Cognitive assessments have become a big part of hiring processes today. They’re used to test skills like problem-solving, reasoning, and decision-making—traits most employers want. But recently, there’s been a lot of talk about whether these tests are actually helpful. Are they really giving us the right candidates, or are they missing the mark?
Some say that these tests might actually make it harder to build diverse and creative teams. Why? Because they tend to favour certain types of thinkers, often those from particular educational backgrounds or with access to specific resources. So, do these assessments end up excluding talented people just because they think differently?
And beyond just picking the “right” candidates, research argues that anyone who practices these tests can do well on them. Which, if true, raises an even bigger question: Are these tests measuring real ability, or just how good someone is at taking the test?
That’s what we’re here to explore—looking at both sides, figuring out what works and what doesn’t. Let’s dive into whether cognitive assessments help us hire better and, if so, how we can make them more inclusive and effective.
Are Cognitive Assessments Truly Exclusionary?
Concerns About Inclusivity
Let’s start with one of the biggest criticisms of cognitive assessments: inclusivity. Some argue that these tests don’t give everyone a fair chance, especially people from different socioeconomic or educational backgrounds. Think about it—someone who’s had access to better schooling or resources might perform well simply because they’ve been exposed to similar tests before. But does that mean they’re more capable on the job? Not necessarily.
The concern here is that cognitive tests might unintentionally favour people who think a certain way or come from certain environments. If that’s the case, how can we say we’re truly hiring the best talent?
Beyond Gender and Race
When we think about diversity, it’s easy to focus on gender and race. But there’s a whole other layer to consider: cognitive diversity. This is about how people think, solve problems, and approach challenges. And here’s where the concern comes in—traditional cognitive tests don’t always capture this kind of diversity. In fact, they can sometimes lead to a homogeneous candidate pool, even if that pool is diverse in terms of race or gender. If cognitive tests lead to hiring candidates who all think alike, no matter their background, then are we really building a diverse team?
This is where we, at PerspectAI, take a different approach. It’s not just about the games or tests themselves but about how they’re applied. The way organizations use the scoring process matters. Many platforms, including ours, score candidates based on how existing high performers have done on the same assessments. But here’s the key: companies have control over how they interpret and use those scores.
For example, let’s say a candidate scores lower on cognitive traits but excels in personality traits like adaptability or social intelligence—traits that might be crucial for a specific role. Organizations can choose to prioritize those personality scores if that’s what aligns with their needs. It’s not about being restrictive but about giving companies flexibility.
The goal isn’t to create a standardized “ideal candidate” that everyone must fit into, but to provide data that helps organizations make more informed, nuanced decisions.
Designing for Inclusivity
The key is in the design. By creating tasks that are less dependent on language, culture, or prior experience, we can make cognitive assessments more inclusive. This means avoiding questions that rely on specific knowledge or contexts, and instead focusing on how people think. A well-designed game can level the playing field, letting candidates demonstrate their problem-solving and reasoning skills without bias.
So, while the criticism is valid, it’s also possible to design assessments that overcome these barriers. When done thoughtfully, cognitive tests can actually support inclusivity, rather than hinder it.
Holden and Tanenbaum (2023) dive deep into the topics of equity and fairness in intelligence and cognitive testing. For a deeper understanding, their work is worth exploring.
The Role of Cognitive Assessments in Fostering Creativity
Challenging the Notion of ‘Conformity’
One common argument against cognitive assessments is that they force people to think in rigid, conventional ways, favouring conformity over creativity. But is that really true? It depends on how the tests are designed. Traditional assessments might focus on logic and reasoning in a way that feels rigid, but modern game-based assessments are different. They can measure things like cognitive flexibility—how well someone can switch between different ideas or adapt to new situations.
This is huge for creativity. Creative thinkers aren’t always the ones who follow a straight path to a solution. They’re the ones who jump from one idea to another, finding connections that others might miss. A well-designed cognitive assessment can actually capture that.
Expanding Cognitive Focus
So, how does this work? Today’s cognitive assessments, especially the game-based ones, are more dynamic. They don’t just test whether someone can follow a set of rules—they see how people solve problems when the rules change or when they face something unexpected. This shift in focus allows us to measure traits like abstract reasoning and cognitive flexibility, which are core components of creativity.
Think tasks where someone has to figure out a pattern, but the pattern keeps changing. Or a problem that doesn’t have a single right answer but requires thinking through different approaches. These types of tasks are designed to measure not just how someone follows rules but how they innovate and adapt—traits essential for creativity.
Case Example
Let’s take the example of a game that measures cognitive flexibility. It challenges players to switch between tasks or strategies when the rules or objectives change. Someone who performs well in this game shows that they can adapt quickly, make connections between different ideas, and shift their approach based on new information. These are the same skills needed to excel in fields like product development, marketing, or even leadership—any role where the ability to think on your feet is critical.
Someone who shows high cognitive flexibility could bring value to any domain where adaptability is key, from tech start-ups to creative industries and even highly regulated sectors like finance or healthcare.
By focusing on how candidates handle change and ambiguity, cognitive tests can actually help identify those who will thrive in diverse, evolving environments. It’s not just about being good at the test, it’s about being ready for the demands of modern work.
