Search

U. S. Supreme Court justices and other federal judges are, effectively, appointed for life, with no built-in check on their cognitive functioning as they approach old age. There is about a century of research on aging and intelligence that shows the vulnerability of processing speed, fluid reasoning, visual-spatial processing, and working memory to normal aging for men and women at all levels of education, even the maintained ability of crystallized knowledge declines in old age. The vulnerable abilities impact a person’s decision-making and problem solving, crystallized knowledge, by contrast, measures a person’s general knowledge. The aging-IQ data provide a rationale for assessing the key cognitive abilities of anyone who is appointed to the federal judiciary. Theories of multiple cognitive abilities and processes, most notably the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model, provide a well-researched blueprint for interpreting the plethora of findings from studies of IQ and aging. Sophisticated technical advances in test construction, especially in item-response theory and computerized-adaptive testing, allow for the development of reliable and valid theory-based tests of cognitive functioning. Such assessments promise to be a potentially useful tool for evaluating federal judges to assess the impact of aging on their ability to perform at a level their positions deserve, perhaps to measure their competency to serve the public intelligently. It is proposed that public funding be made available to appoint a panel of experts to develop and validate an array of computerized cognitive tests to identify those justices who are at risk of cognitive impairment.

We used contemporary psychometric theory of intelligence and confirmatory factor analysis to reanalyze data obtained on samples of nonhuman primates administered the Primate Cognition Test Battery. Our main goals were to interpret stability of the Primate Cognition Test Battery tasks and factors over time and to determine whether the cognitive factors that emerge from confirmatory factor analysis for apes can be interpreted from the perspective of a major theory of human intelligence, namely, the Cattell-Horn-Carroll model. We also analyzed data for 2½-year-old children on Wechsler's preschool test to afford a comparison between ape and child cognitive factors. Results indicated that multiple cognitive abilities provide the best factor solutions for both apes and children, and that the ape factors can be meaningfully interpreted from Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Patterns of maintenance of ability across the life span have been documented on tests of knowledge ( Gc), as have patterns of steady decline on measures of reasoning ( Gf/Gv), working memory ( Gsm), and speed ( Gs). Whether these patterns occur at the same rate for adults from different educational backgrounds has been debated. In addition, age-related research is needed to study global IQs, especially in view of the increased reliance on IQ in capital punishment court cases. In this study, large representative samples of adults tested during the standardizations of three versions of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) served as subjects: WAIS-R ( N = 1,480, ages 20-74), WAIS-III ( N = 2,093, ages 20-90), and WAIS-IV ( N = 1,800, ages 20-90). Based on regression analysis, patterns of aging on Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) and the four abilities (a) were essentially the same for males versus females and (b) characterized all levels of education across three generations of Wechsler’s adult scales.

The two featured articles and eight commentaries on the WISC-IV (Wechsler, 2003) and WAIS-IV (Wechsler, 2008) in this special issue of Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment are of exceptional quality. As a collective, this special issue greatly advances the field of cognitive assessment by intelligently synthesizing the best of methodology (confirmatory factor analysis) with the best of theory (Cattell–Horn–Carroll). The Weiss et al. articles represent sophisticated approaches to test validation and interpretation and the commentaries deal with applications, extensions, and limitations of the findings. This “response to the respondents” focuses on Wechsler’s approach to assessment, historical antecedents of factor analysis (especially the contributions of Jacob Cohen in the 1950s), and the “intelligent testing” model of test interpretation.

The concepts of measurement and theory have always been central to psychological science. This chapter reviews the history of applied mental tests and the ideas behind them, with a specific emphasis on individually administered intellectual measures in the era of scientific psychology (i.e., after Wundt). The chapter discusses theoretical underpinnings associated with mental tests and test/theory falsifications. Beginning with the contributions of Francis Galton and J. McKeen Cattell and continuing through the present, the topics discussed include anthropometric testing, Charles Spearman’s two-factor theory and general intelligence factor, Alfred Binet and David Wechsler’s pragmatic approaches, Raymond B. Cattell and John L. Horn’s fluid and crystallized intelligence, John B. Carroll’s three-stratum model of cognitive abilities, and Alexander R. Luria’s conceptualization of brain-based, cognitive processing. The chapter closes with a discussion about theory-building and falsification in mental testing and the importance of reconciling theory with clinical practice in psychological assessment.

