TESTS OF

INTELLIGENC
E
CHAPTER 10
TEST OF INTELLIGENCE
 Dependent on the test
developer’s conception
of intelligence
 Test will be designed
based on the test
developer’s concept of
intelligence in terms of
mental structures
CONSIDERATIONS THAT GO INTO
A TEST’S APPEAL
 Theory on which the test
is based
 Ease of which the test
can be administered
 Ease with which test can
be scored
 Ease with which test
results can be interpreted
for a specific purpose
CONSIDERATIONS THAT GO INTO
A TEST’S APPEAL
 Adequacy and
appropriateness of
norms
 Acceptability of the
published reliability
and validity indices
 Test’s utility in terms
of costs versus benefits
PRIMARY MENTAL ABILITIES
TEST
 Louis L. Thurstone,
conceived of
intelligence as
composed of what he
termed primary mental
abilities (PMAs)
PRIMARY MENTAL ABILITIES
TEST
 Consisted of separate tests,
each designed to measure
one PMA
 Verbal meaning
 Perceptual speed
 Reasoning
 Number facility
 Rote memory
 Word Fluency
 Spatial relations
INTELLIGENCE TEST
INTELLIGENCE TEST
 Developed on the basis
of one theory but can
be reconceptualized in
terms of another theory
INTELLIGENCE TESTS
 In history, developed
more as a matter of
necessity
 Binet (1900s) charged
with responsibility of
developing a test to
screen developmentally
disabled children in
Paris schools
ALFRED BINET
 Collaborated with
Theodore Simon to create
the world’s first formal
test of intelligence in 1905
 Adaptations appeared in
many countries all over
the world
 Original Binet-Simon
Scale, in use in the United
States as early as 1908
BINET-SIMON SCALE
 In use in the United
States as early 1908
 1912: modified version
published, extended
age range of test
downward to 3 months
LEWIS MADISON TERMAN
 Work at Stanford
University was the
ancestor of the Stanford
Binet Intelligence Scale
 1916: Published a
translation and
“extension” of the Binet-
Simon Intelligence Scale
STANFORD-BINET
INTELLIGENCE SCALES
 First edition:
 Lacked
representativeness of
standardization sample
 Contained some
important innovations
INNOVATIONS OF THE STANFORD-
BINET INTELLIGENCE SCALES
 First published
intelligence test to
provide
 Organized and detailed
administration and
scoring instructions
STANFORD-BINET
INTELLIGENCE SCALE
 First American test to
employ the concept of IQ
 First to introduce the
concept of an alternate
item (item to be used if
the regular item had not
been administered
properly by the
examiner)
LEWIS TERMAN & MAUD
MERRILL
 Began a collaboration with
Maud Merrill, in a project to
revise the test
 Took 11 years to complete
 Developed two equivalent
forms
 L: Lewis
 M: Maude
 New types of tasks for use
with preschool-level and
adult-level testtakers
STANFORD-BINET
 Manual contained many
examples to aid examiner in
scoring
 Went to then-unprecedented
lengths to achieve an adequate
standardization sample
 Praised for technical
achievement in areas of
validity and reliability
 Lacked representation of
minority groups
1960 REVISION OF THE
STANFORD BINET TEST
 Consisted of only a single
form
 Included items considered
to be the best from the
two forms on the 1937
test, no new items added
 Used deviation IQ tables
in place of the ratio IQ
tables
RATIO IQ
 Ratio of the testtaker’s
mental age divided by
his/her chronological
age, multiplied by 100
to eliminate decimals
 IQ was really a
quotient
STANFORD-BINET 2ND EDITION
1972 VERSION OF STANFORD-
BINET (Third Revision)
 Quality of sample size
was criticized
 Manual was vague
about minority in the
standardization sample
STANDFORD-BINET (4TH EDITION)
 Significant departure
from the previous
versions in
 Theoretical
organization
 Test organization
 Test administration
 Test scoring
 Test interpretation
OTHER CHANGES
 Age Scale: Different
items were grouped by
age (previous editions)
 Point Scale: test organized
into subtests by category
of item, not by age at
which most testtakers are
presumed capable of
responding in the way that
is keyed correct
IN A NUTSHELL
TEST COMPOSITE
 Defined as a test score
or index derived from
the combination of,
and/or a mathematical
transformation of, one
or more subtest scores
SB-5 FIFTH EDITION
 Designed for
administration to
assess as young as 2
and as old as 85
 Yields a number of
scores
SB-5 COMPOSITE SCORES
 FullScale IQ derived
from the
administration of 10
subtests
SB-5 THEORETICAL BASIS
 Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory of Intellectual