The Limitations of Cognitive Tests for Experienced Candidates
The Skill Gap
Cognitive assessments are great at measuring raw abilities like problem-solving or reasoning. But when it comes to experienced professionals, things get a little more complicated. Why? Because cognitive tests often miss something crucial—practical, real-world skills that come from years of experience. For example, a seasoned sales manager might not score as high in a general abstract reasoning test, but they have an in-depth understanding of the market, strong client relationships, and a knack for closing deals. These are skills that a test, no matter how well-designed, might not fully capture.
It’s important to recognize this gap. The longer someone has been in the field, the more their value comes from experience and context-specific knowledge. And that’s something that a purely cognitive test won’t show.
Real-World Context Matters
Experience brings a lot to the table – things like strategic thinking, judgment in real-world situations, and the ability to navigate complex problems over time. Cognitive assessments don’t always reflect this kind of practical intelligence. In fact, many experienced candidates have built up expertise that allows them to make decisions faster and more effectively, without needing to rely on the types of logical reasoning that cognitive tests often measure.
This raises a valid concern: If cognitive tests don’t account for these real-world skills, are they really the best way to evaluate experienced professionals?
The answer lies in balance. Cognitive tests alone might not be enough for evaluating someone with years of experience. But when combined with other tools—like work simulations, case studies, or in-depth interviews—they can be part of a more complete picture. The key is not to rely solely on one assessment method but to integrate multiple ways of evaluating both cognitive ability and real-world expertise. This way, we can get a clearer understanding of how a candidate will perform in complex environments.
Test Familiarity and ‘Gaming the System’
Then there’s the issue of test familiarity. Anyone can improve their score by practicing these types of assessments. If you’ve taken enough problem-solving or reasoning tests, you start to recognize patterns, and that can lead to better scores—not necessarily because you’re more skilled, but because you’re more practiced.
For experienced candidates, who may not have the time or interest to “game the system,” this presents a real problem. The concern here is that these tests end up rewarding people who are good at taking tests, rather than those who have developed the skills needed to perform well on the job.
So, while cognitive assessments are useful, they may not always give a full picture of an experienced candidate’s ability to succeed in a real-world environment.
So, How Can Cognitive Assessments Be Made More Effective?
Combining Cognitive Tests with Real-World Simulations
Relying only on cognitive tests to pick the right candidate can fall short, especially for senior or experienced roles. So, what’s the solution? Combine cognitive tests with real-world simulations or situational judgement tests. They mimic actual job challenges, providing a more accurate way to see how someone will perform on the job.
For example, a sales manager might be tested on planning a strategy or negotiating with a virtual client—tasks that go beyond general reasoning. By integrating cognitive assessments with these practical exercises, we can get a fuller picture of both mental agility and on-the-ground performance.
Tailoring for Experience Levels
It’s also important to adjust the focus of these assessments based on the candidate’s experience. For entry-level roles, testing basic cognitive traits like memory, reasoning, or problem-solving can be helpful. But for experienced candidates, assessments should shift toward more complex tasks—like strategic planning, decision-making or risk-taking. Tailoring the tests this way ensures that we’re not just measuring raw ability but also the skills that have developed over time through experience. The goal is to match the assessment to the role, not take a one-size-fits-all approach.
Game-Based Assessments as a Tool
Game-based assessments can bridge the gap. They go beyond traditional tests by integrating cognitive challenges with scenarios that mirror real-world tasks. For instance, PerspectAI’s games don’t just measure logical reasoning—they also test decision-making, resource optimization, and strategic planning. These kinds of games are useful because they tap into both cognitive flexibility and job-relevant skills at the same time. By making assessments more engaging and relevant to the job, game-based tools can help identify candidates who are also capable of handling job-specific challenges.
Cognitive assessments become far more effective when they’re part of a bigger toolkit. By pairing them with simulations and tailoring them to experience levels, we can make smarter, more inclusive hiring decisions.
The Future of Cognitive Tests in Hiring
Moving Towards More Inclusive Assessments
Cognitive assessments are evolving. While they’ve traditionally been seen as rigid or exclusive, the shift toward game-based assessments and more inclusive designs is promising. These tools are now being used to measure a broader range of abilities, from creativity and cognitive flexibility to practical problem-solving. The future of these tests lies in how well they can adapt to the demands of modern work environments and the diverse talent pool companies need to thrive.
Building a Complete Picture
Incorporating real-world tasks, simulations, and a focus on cognitive diversity is the way forward. Hiring isn’t just about raw intelligence—it’s about finding candidates who can think critically, adapt, and bring new ideas to the table. The future of cognitive assessments will involve balancing traditional tests with dynamic, real-world applications. This way, we can ensure that we’re identifying talent that’s ready for both today’s challenges and tomorrow’s innovations.
Final Thoughts
As companies continue to explore new ways of assessing candidates, the goal should always be to create assessments that are inclusive, fair, and reflective of the skills that really matter on the job. Cognitive tests, when used thoughtfully, can still play a crucial role in this process. The key is evolving how we use them to keep up with the changing needs of the workforce.
Join us and re-think your assessments to truly reflect the talent you’re looking for—across every level and every industry.