Flynn wrote a book devoted to the Flynn effect, featuring his theoretical explanation of why the intelligence of worldwide populations has apparently increased from generation to generation. The essence of his theorizing is that because of the societal impact of scientific technology, people of today are much more guided by abstract, rather than concrete, approaches to problem solving. He bases his theory in large part on gains on specific tasks, most notably Raven’s matrices, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) Performance subtests, and, most important, on WISC Similarities. The gains on these separate tasks over more than half a century (1947-2002) are striking. However, Flynn failed to take into account the sweeping changes in test content, administration procedures, and scoring guidelines when the 1974 WISC-R was developed from the 1949 WISC. These substantial changes challenge the meaningfulness of comparing children’s performance in 1947 with their performance in 2002 on Similarities and other WISC subtests— and therefore challenge Flynn’s explanation of the effect that bears his name.

It is common practice to look at disparities among subtest scores (“scatter”) on an intelligence test to establish if a score is deviant. However, it remains unclear whether subtest scatter reflects primarily normal variation within individuals or is clinically meaningful. The present study explored this issue based on data from 467 children with developmental disabilities tested on the Dutch WISC–RNL. Of these children, 132 had learning disabilities, 178 had psychiatric disorders, and 157 had epilepsy. Subtest scatter was defined as scaled-score range (highest minus lowest scaled score). When contrasted with “normal scatter,” the overall sample revealed higher ranges on the Performance Scale and Full Scale, although effect sizes were small. Analysis of the data for the three separate clinical samples revealed unusual scatter only for the sample of children with psychiatric disorders. When comparing the clinical samples, scaled-score range was larger for the sample of children with psychiatric disorders than for those with epilepsy. Two distinct subsamples revealed elevated ranges with moderate effect sizes: children with autistic spectrum disorders and children with left hemisphere seizures. These results suggest that elevated subtest scaled-score range might characterize specific clinical samples rather than denoting an overall sign of pathology.

The WISC, WAIS, and WPPSI have enjoyed an unprecedented research and clinical history since the Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale was published in 1939. The current fourth editions of the tests have departed considerably from the Verbal-Performance organization of the scales that characterized all versions through the WISC-III, WAIS-III, and WPPSI-III, although a psychologist from the 1940s would immediately recognize the current Wechsler scales. The latest editions of the scales reflect contemporary research and theory in cognitive neuroscience, neuropsychology, and psychometrics and continue to be the most popular “IQ tests” in the world. Keywords: Binet, Alfred; cognitive science; intelligence; intelligence quotient (IQ); measurement in psychology; psychometric testing; Terman, Lewis; testing in psychology; Wechsler, David; Yerkes, Robert

David Wechsler (1896–1981) was the author of the leading intelligence and memory tests in the U.S.A. in the second half of the twentieth century. Wechsler's legacy is highlighted by the continued popularity of his scales and his key role in transforming psychometric testing into clinical assessment. Keywords: intelligence; intelligence quotient (IQ); memory

The development of short forms of intelligence tests, especially of Wechsler's scales, has been a pastime of researchers and clinicians for decades. These short forms have usually been of the two- or four-subtest variety, but other variants such as Satz-Mogel split-half short forms have also been common. The literature is replete with proposed short forms and with controversies over their proper use, the statistical problems associated with validity coefficients when the short-form data are obtained from a complete administration of the test battery, and the logic of choosing subtests that are long to administer and score in view of the goal to reduce time. This article argues that the time has come to abandon short forms of intelligence tests in favor of brief tests such as the K-BIT, WASI, and WRIT, which are reliable, valid, well normed, and easy both to give and score.

The third edition of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale manual reports four-factor solutions for the WAIS-IJI, and subsequent research has validated four-factor solutions for a variety of samples. These four factors consistently correspond to the four Factor Indexes that are yielded by the WAIS-III. However, the WAIS-LIL still provides Verbal and Performance IQs, in addition to the Indexes, making it desirable to examine two-factor solutions as well. In addition, because the Wechsler literature includes much interpretation of three-factor solutions, these solutions were likewise examined. Principal factor analysis followed by Varimax and Oblimin rotations of two and three factors were performed on data for the total WAIS-11 sample ages 16 to 89 years (N = 2,450). The two-factor solutions were viewed as a construct validation of Wechsler's two separate IQs, although the Working Memory subtests tended to load higher on the Performance scale than on their intended scale (Verbal); three-factor solutions were interpreted within the context of Horn's expanded fluid-crystallized theory and research on working memory. Both the two and three-factor Varimax-rotated solutions were related to similar factor analyses conducted previously for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-III. Co-Efficients of congruence between like-named factors consistently exceeded .90, and usually .98, across different Wechsler batteries.

