Copyright © The British Psychological Society

Reproduction in any form (including the internet) is prohibited without prior permission from the Society

145

The
British
Psychological
British Journal of Clinical Psychology (2006), 45, 145–152
q 2006 The British Psychological Society
Society

www.bpsjournals.co.uk

A factor analysis of the Wechsler Adult

Intelligence Scale 3rd Edition (WAIS-III)
in a low IQ sample

Jill J. S. Jones1*, Paul van Schaik2 and Paul Witts3

1
Doctoral Programme in Clinical Psychology, University of Teesside, UK
2
Psychology Subject Group, School of Social Sciences and Law,
University of Teesside, UK
3
Tees and North East Yorkshire NHS Trust, UK

Objectives. Previous factor analytic studies of the WAIS, WAIS-R and WAIS-III used
standardization samples, (representing the general population), clinical populations
(e.g. psychiatric) and ‘non-clinical’ groups (e.g. older adults). These studies endorsed
the reliability of the scales in such samples and supported theoretical models of
intelligence. The WAIS-III (1997) includes four Indexes based on factor analysis, which
provide clinically useful information to practitioners, but have not been validated in a
low IQ population. However, the WAIS-III is often administered to individuals with
suspected or proven low IQ, as it offers service providers, legislators and the
Department of Health with a reliable measure of IQ. The aim of this study was to
investigate the factor structure of the WAIS-III in a low IQ sample.
Methods. WAIS-III data was collected from assessments carried out in routine
clinical practice from individuals with a full scale IQ of 74 or below (n ¼ 105). The data
were subjected to factor analysis, using two types of factor analysis: principal axis
factoring and principal components analysis. Orthogonal and oblique rotations were
applied to the analyses.
Results. Only one robust solution could be extracted. This contained two factors,
analogous to traditional verbal and performance sub-scales.
Conclusions. This study does not support the four-factor solution which underlies
WAIS–III index scores in a low IQ population.

The third edition of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-III; Psychological
Corporation, 1997) follows its predecessors, the WAIS (1955) and the WAIS-R (1981), as
a popular tool for the assessment of cognitive ability in a range of populations, both
clinical and non-clinical. There is a large research base for all three versions; in

* Correspondence should be addressed to Dr Jill J. S. Jones, Lynebank Hospital, Halbeath Road, Dunfermline, Fife KY11 4UW,
UK (e-mail: jilljones@fife-pct.scot.nhs.uk).

DOI:10.1348/014466505X29134
 Copyright © The British Psychological Society
Reproduction in any form (including the internet) is prohibited without prior permission from the Society

