Test fairly well:

A 2 .


the coefficient of correlation was corrected for attenuation

3 H. E. Garrett* and W. W. Kellogg* nThe Relation of Physical Constitution to General Intelligence* Social Intelligence* and Emotional Instability, Journal of Experimental Psychology* 1928* 11:113-29.


it was:


The study was carried out on a population of

one hundred and twenty-three college freshmen. Another investigation^ used ninety-two college women in an attempt to come to some conclusion as to what social intelligence is.

The group consisted of three types of


socially active, socially inactive, and a random


In the group of thirty women who were socially

inactive, the Social Intelligence T e s t ’s mean score was IO 3 .3 .

The group of thirty-two who were socially active

women had a mean score on the Social Intelligence Test of

105 . 101.9.

The third and unselected group had a mean score of The differences between the groups were found to be


In the same study sixteen sorority women were

rated by sixteen sorority presidents, and then the ranks were transmuted into scores.

The correlation coefficient between

the personal ratings and the Social Intelligence Test was .16.

In an attempt to investigate the nature of the Social

Intelligence Test further, twenty-seven subjects were selected who averaged 102 and had a median of 103 on the Social Intelligence Test.

These people were then given the

Introversion-Extroversion Personal Inventory, which is issued

^ V. R. McClatchy, "A Theoretical and Statistical Criticism of the Concept of Social Intelligence and of Attempts to Measure Such a Process," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1929, 24:217-220.


by Colgate University. was

The correlation between the two tests

.53* and the P. E. was .10.

It was held that this

result would have been expected using a general intelligence test* but not a social intelligence test.

The conclusion

was essentially that if social intelligence is an ability it should fit* either by logic or experimentation* into the results of experimentation. An investigation by the author of the Social Intelligence Test^ found social intelligence was being measured by the Social Intelligence Test rather than abstract or verbal intelligence.

F. A. Moss held that the Social

Intelligence Test was designed to measure ability to under­ stand and manage people.

The test had been administered to

twelve thousand persons* the total sample including both industrial and school groups.

It was felt that the traits

which are necessary to form adequate social contacts are the following:

judgment in social situations* memory for

names and faces* keenness in the observation of human behavior* the ability to recognize mental states from facial expressions* the ability to understand motives behind the spoken word* and the possession of information concerning topics of social interest.

5 F. A. Moss* "The Measurement of Social Intelligence*" Psychological Bulletin, 1928* 25:168-169.


The reliability of the Social Intelligence Test was checked two ways.

The same form of the test was administered

to one hundred college students four months apart.


coefficient of correlation between the two administrations was .8 9 . Another method of establishing reliability was used also.

The tests of one hundred and twenty-nine persons were

scored by using the counts of the odd and even items separately.

The scores were then correlated and the Spearman-

Brown Prophecy formula used to determine the reliability of the whole test.

The reliability was .8 8 .

The validity of the test was measured three ways. First, ninety-eight employees in a large Sales Company took the Social Intelligence Test and were rated by their superior on a seven point scale. got along with people. found to be .61.

The scale dealt with how well they The coefficient of correlation was

Second, two hundred and sixty-two college

students were selected on the basis of participation in extra-curricular activity.

It was determined that the mean

score for those with no extra-curricular activity was 99 , participating in two activities netted the students a score of 110 , those students who participated in three such activities had a score with a mean of 112 , and the students who participated In four extra-curricular activities had a mean score of 116.

Third, an investigation was carried on


in a Southern University using women.

The results which

were obtained were substantially the same in all respects as those above.

The investigator has come to the conclusion

that the Social Intelligence Test clearly seems to be measuring something important in determining participation in campus activities and organizations.

Moss also discussed

the positive correlations found in all cases between the Social Intelligence Test and the tests of abstract intelligence.