Abilities
 The CHC factors were clearly recognizable in the
early editions of the Binet Scales
SB-5 STANDARDIZATION
 Five years in development and
extensive item analysis to address
possible objections on the ground
of gender, racial/ethnic, cultural, or
religious
 Examinees in the norming sample
were 4,800 subjects from age 2 to
over 85
 Nationally representative based on
the 2000 US census data, stratified
with regard to age, race/ethnicity,
geographic region, and
socioeconomic level
SB-5 PSYCHOMETRIC
SOUNDNESS
 Internal-consistency reliability
formula designed for the sum
of multiple tests
 Full Scale IQ consistently high
(.97 to .98) across age groups
 Reliability for Abbreviated
Battery I: average of .91
 Inter-scorer reliability
coefficients: ranged from .74 to
.97 with an overall median of .
90
SB-5 TEST ADMINISTRATION
 Adaptive testing:
testing individually
tailored to the testtaker
 Helps ensure that the
early test or subtest
items are not so
difficult and not so
easy
ADVANTAGE OF BEGINNING AN
INTELLIGENCE TEST OR SUBTEST AT AN
OPTIMAL LEVEL OF DIFFICULTY
 Allows test user to collect
maximum amount of
information in the
minimum amount of time
 Facilitates rapport
 Minimizes the potential
for examinee fatigue
from being administered
too many items
ROUTING TEST
 Defined as a task used to
direct or route the
examinee to a particular
level of questions
 Purpose is to direct
examinee to test items
that have a high
probability of being at an
optimal level of difficulty
TEACHING ITEMS
 Included in to routing tests
 Designed to illustrate the task
required and assure the
examiner that the examinee
understands
 Qualitative aspects of an
examinee’s performance on
teaching items may be
recorded as examiner
observations on the test
protocol
ROUTING TESTS ON SB-5
 Activity names: Object
Series/Matrices and
Vocabulary
 Factor-related names:
Nonverbal Fluid Reasoning
and Verbal Knowledge
 Same two subtests are
administered for the purpose
of obtaining the Abbreviated
Battery IQ Score
DESCRIPTIONS OF ITEMS OF A SUBTEST
IN INTELLIGENCE AND OTHER ABILITY
TESTS
 Floor: lowest level of items in a subtest
 (From developmentally delayed to
intellectually gifted)
 Ceiling: highest-level item of the
subtest
 Basal Level: describe a subtest with
reference to a specific testtaker’s
performance
 Examinee answers two consecutive
items correctly
 If examinee fails a certain number of
items in a row, a ceiling level is said to
have been reached and testing is
discontinued
SB-5 SCORING AND
INTERPRETATION
 Manual contains
explicit directions for
administering, scoring,
and interpreting the
test in addition to
numerous examples of
correct and incorrect
responses
SB-5 SCORING
 Tallied to yield raw
scores on each of the
various subtest scores
into a standard score
 From the standard
scores, composite
scores are derived
KNOWLEDGEABLE TEST
USER
 Administration of SB5 may yield
 Full Scale IQ and related composite scores
 Testtaker’s strengths and weaknesses with respect to
cognitive functioning
 Information may be used by clinical and academic
professionals in interventions designed to make a
meaningful difference in the quality of examinees’
lives
METHODS OF PROFILE ANALYSIS FOR USE
WITH ALL MAJOR TESTS OF COGNITIVE
ABILITY
 Identificationof differences between subtest,
composite, and other types of index scores
 Detailed analysis of factors analyzing those
differences
 Reliance of statistical calculations and normative
data
 Large difference between scores in analysis,
uncommon or infrequent
SB-5 BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATION
 Assessor must be alert to the assessee’s extratest
behavior to supplement the test score
 The way examinee copes with frustration
 How examinee reacts to items considered very easy
 Amount of support examinee seems to require
 General approach to the task
 How anxious, fatigued, cooperative, distractible, or
compulsive the examinee seems to be
CUT-OFF BOUNDARIES FOR SB5
INTELLIGENCE TESTS
The Wechsler Tests
DAVID WECHSLER
 Designed a series of individually administered
intelligence tests to assess intellectual abilities of
people from preschool to adulthood
LISTING OF SUBTESTS SPECIFIC TO
INDIVIDUAL WECHSLER SCALES
 P. 332 of book
COMMONALITY BETWEEN
WECHSLER SCALES
 Wechsler tests: all point scales that yield deviation IQs with a
mean of 100 (interpreted as average) and a standard
deviation of 15.
