-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Structural and incremental validity of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, 2008a) was examined with a sample of 300 individuals referred for evaluation at a university-based clinic. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the WAIS-IV structure was best represented by 4 first-order factors as well as a general intelligence factor in a direct hierarchical model. The general intelligence factor accounted for the most common and total variance among the subtests. Incremental validity analyses indicated that the Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) generally accounted for medium to large portions of academic achievement variance. For all measures of academic achievement, the first-order factors combined accounted for significant achievement variance beyond that accounted for by the FSIQ, but individual factor index scores contributed trivial amounts of achievement variance. Implications for interpreting WAIS-IV results are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).
Psychological Assessment 04/2013; · 2.99 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Empirical examination of the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS; C. R. Reynolds & R. W. Kamphaus, 2003a) has produced mixed results regarding its internal structure and convergent validity. Various aspects of validity of RIAS scores with a sample (N = 521) of adolescents and adults seeking psychological evaluations at a university-based clinic were examined. Results from exploratory factor analysis indicated only 1 factor, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated that the 1-factor model was a good fit and a better fit than the 2-factor model. Hierarchical factor analysis indicated the higher order, general intelligence factor accounted for the largest amount of variance. Correlations with other measures of verbal/crystallized and nonverbal/fluid intelligence were supportive of the convergent validity of the Verbal Intelligence Index but not the Nonverbal Intelligence Index. Joint CFA with these additional measures resulted in a superior fit of the 2-factor model compared with the 1-factor model, although the Odd-Item-Out subtest was found to be a poor measure of nonverbal/fluid intelligence. Incremental validity analyses indicated that the Composite Intelligence Index explained a medium to large portion of academic achievement variance; the NIX and VIX explained a small amount of remaining variance. Implications regarding interpretation of the RIAS when assessing similar individuals are discussed.
Psychological Assessment 08/2011; 24(1):129-40. · 2.99 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The present study examined the factor structure of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale--Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV; D. Wechsler, 2008a) standardization sample using exploratory factor analysis, multiple factor extraction criteria, and higher order exploratory factor analysis (J. Schmid & J. M. Leiman, 1957) not included in the WAIS-IV Technical and Interpretation Manual (D. Wechsler, 2008b). Results indicated that the WAIS-IV subtests were properly associated with the theoretically proposed first-order factors, but all but one factor-extraction criterion recommended extraction of one or two factors. Hierarchical exploratory analyses with the Schmid and Leiman procedure found that the second-order g factor accounted for large portions of total and common variance, whereas the four first-order factors accounted for small portions of total and common variance. It was concluded that the WAIS-IV provides strong measurement of general intelligence, and clinical interpretation should be primarily at that level.
Psychological Assessment 12/2010; 22(4):827-36. · 2.99 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The factor structure of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, 2008a) with the adolescent participants (ages 16–19 years; N = 400) in the standardization sample was assessed using exploratory factor analysis, multiple factor extraction criteria, and higher-order exploratory factor analyses. Results from exploratory factor analyses were not included in the WAIS-IV Technical and Interpretation Manual (Wechsler, 2008b) and are necessary for determining convergence or divergence with the reported confirmatory factor analyses. As found with the total WAIS-IV standardization sample (Canivez & Watkins, in press), the present results with the adolescent subsample found all WAIS-IV subtests (10- and 15-subtest configurations) were properly associated with their four theoretically proposed first-order factors, but only one factor extraction criterion (standard error of scree) recommended extraction of four factors. Hierarchical exploratory analyses with the Schmid and Leiman (1957) procedure found that the second-order g factor accounted for major portions of total and common variance, while the four first-order factors accounted for small portions of total and common variance. It was concluded that the WAIS-IV provides strong measurement of general intelligence in adolescents and clinical interpretation should be primarily at that level. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