Several such correlations were enumerated:

Thorndike Intelligence Test and Social Intelligence Test — .42, George Washington Mental Alertness Test and Social Intelligence Test —

.54, McCall Multi-Mental and Social

Intelligence Test —

.25, and Pintner Classification Test

and Social Intelligence Test —


It was concluded from

the above that it is quite reasonable to assume that some general intelligence is being tested, but it is impossible to say that the tests of general intelligence and the Social Intelligence Test are measuring the same thing. The investigators Pintner and Upshall, the other side of the divergent positions.

shed light on

The population

of this investigation consisted of fifty graduate students.

^ R. Pintner, and C. C. Upshall, "Some Results of Social Intelligence Tests,” School and Society, 1928, 27:369-370.


The population was given the Social Intelligence Test, the Gilliland Sociability Test, and a reliable verbal intelligence test. The results were as follows:

the mean found for the

Social Intelligence Test for a college population was 113, and the median found in this particular investigation was also 113 ; the supplied Q 1 value was 98 the obtained value 99; the supplied

value was 123 and the obtained value was

also 123 ; for Q the supplied value was 12.5 and the obtained value was 12.0.

These display an unusually close relation­

ship between the investigation and the printed norms for the test.

The correlation between the Social Intelligence Test

and the Gilliland Sociability Test for thirty-two cases was .14 with a P. E. of .11.

It was concluded, therefore, that

whatever the tests were measuring it could not be the same thing.

A reliable verbal intelligence test was then

correlated with the Social Intelligence Test, and the correlation between them was found to be .68 .

The verbal

intelligence test was correlated with the Gilliland Sociability Test using nineteen cases, and the coefficient of correlation was found to be .12.

The general conclusion

of this investigation was to the effect that if the Social Intelligence Test is actually a measure of social intelligence, then for the selected population of graduate students, the verbal intelligence and the social intelligence correlate


closely in general.

Also administered to the same graduate

students of only forty-eight was a test of the "Community of Ideas" type.

This test was scored on the basis of the

number of common responses.

The correlation between the

Social Intelligence Test and the "Community of Ideas" type test was found to be only .04.

The general purpose of the

"Community of Ideas" type test is to give a rough indication of the tendency to give common rather than individual responses.

The conclusions formulated from the unsuccessful

attempts to correlate the Social Intelligence Test with other possible measures are that perhaps the Social Intelligence Test actually does not measure the ability to understand and manage people or that social intelligence and abstract intelligence are so closely related that it would be unprofitable to attempt to distriminate between them. 7 R. Strang' conducted an investigation along the same lines of research as the previous one, but Strang’s study was more extensive and involved more possible measures of social intelligence manifestations. Data found in the study:

^ R. Strang, "Relation of Social Intelligence to Certain Other Factors," School and Society, 1930, 32:268-272.

16 S.I.T. General intelligence ............... Term marks .......................... Gilliland test ..................... Occupation of father (Barr scale) Nationality ....................... Place of birth ..................... Self-support ....................... ................... Club activities Voluntary work ..................... ............. Experience as teacher Experience as dean ................. Salary .............................. A g e ............................

.44 .29 .17 .13 .02 .03 .02 .11 .03 -.06 -.03 .03 -.15

Sub­ test -2 .15 .03 .00 -.10 -.10 .10 .04 -.04 .02 -.07 -.18

N 157 311 107 311 311 311 310 311 311 290 ill 298 311

The general conclusions drawn from the above data can be summarized as:


If social intelligence were a unique

ability, then the correlation would be lower, or should be lower with the general intelligence score; 2.

One would be

inclined to expect a higher coefficient of correlation with other measures of sociability; 3.

A significant relationship

between the Social Intelligence Test and extra-curricular activities, voluntary work, social and economic background, salary, and experience as dean. The reason that the expectations could not be met could be that social intelligence and general intelligence may be related parts of the whole, and not separate abilities. Or the Social Intelligence Test may only test one part of the social intelligence, that is, the informational and not the functional part.

The lack of correlation could be due to

Inadequacies of measurements in rating the various factors


used as criteria.