146 Jill J. S. Jones et al.

particular, factor-analytic studies have been carried out with a range of populations, as
well as on the large samples upon which they were standardized.
In constructing the WAIS-III, extensive exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses
were conducted, which produced a robust four-factor structure. Four indexes, named
verbal comprehension, perceptual organization, processing speed and working
memory, were constructed using this four-factor structure. These indexes have a useful
clinical application, and have been shown to correspond to neuropsychological
constructs (Kaufman, 2000).
In the literature, exploratory factor-analytic studies of the WAIS, WAIS-R, and WAIS-III
have generally had one of two aims. First, research has aimed to define intelligence itself,
in terms of measurable components in a test. Secondly, research has been carried out in
order to validate the scale in different nations, groups, and clinical populations, and
sometimes to develop different ways of interpreting the test for different groups. There
are a number of studies that have investigated the factor structure of the WAIS and
WAIS-R in a range of populations. It is beyond the scope of the current paper to examine
this, however, useful reviews can be found in Leckliter, Matarazzo, and Silverstein
(1986), Hill, Reddon, and Jackson (1985), and Enns and Reddon (1998).
The WAIS-III is frequently used to determine whether an individual has significant
deficits in intellectual functioning, which is one of three world-wide accepted criteria
for the classification of having a learning disability (along with significant impairment
in adaptive functioning and onset before age 18). In the past, difficulties in making
reliable and valid assessments of adaptive functioning have led to a tendency for
clinicians to rely more heavily on intellectual ability when assessing whether an
individual has a learning disability (British Psychological Society, 2002). Decisions
about a person’s life can take into account a WAIS-III assessment in the context of
mental health legislation regarding mental impairment, informing legal decision-
making (Murray, McKenzie, & Lindsay, 2003), and it is a useful clinical tool in terms
of planning and evaluating interventions. The addition of the four indexes has also
improved this neuropsychological application. Therefore, it is important to ensure
that the psychometric properties of the scale are the same for a population with low
IQ or learning disabilities as for the population upon which it is normed, and factor
analysis is one way of investigating this.
Since the WAIS-III was published, four exploratory factor-analytic studies have
examined its structure. Saklofske, Hildebrand, and Gorsuch (2000) studied a Canadian,
non-clinical sample; Kaufman, Lichtenberger, and McLean (2001) examined the
standardization sample; Ryan and Paulo (2001) studied a mixed-patient sample; and
Dickinson, Iannone, and Gold (2002) examined the factor structure in individuals with
schizophrenia. All four of these studies replicated the four-factor structure, which
suggests that it is very robust across a range of samples. The replication of this structure
offers clinicians and researchers increased confidence when using the scale with
individuals from specific samples.
The current study, therefore, aims to investigate the factor structure of the WAIS-III
with a low IQ population, in order to assess whether the factor structure is the same as
that of the standardization sample.

Method
WAIS-III scores from 105 individuals were obtained as part of routine clinical practice in
learning disability services throughout the north east of England. All full-scale IQ scores
 Copyright © The British Psychological Society
Reproduction in any form (including the internet) is prohibited without prior permission from the Society

Factor analysis of the WAIS-III in individuals with low IQ 147

were 74 or less. Of the 105 participants, 68 were male, and 37 were female. The age
range of participants was from 16 to 69 (the numbers in each age bracket were: age
16–17, N ¼ 6; 18–19, N ¼ 5; 20–24, N ¼ 18; 25–29, N ¼ 16; 30–34, N ¼ 13; 35–44,
N ¼ 19; 45–54, N ¼ 14; 55–64, N ¼ 6; 65–69, N ¼ 3). The mean full-scale IQ score was
61.47 (SD ¼ 6:7; range ¼ 45–74).
In terms of data analysis, preliminary analyses were carried out to make sure that the
sample was appropriate for factor analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). Factor analysis
itself can be carried out in a number of different ways, and is subject to interpretation,
which often results in difficulty in comparing different studies with one another.
Therefore, in this study, two methods were chosen to facilitate such comparison. First,
principal axis factoring (PAF) was employed, as this method was used by the
Psychological Corporation in their construction of the test. Principal components
analysis (PCA) was also applied to the data, because this is another popular technique.
Finally, both oblique and orthogonal rotations of PAF and PCA solutions were
considered. A more detailed description of these techniques can be found in Tabachnick
and Fidell.

Results
Preliminary analyses
Sample size
The size of the data set satisfied a number of criteria: number of cases $ 5 £ number of
variables (Lewis, 1995), N 2 n 2 1 $ 50 (where N ¼ number of participants and
n ¼ number of variables; Lawley & Maxwell, 1971), and a ratio of at least 2:1
participants to variables (Kline, 1994).

Normality and linearity of variables

Standardized skewness and kurtosis statistics were calculated; these indicated that the
distribution of some subtests deviated from a normal one (picture completion,
vocabulary, digit-symbol coding, matrix reasoning, comprehension, symbol search and
letter-number sequencing were highly skewed, and picture completion suffered from
positive kurtosis). However, given that the data were taken from a clinical sample, this
might be expected, and does not necessarily degrade the analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell,
2001). Inspection of scatterplots suggested that in some pairs of subtests there is a linear
association, while in others there is not. Again, this would be expected given the nature
of the data set, and does not invalidate the results of factor analysis.

