Validity of Spatial Ability Tests for Selection into STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) Career Fields: The Example of Military Aviation

Quantitative and verbal aptitude tests are widely used in the context of student admissions and pre-employment screening. In contrast, there has been “contemporary neglect” of the potential for organizations to use spatial abilities testing to make informed decisions on candidates’ success in educational settings (Wai J, Lubinski D, Benbow CP, J Educ Psychol 101:817–835, 2009) and the workplace. We begin with a review of the research literature on the validity of spatial ability tests for predicting performance in STEM fields (e.g., engineering, surgery, mathematics, aviation). We address the controversy regarding the extent to which spatial abilities provide incremental validity beyond traditional measures of academic aptitude. We then present results from over a decade of U.S. Air Force research that has examined the validity of spatial ability tests relative to verbal and quantitative measures for predicting aircrew and pilot training outcomes. Finally, consistent with meta-analyses examining pilot training outcomes across several countries (e.g., Martinussen M, Int J Aviat Psychol 6:1–20, 1996), we present results showing spatial ability tests add substantive incremental validity to measures of numerical and verbal ability for predicting pilot training outcomes. Hence, organizations that fail to include spatial testing in screening may be overlooking many individuals most likely to excel in STEM fields. We conclude with a discussion of potential challenges associated with spatial ability testing and provide practical recommendations for organizations considering implementing spatial ability testing in student admissions or personnel selection.