A contributing factor may be that of the

population used for the study, which is atypical. In a rather short investigation to determine the o

validity of the Social Intelligence Test, M. E. Broom


two hundred and fifty-eight college students (mostly freshmen) at San Diego State Teacher's College.


validation was determined by statistical comparisons made with the Thorndike Intelligence Examination, Series of 19251929. The data gathered by this investigator is supplied below: n. 1233 (norms) Thorndike 258 " 4181 (norms) S. I. T. md. 258 n — r — Prob. k —

258 .56 Error -- .029 .828


C. of V. (Pearson)


P -E -m

6 l .8 60.3 98.0 98.0

.30 .64

15.46 15.26

25.02 25.31




To find the degree of correspondence between the two tests the coefficient of correlation was corrected for attenuation. r —


The investigator concluded that the two tests validated each other rather well.

M. E. Broom, nA Note on the Validity of a Test of Social Intelligence,M Journal of Applied Psychology, 1928, 12:426-428.

18 Grossvenor^

studied the relationship of the Social

Intelligence Test with a Terman Group (B) Test and class room information.

The population employed was one hundred

and thirty-six girls in the ninth grade of a senior commercial high school. The data is represented below: Correlations of Terman Group (B) Test with: Chronological age Physiological age S. I. Test S. I. Test - part S. I. Test - part S. I. Test - part S. I. Test - part S. I. Test - part S. I. Test - part

1 2 3 4 5 6

-.0978 -.0276 .75 .637 .854 ,82 .46 .37 .93

Arithmetic English Short hand Typing Spelling

.55 .398 .1165 .069 .0582

Correlations of Social Intelligence Test with: Terman Chronological Physiological Arithmetic English Short hand Typing Spelling

age age

.75 -.0 65 .466 .261 .311 .2145 .123 .147

The investigator's conclusions were not exactly on the topic.

However, she concluded that chronological age was

not a good basis for dividing children into classes and that

9 E. L. Grossvenor, "Study of the Social Intelligence of High School Pupils," American Physical Education Review, 1927, 32 :656 .


physiological age is better to use.

More to the point would

be: That the Social Intelligence Test seems to correlate quite a bit higher with physjological age than does the Terman test.

However, the two tests are amazingly similar

in prediction of academic success.

The investigator further

concludes that it would be wise to administer a Social Intelligence Test and a Terman Group (B) Test to all pupils to aid the schools in constructing a better program for their instruction. An investigator10 at Stanford University did a study to determine the relationship of the Social Intelligence Test scores to social ratings.

For this study fifty women

were selected from five different sorority houses.


population was composed of freshmen, sophomores, juniors and seniors.

The tests used were the Thorndike College Aptitude

Test and the Social Intelligence Test.

Ratings were obtained

by sorority sisters on four social traits:

social prestige,

social knowledge, social desire, and ability to inspire affection. The results are indicated below and are:

10 Francis W. Burks, uThe Relation of Social Intelligence Test Scores to Ratings of Social Traits,” Journal of Social Psychology, 1937* 8:146-53-


Ability to Inspire Affection

Social Prestige r PE Z/(TZ

r PE z/crz

.26 .09 -1.7§

Social Knowledge r PE z/






4 13 23

Z9 27 34 28

31 25 16 24 7 9 2

47 13 10 io 1

215 242

*3 ' 7 2 1

195 142 -105





’ ' ^ScOR'ES OF 1437 VTo m e n





w it h

30-MiNUTE T im e L im it

u rr

25-29 20-24 15-19 10-14

*' r 'l ml



yhK r7 0 -7 4

2, 3' -4 *6■,

35r 39 ' : ' 3 6 -3 4 ' •> 2 5 -2 9 ^ t ,^0-24 , J 57.19-


’ : “ 5- 9 '

1 3 -H

15 +


17 , IQ 31 37 19 J " 47 Vr . 33 26


13 5

T o ta l


1 2 ’ 19 16

3 H

4, 13 10

7 10

- 31 65 90

' '' ’ 45 55 66 103 86

77 ' 61 • 48

79 45 27

■ 3i 19 7 7 1 475

19 8 1

15 24 13 15. 3 4 1 1


5 6 8 ■.0 3 3 1


. .