Absence of outliers
Within the analysis, 1.7% of cases were identified as potential univariate outliers, and no
multivariate outliers were detected. This indicated that the data set was acceptable for a
factor analysis.

Multicollinearity and singularity

The determinant of the correlation matrix was 0.01336, which indicates that
multicollinearity (i.e. variables that are highly correlated) and singularity (i.e. variables
that are perfectly correlated) were not a threat in the present data set.
 Copyright © The British Psychological Society
Reproduction in any form (including the internet) is prohibited without prior permission from the Society

148 Jill J. S. Jones et al.

Factorability
Tabachnick and Fidell (2001) recommend evaluating the ‘factorability’ of the data by
examining the correlation matrix. If the data are factorable, this should reveal ‘several
sizeable correlations’, at least over 0.3. An examination of the current correlation matrix
reveals that at least 70% of the corrections in the matrix are at least 0.3. Kaiser and Rice’s
(1974) Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was 0.861 in this
case. This can be taken to indicate high sampling adequacy and good preconditions for
factor analysis (Field, 2000).

Factor analysis
In order to determine how many factors should be extracted from a factor analysis, the
scree plot and eigenvalues are usually inspected. Table 1 shows eigenvalues and the
percentage of variance for factors I–IV, (which were identical using both principal axis
factoring and principal components analysis), which indicated a two-factor solution.
However, in order to examine other solutions to compare with previous research, three-
and four-factor solutions were also investigated.

Table 1. Eigenvalues and percentage of variance for factors I–IV

Factor Eigenvalue % Variance explained

I 5.022 38.63
II 1.251 9.621
III 0.973 7.484
IV 0.863 6.637

Two-, three-, and four-factor solutions were all rotated first using an oblique
technique (direct oblimin). This rotation is based on the assumption that factors are
related, in contrast to orthogonal rotation, which assumes that factors are independent.
In the current research, factors produced using oblique rotation all had correlations of at
least 0.3, and therefore orthogonal rotations are not reported.

Two-factor solutions
The two-factor PAF and PCA solutions with direct oblimin rotation (see Table 2) showed
simple structure and an identical pattern of loadings greater than 0.45, with 40% and 48%
of variance of items accounted for and correlations of 0.642 and 0.532 between factors,
respectively. The first factor was interpreted as ‘verbal’ (vocabulary, similarities,
comprehension, digit span, information, arithmetic, letter-number sequencing subtests).
The second factor was interpreted as ‘performance’ (digit-symbol coding, picture
arrangement, symbol search, picture completion and matrix reasoning subtests).

Three-factor solutions
The three-factor PAF and PCA solutions with direct oblimin rotation (see Table 3)
showed a different pattern of loadings greater than 0.45 and a lack of simple structure
(with non-loading items for cut-off at 0.45 and cross-loadings for cut-off at 0.32), with
44% and 56% of variance accounted for, respectively. Factors were not stable between
extraction methods and cut-off points for loadings, and loadings were not consistent
with factors identified in previous research.
 Copyright © The British Psychological Society
Reproduction in any form (including the internet) is prohibited without prior permission from the Society

Factor analysis of the WAIS-III in individuals with low IQ 149

Table 2. Two-factor solutions of the WAIS-III

PAF PCA

Variable (subtest) I II I II

Picture completion 0.057 0.471 2 0.026 0.639

Vocabulary 0.712 2 0.108 0.844 20.192
Digit-symbol coding 20.177 0.851 2 0.113 0.839
Similarities 0.801 2 0.079 0.808 20.047
Block design 0.180 0.454 0.158 0.559
Arithmetic 0.455 0.224 0.544 0.204
Matrix reasoning 0.136 0.359 0.056 0.525
Digit span 0.519 0.127 0.603 0.110
Information 0.516 0.151 0.600 0.132
Picture arrangement 0.069 0.578 0.001 0.726
Comprehension 0.528 0.059 0.641 0.011
Symbol search 0.125 0.655 0.187 0.649
Letter-number sequencing 0.440 0.221 0.543 0.187

Notes. Direct oblimin rotation. Bold type indicates loadings that exceed 0.45; italic type indicates
loadings that exceed 0.32.

