The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Retesting in selection: A meta-analysis of coaching and practice effects for tests of cognitive ability.
Abstract
Previous studies have indicated that as many as 25% to 50% of applicants in organizational and educational settings are retested with measures of cognitive ability. Researchers have shown that practice effects are found across measurement occasions such that scores improve when these applicants retest. In this study, the authors used meta-analysis to summarize the results of 50 studies of practice effects for tests of cognitive ability. Results from 107 samples and 134,436 participants revealed an adjusted overall effect size of .26. Moderator analyses indicated that effects were larger when practice was accompanied by test coaching and when identical forms were used. Additional research is needed to understand the impact of retesting on the validity inferences drawn from test scores.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Cohen, P., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2014) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410606266 · Cited by 20,737
(1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,252
(1964) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 10,439
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542
(1941) · Research in International Economics by Federal Agencies · doi:10.7312/schw92626-009 · Cited by 4,682
Human cognitive abilities a survey of factor-analytic studies
Carroll, J. B. (2004) · Cited by 3,394
International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Contents of Previous Volumes
(2003) · International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2004 · doi:10.1002/0470013311.oth1 · Cited by 2,762
Meta-analysis of experiments with matched groups or repeated measures designs
Dunlap, W. P., Cortina, J. M., Vaslow, J. B., & Burke, M. J. (1996) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.1.2.170 · Cited by 1,693
The Perceived Fairness of Selection Systems: An Organizational Justice Perspective
Gilliland, S. W. (1993) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258595 · Cited by 1,185
The Structure of Human Abilities.
Vernon, P. E. (1950) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 688
Cited by
The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies.
Uttal, D. H., Meadow, N. G., Tipton, E., Hand, L. L., Alden, A. R., Warren, C., & Newcombe, N. S. (2013) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0028446 · Cited by 1,899
Duckworth, A. L., & Yeager, D. S. (2015) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x15584327 · Cited by 993
Practice effects in healthy adults: A longitudinal study on frequent repetitive cognitive testing
Bartels, C., Wegrzyn, M., Wiedl, A., Ackermann, V., & Ehrenreich, H. (2010) · BMC Neuroscience · doi:10.1186/1471-2202-11-118 · Cited by 444
Freund, P. A., & Kasten, N. (2012) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0026556 · Cited by 277
Carlson, D., Borman, G. D., & Robinson, M. (2011) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/0162373711412765 · Cited by 249
Metadata
- Authors
- Hausknecht, J. P., Halpert, J. A., Di Paolo, N. T., & Moriarty Gerrard, M. O.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2007-03
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 373-385
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W2062306902
- Cited by
- 340
- References
- 55
- FWCI
- 2.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Retesting in selection: A meta-analysis of coaching and practice effects for tests of cognitive ability. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.373
- The paper
- Hausknecht, J. P., Halpert, J. A., Di Paolo, N. T., & Moriarty Gerrard, M. O. (2007). Retesting in selection: A meta-analysis of coaching and practice effects for tests of cognitive ability. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.373
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