This paper examined age changes in intellectual ability across the broad 16- to 89-year age range. The results of two studies, both involving IQs on the recently published WAIS-III, are presented and integrated to address issues concerning the relationship of IQ to age, most notably how this relationship (a) provides greater insight into Horn's expansion and elaboration of fluid-crystallized theory and (b) has changed from one generation to the next when the data are analyzed in the context of data on the WAIS, WAIS-R, and other intelligence tests for adults. Study 1 was a cross-sectional investigation based on standardization data from the WAIS-III manual and data provided by the test publisher that evaluated changes on the three WAIS-III IQs, controlling for the important cohort variable of educational attainment. Study 2 was a longitudinal investigation with independent samples that examined the Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale IQs of seven cohorts at three points in time over a span of 17 years. For the latter study, the data source was normative data from the WAIS-R and WAIS-III, with appropriate adjustments for errors due to changes in instrumentation and time lag. Results were interpreted in the context of Horn's theory, especially his distinction between maintained and vulnerable abilities. Differences in age patterns from the 1950s through 1970s versus the 1980s and 1990s were interpreted from the perspective of real generational changes in the age–IQ relationship.

R. D. Roberts, M. Zeidner, and G. Matthews (2001) have carefully examined the controversial issue of whether emotional intelligence (EI) should be classified as an intelligence and whether EI's constructs meet the same psychometric standards as general intelligence's constructs. This article casts their efforts into the framework of both historical and modern IQ-testing theory and research. It details David Wechsler's attempts to integrate EI into his tests and how his conception of a good clinician would be that of an emotionally intelligent clinician. Current theories and research on IQ also have a role in EI beyond what Roberts et al. described, including J. L. Horn's (1989) expanded model and A. R. Luria's (1966) neuropsychological research, and better criteria than the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery should be used in future EI studies. The authors look forward to more research being conducted on EI, particularly in future performance-based assessments.

When James Flynn (1984) first reported that American children and adolescents scored higher on IQ tests than did their peers from an earlier generation, that finding generated few ripples in the literature or in clinical practice. Indeed, how would any other result have made sense? The first sets of data compared children from the mid-1930s with the early 1970s on the Stanford-Binet Form L-M and from the late 1940s with the early 1970s on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC). The advent of television, the mass media explosion, the increasing awareness of the importance of a stimulating early environment, and other societal changes during the intervening years provided a simple and handy explanation for the 3 points per decade gain that Flynn observed in the United States. Flynn’s (1987) next publication, however, started to rock the empirical and clinical foundations of the nature of intelligence and cognitive development and the psychometric measurement of IQ. The gains in IQ from one generation to the next (which would come to be known as the Flynn effect [FE]) occurred on a worldwide basis, according to data from 14 developed nations, and the 3-point-per-decade American gain paled in comparison with the larger gains in most other nations studied. In fact, gains about twice that large occurred in Japan and in European countries such as Belgium, Germany, and the Netherlands. These gains defied easy explanation (Neisser, 1998). So did the fact that the 3-point-per-decade gain in the United States was not limited to post–World War II societal advances, but continued to occur into the 1980s (Kaufman & Kaufman, 1983), the 1990s (Wechsler, 1991), and the 2000s (Roid, 2003; Wechsler, 2008). FE has apparently stopped, and even reversed, in some Scandinavian countries (Teasdale & Owen, 2008), but it has remained a virtual constant gain for children and adults in the United States for the past eight decades. Researchers differ on why the FE occurs. Some claim that genetics is the key variable (Rodgers & Wanstrom, 2007), though most stress environmental factors such as nutrition (Colom, LluisFont, & Andres-Pueyo, 2005), education (Teasdale & Owen, 2005), or improvement in public health (Steen, 2009). Flynn (2007, 2009), in What Is Intelligence?, explains the effect named after him in terms of a societal shift from concrete to abstract thinking, whereas other scholars and researchers maintain that the so-called effect is nothing more than an artifact of statistical or methodological origin (Beaujean & Osterlind, 2008; Rodgers, 1998). And, in fact, the dispute about the scientific validity of the FE has entered the U.S. courtrooms in a big way as a burgeoning array of law cases asks whether the FE should be considered when sentencing low-functioning criminals convicted of a capital crime. Ever since the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins v. Virginia (2002), which stipulated that a criminal who is mentally retarded cannot be executed