Four-factor solutions
The four-factor PAF and PCA solutions with direct oblimin rotation (see Table 4) showed
a different pattern of loadings greater than 0.45 and a lack of simple structure (with non-
loading items for cut-off at 0.45 and cross-loadings for cut-off at 0.32), with 47% and 62%
of variance accounted for, respectively. Factors were not stable between extraction
methods and cut-off points for loadings, and loadings were not consistent with factors
identified in previous research.

Table 3. Three-factor solutions of the WAIS-III

PAF PCA

Variable (subtest) I II III I II III

Picture completion 0.085 2 0.082 0.489 0.056 0.762 0.151

Vocabulary 0.223 2 0.574 0.054 0.805 20.139 20.008
Digit-symbol coding 0.046 0.149 0.791 2 0.079 0.738 20.220
Similarities 2 0.172 2 0.943 0.087 0.796 0.058 0.067
Block design 0.173 2 0.102 0.462 0.108 0.287 2 0.513
Arithmetic 0.522 2 0.275 0.209 0.448 20.073 2 0.543
Matrix reasoning 0.101 0.092 0.362 2 0.026 0.138 2 0.684
Digit span 0.148 2 0.435 0.157 0.534 20.046 2 0.345
Information 2 0.096 2 0.452 0.186 0.565 0.085 20.168
Picture arrangement 2 0.330 2 0.143 0.686 0.049 0.721 20.069
Comprehension 0.059 2 0.545 0.088 0.688 0.272 0.340
Symbol search 0.173 0.055 0.650 0.169 0.467 2 0.377
Letter-number sequencing 0.133 2 0.372 0.240 0.520 0.156 20.138

Notes. Direct oblimin rotation. Bold type indicates loadings that exceed 0.45; italic type indicates
loadings that exceed 0.32.
 150
Jill J. S. Jones et al.
Table 4. Four-factor solutions of the WAIS-III

PAF PCA

Variable (subtest) I II III IV I II III IV

Picture completion 0.134 0.412 0.113 0.041 0.021 0.706 0.186 0.002
Vocabulary 0.594 0.032 2 0.242 20.021 0.419 2 0.176 0.579 20.107
Digit-symbol coding 2 0.089 0.825 2 0.012 0.003 0.568 0.560 2 0.176 20.026
Similarities 0.874 20.165 0.186 0.106 20.017 0.081 0.769 0.191
Block design 0.061 0.232 2 0.053 0.413 0.423 0.152 2 0.050 0.393
Arithmetic 0.212 0.134 0.412 0.113 0.667 2 0.211 0.118 0.254
Matrix reasoning 2 0.041 0.594 0.032 20.242 20.052 0.077 -0.432 0.900
Digit span 0.376 20.089 0.825 20.012 0.145 2 0.081 0.410 0.459
Information 0.434 0.874 2 0.165 0.186 0.369 0.017 0.396 0.107
Picture arrangement 0.166 0.061 0.232 20.053 0.027 0.649 0.151 0.254
Comprehension 0.581 0.212 0.105 2 0.399 20.079 0.306 0.750 20.073
Symbol search 0.102 20.041 0.008 0.050 0.735 0.278 2 0.064 0.043
Letter-number sequencing 0.394 0.376 0.011 20.073 0.559 0.052 0.298 20.077

Notes. Direct oblimin rotation. Bold type indicates loadings that exceed 0.45; italic type indicates loadings that exceed 0.32.
Copyright © The British Psychological Society
Reproduction in any form (including the internet) is prohibited without prior permission from the Society
 Copyright © The British Psychological Society
Reproduction in any form (including the internet) is prohibited without prior permission from the Society