 On each test, testtaker’s performance compared with scores
earned by others in the age group
 Clearly written manuals that provide descriptions of each of
the subtests, including the rationale for their inclusion
 Manuals also contain clear, explicit directions for
administering subtests as well as a number of standard
prompts for dealing with a variety of questions comments, or
other contingencies
COMMONALITY BETWEEN
WECHSLER SCALES
 Similar starting, stopping, and discontinue guidelines
 Explicit scoring instructions with clear example
 For interpretation: all manuals come with statistical
chards that can prove useful when making
recommendations on the basis of assessment
 Aftermarket publications authored by various
assessment professionals available to supplement
guidelines presented in manuals
EVALUATION OF WECHSLER
TESTS
 Favorable from a psychometric standpoint
 Coefficients of reliability vary as a function of the
specific type of reliability assessed are generally
satisfactory
 Internal consistency
 Test-retest reliability
 Inter-scorer reliability
WECHSLER TESTS IN USE
 Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition
(WAIS-IV): Ages 16 to 90 years 11 months
 Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth
Edition (WISC-IV): Ages 6 to 16 years 11 months
 Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of
Intelligence-Third Edition (WPPSI-III) Ages 3 to 7
years and 3 months
WECHSLER ADULT INTELLIGENCE
SCALE-FOURTH EDITION: (WAIS-IV)
 Developed by David Wechsler in the early 1930s
 Bellevue Hospital, Manhattan: need an instrument
for evaluating the intellectual capacity of
multilingual, multinational, and multicultural
clients
 Wechsler was dissatisfied with existing
intelligence tests
WECHSLER TESTS
 W-B I: point scale
 Items were classified by subtests rather than by
age
 Test organized into six verbal subtests and five
performance subtests, all items in each test were
arranged in order of increasing difficulty
WECHSLER TESTS:
PROBLEMS
 Standardization sample restricted
 Some subtests lacked sufficient inter-item
reliability
 Some subtests were made up of items that were
too easy
 Scoring criteria for certain items were too
ambiguous
WECHSLER ADULT
INTELLIGENCE SCALE: WAIS
 Published 16 years after
 Organized into Verbal and Performance Scale
 Scoring yielded
 Verbal IQ
 Performance IQ
 Full Scale IQ
 Quickly achieved status as “the standard against
which other adult tests can be compared
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-
Revised (WAIS-R)
 Published in 1981 shortly after Wechsler’s death in
May
 New norms and updated materials
 Administration manual mandated alternate
administration of verbal and performance test
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III
(WAIS-III)
 Published in 1997, authorship credited to David Wechsler
 Contained updated and more user-friendly materials
 Test materials made physically larger to facilitate viewing
by older adults
 Some items added to each subtest that extended the test’s
floor in order to make the test more useful for evaluating
people with extreme intellectual deficits
 Extensive research: designed to detect and eliminate items
with cultural bias
 Norms extended to include testtakers between 74 to 89
WAIS-III
 Co normed with the Wechsler Memory Scale-Third
Edition (WMS-III)
 Facilitating comparisons of memory with other indices of
intellectual functioning when the WMS-III and the WAIS-
III were administered
 Full Scale Composite IQ (4 index scores)
 Verbal Comprehension
 Perceptual Organization
 Working Memory
 Processing Speed
WECHSLER ADULT
INTELLIGENCE SCALE IV
 Most recent edition
 Made up of subtests designated as core or
supplemental
 Core subtest: one administered to obtain a composite
score
 Supplemental Subtest (Optional Subtest): used for
purposes such as providing additional clinical
information
WHEN TO GIVE A
SUPPLEMENTAL SUBTEST
 The examinee incorrectly administered a core
subtest