The best way to try to predict the future of IQ testing for school psychologists is to explore the past, in this case a colorful past that extends back to the 19th century, to visionaries such as Esquirol, Seguin, Galton, and Binet. From the very beginning, issues concerning schools and practitioners were the guiding forces in shaping the development and use of IQ tests. Wechsler's impact was far more than the tests he developed, as this master practitioner and clinician introduced the clinical approach to intellectual assessment. Throughout its history IQ tests have been at the center of controversy, and that role continues to the present. The future of IQ testing for school psychology probably rests on the resolution of these controversies as well as on the ultimate interface of clinical assessment and computer technology. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Summary.-This study examined the interrater reliability of che measure of written expression in the Peabody Individual Achievement Test-Revised. A sample more diverse in years of education and age than he normed population was used in this study. Fifty subjects from Cahfornia, comprised of 72% females and 74% Caucasians, and ranging in age from 13 to 46, comprised the sample. Subjects were administered the "box" prompt from the PIAT-R Written Expression subtest (Level 11). Interrater reliability for these scores was within the same range as the values provided in the manual once restriction of range was corrected. The measurement of written expression presents numerous practical, theoretical, and psychometric problems (Hooper, Montgomery, Swartz, Reed, Sander, Levine, Watson, & Wasileski, 1994). The need to idenufy individuals with learning disabilities in writing has led to the inclusion of writing subtests in recent achievement batteries such as the Wechsler Lndvidual Achievement Test (MIAT; Psychological Corporation, 1990) and the revision of the Peabody Individual Achievement Test (PLAT-R; Markwardt, 1989).

Compared the reliability m d validity of three Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition (WZSC-ZIZ; Wechsler, 1991) short f o m , each a tetrad composed of two Verbal and two Perj4ormance subtests. The first tetrad was selected based on psychometric and clinical considerations, and the second was based primarily on practical considerations, namely its brevity in administration and scoring. The third reflects a blend of psychometric, clinical, and practical factors. WISC-III standardization data were used to select the short forms, to determine their psychometric properties, and to develop formulas for computing a child's estimated Full Scale Intelligence Quotient. All three short forms had acceptable average reliability coefficients above .90, but the validity of the brief practical short form was too low to represent a good alternative to either of the other two tetrads. Overall, the short form that represented a compromise between psychometric-clinical and practical variables (Similarities-...

Factor-analyzed data for three race/ethnic groups on the Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT) for people ages 11 to 93 are reported. Factor structures for Whites (N= 1,535), African Americans (N = 226), and Hispanics (N = 140) yielded Fluid and Crystallized dimensions that were congruent across race/ethnic groups and provided construct validity evidence for each subsample. The "g" factors for the three samples yielded congruence coefficients above .99. The KAIT results were interpreted in the context of previous investigations, especially with the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised.

The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale--Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV) is by the far the most popular intelligence test for the assessment of adults in clinical and neuropsychological practice. Despite a number of studies examining the factor structure of the WAIS-IV from a Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) perspective (Benson, Hulac, & Kranzler, 2010; Ward, Bergman, & Hebert, 2012), a CHC interpretation of the WAIS-IV for individuals ages 70 and above has been absent from the literature. The exclusion of individuals ages 70 and above in previous research is likely due to the absence of several key supplemental subtests used to create a full CHC model. We provide an alternative five-factor CHC model of the WAIS-IV which includes only the subtests administered to individuals ages 70 and above in the standardization sample. Our results show (a) the alternative CHC model fits the data well; (b) this alternative CHC model met criteria for partial strict measurement invariance across the life span (only Similarities showed noninvariance) using strict criteria; (c) the five factors for ages 70-90 measure the same five CHC broad abilities identified in previous analyses reported for ages 16-69; and (d) the five-factor CHC solution for ages 70-90 is valid for the entire WAIS-IV age range and can be used whenever examiners administer the core battery but opt not to administer supplemental subtests.