15. 4i 82 96

r 35 198 . ,213 z93 147 96 98 60 34 23 6




C C D+ D D E+ E E -

5 -9

°-4 C o r r espo n d en c e

betw een

T ests



tBe middle score falls. (In Table 2 the 25th tally mark from the Bottom is in the interval 40-44. Therefore this interval is given the rating C.) Assign ratings to the. intervals above and below the C interval as shown. (If necessary to go beyond A + , use AA, AAA, etc.) There­ after,, scores may be interpreted in terms of letter ratings, remembering'that C is “ average.” (The author will be glad to furnish suggestions for making up a table of percentile norms if a need for one is felt.) . -If desired to have fewer ratings, omit the pluses and minuses; let scores between 35 and 49 be rated C, those between 50 and 64, B, etc. If desired, separate tabulations also may be made for applicants of .each classification, such as artisans, clerks, salesmen, foremen, execu­ tives, etc., and each type of applicant rated in comparison with others of his classification. For this purpose it m aybe best to use the same table of ratings for all classifications, but it may be found for example from the separate distributions, that manual workers average C —, clerks average C, foremen average B —, etc. Obviously tables must be made for Test 1 and Test 2 separately, . since Test 2 is harder than Test 1. But scores in all forms of Test imay be entered in one table, and the same for Test 2.


2 .

Table 3 shows the correspondence between scares in Tests 1 and 2, with 30-minute time limits. The table shows, for example, that a score of 35 in Test 1 is equiv­ alent to a score of 21 in Test 2. TABLE 3 C o r r e s p o n d e n c e b e t w e e n S c o r e s in T e s t r . w it h 30-M in u t e T im e L im it s

, . f , ()5r 69 .. ' 60 -6 4 5 5 -5 9 • " •5®-s5 4 '; »,-:-45r 4 9 - . 4 0 -4 4

. .

; 0 - 8 ' " Q -io


II 1

T otal ;T

III hm 11 1

35 -3 9 30 -3 4

School G ra d e C o m pleted ' S co r e


mr ^tr






55-59 5 o- 5 4 45 -4 9

, 38. . 39 28 11 1

A+ A A B+ B B -


70-74 65-69 60-64

,3 . .. 35,. 82 127 :: 169 -

44 3°


1 1


R a t in g

T a l l ie s

75 ....... 75 7 ?-7 4 ' ” '■ 6 5 -6 9 ,: • • 6 0 -6 4 '

M e t h o d o r I n t e r p r e t in g S c o r e s

Score ' I nterv als

S c hool G r a d e C o m p l e t e d S c o re

th e




,14 15 17 19 ■ 20

3 4 5 ,





35 37 38 40 41

21 22 23 24 25

58 59 60 61 62

41 42 44 45 47



43 .44 46 47

27 28 29 30

63 64 65 66 67

49 50 5i 53 55

48 49 5° 5i 52

31 32 33 34 35

68 69 70

57 58 60 61'

53 54 55 56 57

36 37 38 39 40

73 74 75


6 7 8 9 10

21 23 24 26 27

11 12

28 30 3Z 33 34


I3 14 15

17. 18 19 20


T est 2


I 2

7 9 10, 11 12

a nd

A W ord


7i 72

63 65 67 68

C a u t io n

The user should bear in mind that a test of this sort is not infallible. It is only an approximate measure of mental ability. If a group of examinees who have been tested once are tested a second time with an alternative form of the test, their scores will be found to have shifted in order somewhat. Moreover, it must be remembered that mental ability is only one of the factors that make for success on a job. Others are special aptitude, interest in the work, previous training and experience, physical energy, effort and application, personality traits, etc. Some of these can be judged on the basis of an interview and need to be taken into consideration together with the applicant’s score in the mental ability test. For example, a person may have a high mental ability and still fail as a salesman or a foreman for lack of the necessary personality