Ability

Ability is described as the capability of an individual to solve a cognitive task or intentionally show a certain behavior. In this entry, the term is first compared to other often interchangeably used concepts such as achievement, aptitude, intelligence, talent, and skill and then defined more thoroughly. The entry then deals with the immanent question in ability research—to what extent abilities are innate or shaped by the environment—which is especially important because various disciplines are focused on building and promoting abilities. Finally, the entry provides an overview on how abilities are measured efficiently and used in different settings and describes what is known about the development of abilities over the lifespan.

The term ability is used in manifold ways in everyday language. Hence, a definition and separation from other constructs is challenging. It is hard to perceive the common element between disparate abilities, such as the ability to write a poem, conduct an experiment, or play the violin. Use of the term has been inconsistent not only in everyday life but also in the scientific literature. Thus, there is a high risk of assigning different labels to the same concept or using the same label for different concepts; this dilemma is also known as the jingle–jangle fallacy.

For example, it has been argued that aptitude, ability, and achievement refer to the same object of measurement but differ in their time reference. According to this notion, achievement is the result of past learning and experience, ability describes the present state, and aptitude is focused on future performance. In educational research and pedagogy, still other terms are used: Terms such as competency or proficiency are preferred, because they restrict the spectrum of abilities to the ones taught in formal learning (e.g., as part of the school curriculum); moreover, they are often understood as acquired and malleable, which is the aim of school education.

In the same respect, skills are developed by training and usually refer to more practical or motor abilities (e.g., writing skills or playing the violin). Finally, talent often labels an inherited or an exceptional ability (e.g., musical or artistic talent). The subtle nuances between the ability-related constructs can be seen in their assumed position on the nature–nurture dimension, their perceived modifiability, and the research tradition studying that ability. However, what is also apparent from this short overview of concepts is that the distinctions are neither reliable nor useful, because perceived distinctions should also manifest empirically, for instance, in terms of their assessment.

Assume that your task is to classify existing measures of ability, aptitude, skill, and so on. It will be very difficult to come up with a dependable classification of measures along the dimensions provided earlier (e.g., time, part of school curriculum). Therefore, these terms need to be characterized as “fuzzy” and insufficient when it comes to explaining relations between measures [Page 2]and their underlying abilities. The terms may reflect specific research traditions, but they have only little theoretical or empirical substance. Hence, using ability as a single overarching term might be best to avoid misunderstandings when referring to measures of maximal effort.

...