School Psychology Quarterly 11/2010; 25(4):223-235. · 1.45 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI; Psychological Corporation, 1999) and the Wide Range Intelligence Test (WRIT; Glutting, Adams, & Sheslow, 2000) are two well-normed brief measures of general intelligence with subtests purportedly assessing verbal–crystallized abilities and nonverbal–fluid–visual abilities. With a sample of 152 children, adolescents, and adults, the present study reports meaningful convergent validity coefficients and a latent factor structure consistent with the theoretical intellectual models both tests were constructed to reflect. Consideration of the hierarchical model of intelligence tests and issues regarding test interpretation are presented. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
School Psychology Quarterly 11/2009; 24(4):252-265. · 1.45 Impact Factor
-
Gary L. Canivez
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Orthogonal higher-order factor structure of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales-Fifth Edition (SB-5; Roid, 2003a) for child and adolescent samples is reported. Multiple criteria for factor extraction unanimously supported extraction of only one dimension and a unidimensional model. However, following results from DiStefano and Dombrowski (2006) and theoretical consideration, two factors were extracted and obliquely rotated and further subjected to the Schmid and Leiman (1957) procedure using MacOrtho (Watkins, 2004). Results showed that the largest portions of total and common variance were accounted for by the second-order, global ('g') factor and interpretation of the SB-5 should focus primarily, if not exclusively, on the general, Full Scale IQ. No evidence for a five-factor solution was found. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
School Psychology Quarterly 11/2008; 23(4):533-541. · 1.45 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity of the WISC-III (Wechsler, 1991) Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) scores in predicting later academic achievement given significant variability among any of the four WISC-III factor scores. Taken from an archival data set, the sample was composed of 6- to 13-year-old students who were twice evaluated for special education eligibility over approximately a 3-year retest interval. Participants were separated into two groups based on the presence or absence of significant factor score variability and then matched across groups on disability, FSIQ, age, sex, and ethnicity. The results of hierarchical multiple regression analyses indicated that the Full Scale IQ was a valid predictor of academic achievement scores even in the presence of significant factor score variability.
Applied Neuropsychology 02/2008; 15(2):131-9. · 1.17 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children--Third Edition (D. Wechsler, 1991; WISC-III) is often used to identify subtest-based cognitive strengths and weaknesses that are subsequently used to generate interventions. Given that intelligence is presumed to be an enduring trait, cognitive strengths and weaknesses identified via subtest analysis should also be stable over time. This was evaluated with 579 students who were twice tested with the WISC-III. Based on 66 subtest composites, 6 or 7 interpretable cognitive strengths and weaknesses were found on each WISC-III administration. However, subtest-based strengths and weaknesses replicated across test-retest occasions at chance levels. Because subtest-based cognitive strengths and weaknesses are unreliable, recommendations based on them will also be unreliable.
Psychological Assessment 07/2004; 16(2):133-8. · 2.99 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study reports on the psychometric properties of a brief instrument that can be used in research or practice to measure the frequency of communication about sexual matters between parents and adolescents: The Sexual Communication Scale (SCS). The instrument was designed to assess communication between a mother/mother-figure and an adolescent and between a father/father-figure and an adolescent. The instrument, which contains 20 items for mothers and the same 20 for fathers, addresses sexual topics ranging from dating to sexual intercourse to homosexuality to HIV/AIDS. The sample used to establish reliability and validity of the SCS consisted of 158 males and females, who were primarily Caucasian, suburban, low to upper middle socioeconomic status, and in the 9th through 12th grades. Factor analyses revealed a strong unidimensional construct. Further, internal consistency was found to be very high. In sum, the SCS demonstrated adequate psychometric properties.