 The assessee had been inappropriately exposed to
the subtest items prior to their administration
 The assessee evidenced a physical limitation that
affected the assessee’s ability to effectively
respond to the items of a particular subtest
WAIS-IV
 Ten core subtests: Block Design, Similarities,
Digit Span, Matrix Reasoning, Vocabulary,
Arithmetic, Symbol Search, Visual Puzzles,
Information, and Coding
 Five supplemental subtests: Letter-Number
Sequencing, Figure Weights, Comprehension,
Cancellation, and Picture Completion
CHANGES IN WAIS-IV
 Enlargement of the images in the Picture Completion,
Symbol Search, and Coding subtests
 Recommended nonadministration of certain supplemental
tests that tap
 Short-term memory
 Hand-eye coordination, and/or
 Motor Speed for testtakers above the age of 69
 Average reduction in overall test administration time from
80 to 67 minutes (shortening number of items the testtaker
must fail before a subtest is discontinued)
DEVELOPERS OF WAIS-IV
 Deemed subtests to be loading on four factors
 Verbal Comprehension
 Working Memory
 Perceptual Reasoning
 Processing Speed
STANDARDIZATION AND NORMS
 Sample consisted of 2,200 adults from age 16 to
90, 11 months
 Stratified on the basis of 2005 US Census data
 Most subtest raw scores for each age group were
converted to percentiles and to scale with a
meanof 10
WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR
CHILDREN-FOURTH EDITION (WISC-IV)
 Background:
 First published in 1949
 Represented downward extension of the W-B II
 Well-standardized, stable instrument correlating well
with other tests of intelligence
 White children in the standardization sample
WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR
CHILDREN-FOURTH EDITION (WISC-IV)
 REVISION: WISC-R
 Included non-whites in the standardization sample
 Test material pictures were more balanced culturally
 Test’s language modernized and “child-ized”
WHY REVISIONS WERE
UNDERTAKEN
 Update and improve test items as well as norms
 Symbol Search Subtest: introduced in WISC-III;
test added as the result of research on controlled
attention, and it was thought to tap freedom from
distractibility
WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR
CHILDREN-FOURTH EDITION (WISC-IV)
 Culmination of a five year research program
involving several research stages
 Conceptual development through final assembly and
evaluation
 “Warming” to the CHC model of intelligence
 Emphasized that cognitive functions were
interrelated, making it difficult if not impossible to
obtain a “pure” measure of a function
WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR
CHILDREN-FOURTH EDITION (WISC-IV)
 Developersrevised the test so it now yields a
measure of general intellectual functioning
 Verbal Comprehension Index
 Perceptual Reasoning Index
 Working Memory Index
 Processing Speed Index
 Scores from each index, based on core subtests only,
combine to yield a Full Scale IQ
WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR
CHILDREN-FOURTH EDITION (WISC-IV)
 Can derive up to seven process scores by using
tables supplied in the Administration and Scoring
Manual
 Process score: index designed to help understand the
way the testtaker processes various kinds of
information
WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR
CHILDREN-FOURTH EDITION (WISC-IV)
 After pilot work and tryout
 Stratified sample of 2,200 subjects ranging in age
from 6 years to 16 years and 11 months
 Sample stratified to be representative of US Census
data for 2000
 Psychometric soundness of the test
 Evidence present to support test’s internal consistency
and test-retest stability
 Evidence of inter-scorer agreement (low to high .90s)
COMPARING WISC TO SB5
SB5 WISC
 Can be used with  Has become a tradition
testtakers both much among assessors who
younger and much test children
older than WISC  Published in 2003
 Published in 2003
COMPARING THE WISC-IV TO
SB5
SB5 WISC
 Individually administered, takes  Contains five