Data obtained on 255 normal individuals, ages 16-83, were factor analyzed. Variables included subtests from the WAIS-R, KAIT, and two new brief cognitive measures (K-FAST, K-SNAP). Four factors emerged that were interpreted from Horn's theory of intelligence: Crystallized (Gc), Fluid (Gf), Short-term Acquisition and Retrieval (SAR), and a blend of Broad Visualization (Gv) and Fluid. Results were interpreted in the context of previous Horn analyses of the KAIT and Wechsler's scales, with particular attention paid to the question of whether the WAIS-R Performance Scale measures fluid intelligence or whether it is primarily a measure of Gv, as some researchers contend.

Changes in ability across the adult life span were investigated for the adult portion of the K-BIT standardization sample (500 individuals aged 20 to 90 years) to permit comparisons with the results of similar investigations conducted with the WAIS and WAIS-R. These changes were explored for separate measures of crystallized intelligence (Vocabulary) and fluid intelligence (Matrices). Two two-way ANCOVAs (age and gender) were conducted, in which raw scores on Vocabulary and Matrices served as dependent variables and educational attainment as the covariate. Results agreed with previous findings on the Wechsler scales: Crystallized intelligence basically was maintained across the age range, while fluid intelligence peaked early and declined steadily despite the control for education. Age x gender interactions were nonsignificant. This study showed that fluid intelligence seems to decline with increasing age, even when the test is untimated and does not rely on visual-motor coordination.

Investigated the Sequential and Simultaneous processing distinctions of high-functioning autistic children and children with a developmental receptive language disorder (DRLD). Twenty autistic subjects and 20 DRLD subjects were matched on age and gender, and compared to each other on their Sequential and Simultaneous processing abilities utilizing the K-ABC and selected subtests of the WISC-R. Results showed that both groups manifested a relative sequential processing deficit. However, the groups did not differ significantly on their overall sequential and simultaneous processing capabilities relative to their degree of language impairment. The application of the sequential and simultaneous processing model to the WISC-R provided consistent convergent and discriminant validation for the assessment of these processes with the WISC-R.

Gender comparisons on the WAIS-R were made for 1,480 adults from the standardization sample, ages 20-74 years, to determine whether men and women differ in their age-related patterns of change on tests of fluid and crystallized abilities. Multivariate analyses of covariance and univariate analyses of covariance were conducted, covarying education, to examine the age + gender interactions. These interactions tended to be nonsignificant and trivial for the WAIS-R Verbal and Performance scales and the 11 subtests, which suggests that both men and women maintain their crystallized abilities through old age, but show early, rapid declines in fluid ability. These results were interpreted in terms of the literature on aging and intelligence, gender differences in cognitive abilities, and gender differences in V-P patterns for patients with unilateral brain damage.

Factor analyses of WAIS-R standardization data for samples grouped by sex and race (Black-White) produced congruent factors for the various samples and offered good support for Wechsler's two-scale division of the subtests. The factor structures for males and females produced some interesting differences across the age range that were related to sex-related findings in studies of patients with unilateral brain damage. Additionally, Black males and Black females seemed to use different strategies for solving Wechsler's verbal and nonverbal subtests.

Although valid short forms of the WAIS-R exist, they require a long administration time. This study developed new, extremely brief short forms of the WAIS-R that are both valid and reliable. In developing the abbreviated batteries, the administration and scoring time of the component subtests was considered, as was each task's placement in the administration sequence. The latter variable was important for the dyad and triad based on Thompson's research into the “motivation effect.” The selected dyad was composed of Information and Picture Completion, while the triad added Digit Span to this dyad. The tetrad was composed of Arithmetic, Similarities, Picture Completion, and Digit Symbol. Each of these abbreviated WAIS-Rs averages less than 20 minutes' administration time, yet each has a reliability of .90 or above and validity coefficients that average .88 for the dyad, .92 for the triad, and .95 for the tetrad.

The Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-Revised (WPPSI-R) is a thorough revision of the 1967 WPPSI, with expanded age range (3–7 years), new colorful materials, new item types for very young children, a new icebreaker subtest (Object Assembly), and a comprehensive manual. The test's strengths are its attractive pictures, strong evidence of construct validity, excellent reliability, and superb standardization sample. The revised battery's weaknesses are the heavy reliance on bonus points for Block Design and Object Assembly, the cumbersome scoring system for Geometric Design, the relative instability over time of some subtests (especially nonverbal), and its user-unfriendliness. Administration difficulties come from directions to the examiner that are too detailed and confusing, and directions to the child that include difficult concepts.

The nature of practice effects on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale-Third Edition (WISC-III) Performance Scale was examined for 51 middle-class White children ages 11 to 13 years. The participants were tested twice on the six WISC-III Performance subtests (mean interval = 13 days) to determine whether the gain scores were significantly related to the children's ability level, memory, learning ability, and attention and motivation. Measures of these constructs were administered during the initial evaluation. Results indicated that retest gains on the separate subtests were uncorrelated with each other. Multiple regression analyses yielded some significant and meaningful results (e.g., a measure of long-term memory was a significant predictor of gains on Object Assembly), but, in general, few meaningful relations were yielded in these analyses.

The book Essentials of WPPSI-III Assessment, by Elizabeth O. Lichtenberger and Alan S. Kaufman (see record 2004-12444-000), provides valuable information to the pediatric psychologist. This book delivers practical information in an efficient and accessible format. The ease of reading is a noted strength, and it capitalizes on a straightforward and concise presentation. In a time when test revisions seem prolific and the resulting consumer reaction can border on cynicism, the revision of the WPPSI-R (Wechsler, 1989) is indeed justifiable and a vast improvement over its predecessor. Essentials of WPPSI-III Assessment is an excellent resource for those practicing psychological assessment with children. It accompanies the manual provided in the WPPSI-III and goes beyond the basic theory and scoring to help the clinician better understand the application of clinical data. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved)

Preface Alan S. Kaufman and Nadeen L. Kaufman Part I. History and Tradition: 1. History lessons Margaret Jo Shepherd 2. The Wechsler intelligence scales Gary Groth-Marnat Part II. Alternative Cognitive Approaches to Learning Disabilities Assessment and Remediation: 3. Applications of the Woodcock-Johnson tests of cognitive ability - revised (WJ-R) to the diagnosis of learning disabilities Nancy Mather and Richard W. Woodcock 4. The Kaufman tests - K-ABC and KAIT Elizabeth O. Lichtenberger 5. Using the cognitive assessment system with learning disabled children Jack A. Naglieri 6. Application of the British Ability Scales (BAS II) and Differential Ability Scales (DAS) for the assessment of specific learning disabilities Colin D. Elliott 7. Is dynamic assessment compatible with the psychometric model? Reuven Feuerstein and Raphael S. Feuerstein 8. Multi-perspective, clinical-educational assessments of language disorders Elisabeth H. Wiig Part III. Neuropsychological Approaches to Learning Disabilities Assessment and Remediation: 9. Learning disabilities and their neurological foundations, theories, and subtypes Otfried Spreen 10. The Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery: research findings and clinical application Ralph M. Reitan and Deborah Wolfson 11. Developmental assessment of neurological function with the aid of the NEPSY Marit Korkman, Sarah L. Kemp and Ursula Kirk 12. Clinical neuropsychological assessment of child and adolescent memory with the WRAML, TOMAL, and CVLT-C Erin D. Bigler and Wayne V. Adams Part IV. Integration and Summation: 13. Assessment of specific learning disabilities in the new millennium: issues, conflicts, and controversies Alan S. Kaufman and Nadeen L. Kaufman Index.

The Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT) was developed by Alan S. Kaufman and Nadeen L. Kaufman in 1993 and is an individually administered intelligence test for individuals ranging from 11 to 85-plus years of age. It has a strong theoretical base integrating Horn and Cattell's concept of fluid and crystallized intelligence, Luria and Golden's notion of frontal lobe planning ability, and Piaget's construct of formal operational thought (Smith, 2001). Keywords: intelligence; intelligence theory; UIQ; IQ tests; crystallized/fluid intelligence

HISTORY OF INTELLIGENCE TESTING Intelligence tests were conceived in a theoretical void and born into a theoretical vacuum. During the last half of the 19th century, first Sir Francis Galton in England (1869, 1883) and then Alfred Binet in France (Binet & Henri, 1895) took turns in developing the leading intelligence tests of the day. Galton, who was interested in men of genius and in eugenics, developed his test from a vague, simplistic theory that people take in information through their senses, and thus the most intelligent people must have the best developed senses. His test included a series of sensory, motor, and reaction-time tasks, all of which produced reliable, consistent results (Galton, the half-cousin of Charles Darwin, was strictly a scientist, and accuracy was essential) but none of them proved to be valid as measures of the construct of intelligence (Cohen, Montague, Nathanson, & Swerdlik, 1988). Galton developed a statistic that was the forerunner of the coefficient of correlation, and that proved to be his own undoing; shortly after his friend and biographer Karl Pearson perfected the statistic, a few studies revealed that the Galton intelligence test was misnamed because it did not correlate meaningfully with pertinent cognitive variables (such as grade point average). In fact, the research studies that sounded the death knell for Galton's test conducted in the United States around the turn of the century at Galton-inspired laboratories at Columbia and Cornell were as flawed as the test itself (e.g., very small sample size, highly restricted sample of bright subjects).

This study investigated Inglis and Lawson's (1982) hypothesis that sex differences in research on unilateral brain damage is a function of the way females solve nonverbal problems. They argued that females, to a greater extent than males, use verbal strategies when solving Wechsler's Performance subtests. From this hypothesis, it follows that Verbal and Performance IQs should correlate significantly higher for females than for males. This possibility was explored using standardization data from the WAIS-R for ages 16–74. No sex differences in the correlations were noted, arguing against the Inglis-Lawson hypothesis.

The aim of this investigation was to provide an empirical basis for the interpretation of the WISC-R according to the Luria-Das model of simultaneous and successive processes. Using both an empirical and logical approach, those WISC-R subtests that were expected to involve simultaneous and successive processes were identified. Then the subtest intercorrelation matrices reported by Wechsler (1974) for normal children, Van Hagen and Kaufman (1975) for mentally retarded children, and Stedman, Lawlis, Cortner, and Achterberg (1978) for referred children were factor analyzed. Results of these analyses yielded support for interpreting the WISC-R in accordance with the Luria-Das model of simultaneous and successive processes.

This article introduces the neuroclinician to the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC), a new test of intelligence and achievement with a strong theoretical base supported by diverse cognitive and neuropsychological research. The K-ABC global scales and their subtests are described in some detail, followed by a discussion of the neuropsychological relevance of the K-ABC subtests. The article also provides discussions of research in the following areas: (1) psychometric properties of the K-ABC and a comparison to the Wechsler scales; (2) interpretation and remediation of sequential-simultaneous processing differences; (3) the value of the K-ABC in the assessment of minority children; and (4) controversy surrounding the K-ABC. ( J Child Neurol 1987;2:3-16).

The goal of the present investigation was to analyze data from the standardization sample of the 1981 Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R) to determine the relationships of WAIS-R IQs to the demographic variables upon which the sample was stratified. The sample included 1, 880 adults stratified according to sex and age (equal numbers of males and females within nine groups), race, occupation, urban-rural residence, geographic region, and education. There were 1, 664 whites, 192 blacks, and 24 from other nonwhite groups. Analyses of variance were conducted separately for Verbal (VIQ), Performance (PIQ), and Full Scale IQ (FSIQ). The differences in mean IQs due to sex, urban-rural residence, and geographic regions were nonsignificant. However, there were significant differences that were due to race and education level, and there were also sizeable differences noted for occupational groups. There was a 14 1 2 -point difference in favor of whites over blacks on FSIQ. Differences due to education and occupation were striking: College graduates earned FSIQs that were 32 1 2 points higher than the FSIQs of individuals with 7 years or less of schooling, and professional and technical workers outscored unskilled workers on the WAIS-R Full Scale by 22 points.