Factor analysis of the WAIS-III in individuals with low IQ 151

Discussion
The aim of this study was to examine the factor structure of the WAIS-III in a low IQ
population. A two-factor solution was indicated using typical criteria (eigenvalues . 1
and analysis of scree plot) for choosing the number of factors. This two-factor solution
corresponded with verbal and performance factors traditionally used. Three- and four-
factor solutions showed a lack of stability between extraction techniques and cut-off
points for loadings, and therefore, no clear factor structures could be identified.
Results from the current study indicate that in a low IQ population (IQ # 74), the
four index scores are not supported and, potentially, that the neuropsychological utility
of the scale may be reduced for individuals in this IQ range. Using the results of the
present study, the only factor structure that can reliably be interpreted is a two-factor,
verbal-performance one. This dichotomy is one that has been long supported. However,
contemporary models of intelligence have also emphasized the influence of other
factors such as executive functioning (Psychological Corporation, 1997). Evidence for
factors emphasizing these abilities was not found in the current research. Further
research examining the factor structure in a larger sample of this population should be
carried out, which may facilitate our use of the WAIS-III in clinical practice. Such
research may also allow the development of a more sensitive assessment for individuals
in this population. Until such research is carried out, however, we suggest that index
scores should be used with caution in individuals with low IQ (74 or less). The use of
two scores (for verbal and performance domains) is justified based on the two-factor
solution obtained in the current study.

Acknowledgements
The first author is now employed by Fife Primary Care. This research was carried out while the
first author was a trainee clinical psychologist at the Doctoral Programme in Clinical Psychology,
University of Teesside.

References
British Psychological Society. (2002). Learning disability: Definitions and contexts. Leicester:
Author.
Dickinson, D., Iannone, V. N., & Gold, J. M. (2002). Factor structure of the Wechsler Adult
Intelligence Scale-III in schizophrenia. Assessment, 9(2), 171–180.
Enns, R. A., & Reddon, J. R. (1998). The factor structure of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale –
Revised: One or two but not three factors. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54(4), 447–459.
Field, A. (2000). Discovering statistics using SPSS for Windows: Advanced techniques for the
beginner. London: Sage.
Hill, T. D., Reddon, J. R., & Jackson, D. N. (1985). The factor structure of the Wechsler scales:
A brief review. Clinical Psychology Review, 5, 287–306.
Kaiser, H. F., & Rice, J. (1974). Little Jiffy, Mark IV. Educational and Psychological Measurement,
34(1), 111–117.
Kaufman, A. S. (2000). Tests of intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence
(pp. 445–477). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kaufman, A. S., Lichtenberger, E. O., & McLean, J. E. (2001). Two- and three-factor solutions of the
WAIS-III. Assessment, 8(3), 267–280.
Kline, P. (1994). An easy guide to factor analysis. London: Routledge.
Lawley, D. N., & Maxwell, A. E. (1971). Factor analysis as a statistical method (2nd ed.). London:
Butterworths.
 Copyright © The British Psychological Society
Reproduction in any form (including the internet) is prohibited without prior permission from the Society

152 Jill J. S. Jones et al.

Leckliter, I. N., Matarazzo, J. D., & Silverstein, A. B. (1986). A literature review of the factor analytic
studies of the WAIS-R. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42, 332–342.
Lewis, J. R. (1995). IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: Psychometric evaluation
and instructions for use. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 7(1), 57–78.
Murray, G. C., McKenzie, K., & Lindsay, W. R. (2003). A pilot study of the use of the WAIS-III with
people with a learning disability. Clinical Psychology, 28, 17–21.
Psychological Corporation. (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales (Third Edition): Technical
manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Ryan, J. J., & Paulo, A. M. (2001). Exploratory factor analysis of the WAIS-III in a mixed patient
sample. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 16, 151–156.
Saklofske, D. H., Hildebrand, D. K., & Gorsuch, R. L. (2000). Replication of the factor structure of
the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – third edition with a Canadian sample. Psychological
Assessment, 12(4), 436–439.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Received 7 July 2004; revised version received 27 October 2004