T he City of New London, Connecticut, was developing a system to select police officers. One of the tests it selected was the Wonderlic Personnel Test, a cognitive ability test that was mentioned in this chapter. For each occupation, the Wonderlic provides a minimum score and a maxi- mum score. For police officers, the minimum score is 20 and the maximum is 27. Robert J. Jordan applied for a job as a police officer but was not given an interview because his score of 33 (equivalent to an IQ of 125) made him “too bright” to be a cop. New London’s reasoning was that highly intelligent offi- cers would get bored with their jobs and would either cause trouble or would quit. The New London deputy police chief was quoted as saying, “Bob Jordan is exactly the type of guy we would want to screen out. Police work is kind of mundane. We don’t deal in gunfights every night. There’s a per- sonality that can take that.” Turnover was a great concern, as the city spent about $25,000 sending each officer through the academy. The police department in neighboring Groton, Connecticut, also uses the Wonderlic but tries to hire the highest scorers possible—a policy with which most I/O psychologists would agree. When New London’s policy received national publicity, the city became the butt of many jokes and the policy became a source of embarrassment to 198 CHAPTER many of the residents. According to one resident, “I’d rather have them hire the right man or woman for the job and keep replacing them than have the same moron for twenty years.” Another commented, “Your average dunderhead is not the person you want to try to solve a fight between a man and his wife at 2.00 a.m.” The ridicule got so bad that another city ran an ad asking, “Too smart to work for New London? Apply with us”; San Francisco police chief Fred Lau encouraged Jordan to apply to the San Francisco Police Department; and host Jay Leno rewrote the theme song for the television show to include, “Dumb cops, dumb cops, whatcha gonna do with a low IQ?” Jordan filed a lawsuit but lost. The judge ruled, “Plaintiff may have been disqualified unwisely but he was not denied equal protection.” n Do you agree with New London’s reasoning about being “too bright”? n Do you agree with the judge’s decision that it was not discriminatory to not hire people who are highly intelligent? Why or why not? n How would you have determined the cognitive ability requirements for this job? Information about this case can be found by following the web links in the text website."