This article will familiarize neuroclinicians with the WISC-R and with the results of countless research studies on this popular test of the intelligence of children and adolescents. In addition to a description of the WISC-R and its subtests, and a discussion of the WISC-R from a historical context, the article reviews research in the following areas: (1) relationship of the WISC-R to Wechsler's preschool and adult scales; (2) interpretation of verbal-performance IQ differences; (3) clinical implications of scatter; (4) relationship of an IQ score to present and future functioning; and (5) comparison of IQs on the WISC-R with scores on other tests for children and adolescents. (J Child Neurol 1986;1:89-98.)

The relationship of test performance on the 11 WAIS-R subtests to five background variables was examined by MANOVAs and univariate ANOVAs on standardization data. For all four broad age groups (16-19, 20-34, 35-54, 55-74), significant differences were found for sex, race, and education main effects. Geographic region produced significant main effects for three of the age groups, but residence yielded significant results only for the oldest group. The pattern of the relationships of subtest scores to each background variable was analyzed, interpreted, and integrated with previous research.

Stdmmary.-The new McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities were analyzed in terms of Guilford's structure of intellect model to evaluate the consonance of this model with the structure of McCarthy's scales. The motor tests were analyzed in terms of Guilford's psychomotor matrix. These analyses showed a great deal of consonance between Guilford's systems and McCarthy's scales. A comparison of the abilities assessed by the McCarthy scales, Stanford-Binet, WPPSI, and WISC indicated that the McCarthy and Stanford-Binec measure similar percentages of the various structure of intellect operations, contents, and products but that both batteries assess the operation of evaluation to a lesser degree than the Wechsler scales. The McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities (MSCA) were developed by Dr. Dorothea McCarthy to assess the mental and motor abilities of children in the 2Y2- to 8%-yr. range. She constructed a wide variety of tasks and then grouped these tasks into six scales: Verbal, Perceptual-Performance, Quantitative, General Cognitive, Memory, and Motor. To determine the placement of each task on one or more scales, McCarthy used rational considerations based on her vast clinical experience, and she considered the results of factor analyses of a portion of the standardization data (McCarthy, 1972, p. 2). The main purpose of this paper is to evaluate the consonance of McCarthy's scale structure with Guilford's ( 1967) structure of intellect model by analyzing each component cognitive test in terms of Guilford's system. Such analyses should demonstrate, for example, the degree to which Verbal tasks contain semantic content, Perceptual-Performance tasks contain figural content, and Memory tasks assess the operation of memory-as defined by Guilford. The analyses should also show the types of abilities measured by the McCarthy scales, permitting comparisons with the abilities capped by other tests for children such as the WISC, WPPSI, and Stanford-Binet. PROCEDURE The McCarthy scales contain 18 tests: 15 which assess cognitive ability, including 2 which also assess motor coordination; and 3 which are noncognitive and measure gross motor coordination. The 15 tests of cognitive ability were categorized in terms of the structure of intellect model based on Guilford's (1967) and Meeker's (1969) discussions of the types of tests which measure different operation-content-product trigraphs (see below for explanation). Of particular value were Meeker's classifications of WPPSI, WISC, and StanfordBiner items according to the $dimensional model. Since a number of tasks in

This paper reviews WISC-R research that has particular pertinence for the assessment of learning disabilities. Three topics are treated in depth: factor analysis investigations, recategorization of subtests into Bannatyne's four groupings, and interscale/intrascale scatter. For each topic, relevant current research findings are summarized and interpreted, their implications for LD assessment are explored, and avenues for future research are delineated.

KAUFMAN, ALAN S., and DOPPELT, JEROME E. Analysis of WISC-R Standardization Data in Terms of the Stratification Variables. CmID DEVELOPMENT, 1976, 47, 165-171. The sampling plan for the standardization of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised was based on age groups stratified along the variables of sex, race, geographic region, parental occupation, and type of residence (urban vs. rural). The verbal, performance, and full-scale IQs of the standardization sample were analyzed according to classifications along these variables. Findings were compared with corresponding data in a study of the WISC standardization sample reported in 1950. The relationship between IQ and sex and between IQ and parental occupation group has not changed, although the differences between IQs of ruraland urbanreared youngsters have become smaller in the course of a generation. IQ differences between the sexes are not of practical importance. The average IQs of whites in the sample were about 1 SD higher than those of blacks, and IQ differences among the 5 parental occupation groups were also substantial. Regional differences were larger for blacks than for whites.