Cited by 1,408Cognitive Abilities and TestingIntergenerational and Educational Inequality StudiesLabor market dynamics and wage inequality

Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life

Gottfredson, Linda S.·1997·Intelligence

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0160-2896(97)90014-3

Cites

115 of 115 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 119 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gottfredson, L. S.
Affiliations
University of Delaware (US)
Corresponding author
Gottfredson, Linda S.
Venue
Intelligence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1997-01
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
79-132
ISSN
0160-2896 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2079072929
Cited by
1,408
References
119
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 60 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 67 · 2020: 56 · 2019: 63 · 2018: 71 · 2017: 72 · 2016: 67 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 83 · 2013: 51 · 2012: 75
FWCI
24.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Intelligence (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
Keywords
general intelligence, cognitive complexity, everyday life, employee performance, adult literacy, National Adult Literacy Survey, post-industrial economy, life chances, information processing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review