Adolescence 02/2003; 38(149):43-56. · 0.64 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Investigation of interrater agreement for the Adjustment Scales for Children and Adolescents (ASCA) discriminant classifications is reported. Two teaching professionals or paraprofessionals working in the same classroom for a minimum of 1 hour per day provided independent ratings of the same child using the ASCA. A total of 119 students ranging in age from 7 to 18 years were independently rated on the ASCA. Results indicated significant and moderate to substantial interrater agreement for the discriminant classifications. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Psychology in the Schools 06/2002; 39(4):375 - 384. · 0.72 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Long-term stability of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition (WISC-III; D. Wechsler, 1991) was investigated with a sample of 667 students from 33 states twice evaluated for special education consideration. With an average test-retest interval of 2.87 years, test-retest reliability coefficients for the Verbal IQ, Performance IQ, and Full Scale IQ were .87, .87, and .91, respectively (p
Psychological Assessment 08/1998; 10(3):285-291. · 2.99 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Investigation of interrater agreement for the Adjustment Scales for Children and Adolescents (ASCA) discriminant classifications is reported. Two teaching professionals or paraprofession-als working in the same classroom for a minimum of 1 hour per day provided independent ratings of the same child using the ASCA. A total of 119 students ranging in age from 7 to 18 years were independently rated on the ASCA. Results indicated significant and moderate to substantial interrater agreement for the discriminant classifications. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Current psychological practice indicates a growing preference for objective assessment tech-niques that help facilitate a link between assessment and intervention (Reschly & Ysseldyke, 1995; Piacentini, 1993). Among applied psychologists, standardized behavior rating scales and checklists have achieved popularity (Hart & Lahey, 1999; Merrell, 1994a) and are the most fre-quently used instruments in assessing youths' emotional and behavioral difficulties in school (Stinnett, Havey, & Oehler-Stinnet, 1994). Behavior rating scales are considered to be "one of the most efficient, sound, and effective ways . . . to identify a referred student's behavioral strengths and weaknesses . . . " (Knoff, 1995, p. 857). McConaughy and Ritter (1995) suggested that the use of behavior rating scales from multiple sources (e.g., teacher, parent, youth) in concert with inter-views, observations, and other assessment tools is "best practice" when assessing and diagnosing emotional and behavioral disorders in children. Behavior rating scales offer relatively unobtrusive evaluations of students' behaviors in the natural social settings of school, home, and community. While parents inform evaluators of youths' behavior at home, teachers are natural observers and useful informants in the school environment because they have the comparative experience of observing many students across time and varied social contexts. They also appear to take a normative perspective in rating children's behaviors (Piacentini, 1993). Consequently, teachers are considered to be among the most accurate adult raters of child behaviors (Kamphaus & Frick, 1996), and have demonstrated an absence of expec-tation and practice effects (Brandon, Kehle, Jenson, & Clark, 1990). Like all tests, behavior rating instruments must demonstrate acceptable psychometric prop-erties before they can be validly applied in practice. Edelbrock (1983) reported that existing behavior rating scales differed across a number of psychometric dimensions. One of the most critical psychometric properties of any instrument that relies upon third-party raters is the degree to which two or more informants agree on the presence or absence of behaviors (Suen & Ary, 1989). Commonly referred to as interrater or interobserver agreement, this measures the degree to which conclusions drawn from an instrument vary as a function of the rater rather than the student being rated.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: There has been considerable debate regarding the causal precedence of intelligence and academic achievement. Some researchers view intelligence and achievement as identical constructs. Others believe that the relationship between intelligence and achievement is reciprocal. Still others assert that intelligence is causally related to achievement. The present study addressed this debate with a cross-lagged panel analysis of WISC-III and achievement test scores of 289 students assessed for special education eligibility with a test–retest interval of 2.8 years. The optimal IQ–achievement model reflected the causal precedence of IQ on achievement. That is, the paths from IQ scores at time 1 to IQ and achievement scores at time 2 were significant whereas the paths from achievement scores at time 1 to IQ scores at time 2 were not significant. Within the limits imposed by the design and sample, it appears that psychometric IQ is a causal influence on future achievement measures whereas achievement measures do not substantially influence future IQ scores.
Intelligence.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The factor structure of the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS; [Reynolds, C.R., & Kamphaus, R.W. (2003). Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.]) was investigated with a large (N = 1163) independent sample of referred students (ages 6–18). More rigorous factor extraction criteria (viz., Horn's parallel analysis (HPA); [Horn, J.L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179–185.], and Minimum Average Partial (MAP) analysis; [Velicer, W.F. (1976). Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika, 41, 321–327.]), in addition to those used in RIAS development, were investigated. Exploratory factor analyses using both orthogonal and oblique rotations and higher-order exploratory factor analyses using the Schmid and Leiman [Schmid, J., and Leiman, J.M. (1957). The development of hierarchical factor solutions. Psychometrika, 22, 53–61.] procedure were conducted. All factor extraction criteria indicated extraction of only one factor. Oblique rotations resulted in different results than orthogonal rotations, and higher-order factor analysis indicated the largest amount of variance was accounted for by the general intelligence factor. The proposed three-factor solution was not supported. Implications for the use of the RIAS with similarly referred students are discussed.
Journal of School Psychology.