an hour or so of test
administration time to yield a supplemental subtest
Full Scale Composite Score (30 minutes more)
based on the administration of 10
 Individually
subtests
 No supplemental tests administered
 Can derive an Abbreviated
 No short forms
Battery IQ from administration of
2 subtests
COMPARING THE WISC-IV TO
SB5
SB5 WISC-IV
 Norming sample 6 to  Norming sample 6 to
16, 2,200 16, 2,200
 Included  Included parent
socioeconomic status education as one
and testtaker education stratifying variable
WECHSLER PRESCHOOL AND PRIMARY SCALE
OF INTELLIGENCE-THIRD EDITION (WPPSI-III)
 Wechsler (1967) decided a new scale should be
developed and standardized for children under age
6, for those who were culturally different or
exceptional
 Published in 1967, extended range of Wechsler
series of intelligence tests downward to age 4
WECHSLER PRESCHOOL AND PRIMARY SCALE
OF INTELLIGENCE-THIRD EDITION (WPPSI-III)
 First major intelligence test that adequately
sampled population of the United States (including
racial minorities)
 Advantage contributed greatly to success of
WPPSI
 Designed to assess the intelligence of children
from ages
WECHSLER PRESCHOOL AND PRIMARY SCALE
OF INTELLIGENCE-THIRD EDITION (WPPSI-III)
 Utilityof the Verbal/Performance dichotomy was
reaffirmed in the WPPSI-III manual
 Three composite scores
 Verbal IQ
 Performance IQ
 Full Scale IQ
CHANGES IN THE WPPSI-III
 Five subtests were dropped (Arithmetic, Animal
Pegs, Geometric Design, Mazes, and Sentences)
 New Subtests were added (Matrix Reasoning,
Picture Concepts, Word Reasoning, Coding,
Symbol Search, Receptive Vocabulary, and Picture
Naming)
 Subtests were labeled Core, Supplemental, or
Optional
CHANGES IN THE WPPSI-III
 Core Subtests: required for calculation of
composite scores
 Supplemental: used to provide a broader sampling
of intellectual functioning, also substitute for a
core test if core subtest was not administered or
was administered by not usable
 Optional: May not be used to substitute for core
subtests but may be used in the derivation of
optional scores (General Language Composite)
STRUCTURE OF WPPSI-III
 Reflects interest of test developers in enhancing
measures of fluid reasoning and processing speed
 Three new tests (Matrix Reasoning, Picture
Concepts and Word Reasoning) designed to tap
fluid reasoning
 Two new tests (Coding and Symbol Search)
designed to tap processing speed
WECHSLER, BINET AND THE
SHORT FORM
 Short form: test that has been abbreviated in length
to reduce time needed for administration, scoring,
and interpretation
 Short attention span of testtaker
 Seven subtest short form of the WAIS-III sometimes
used by clinicians, seems to demonstrate acceptable
psychometric characteristics
WECHSLER ABBREVIATED
SCALE OF INTELLIGENCE
 Published in 1999
 Designed to answer need for a short instrument to
screen intellectual ability in testtakers from 6 to 89
years of age
 Two-subtest form (Vocabulary and Block design)
 15-minutes to administer
 Four subtests (Vocabulary, Block Design, Similarities,
and Matrix Reasoning) WISC- and WAIS-type
subtests with high correlations with Full Scale IQ
WECHSLER ABBREVIATED
SCALE OF INTELLIGENCE
 Yields measures of
 Verbal IQ
 Performance IQ
 Full Scale IQ (Set at 100 with a standard deviation
of 15)
 Standardized with 2,245 cases (1,100 children and
1,145 adults)
 Satisfactory psychometric soundness
WECHSLER TESTS IN
PERSPECTIVE
 Illustrations
of exemplary practices in test
development
 Learn to administer tests relatively quickly,
examinees fin test materials engaging
 Computer-assisted scoring and interpretive aids
available; Manuals and guides
OTHER MEASURES OF INTELLIGENCE:
INDIVIDUAL ADMINISTRATION
 Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test
(KAIT)
 Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (K-BIT)
 Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-
ABC): focused on information processing
(sequential and simultaneous processing)
 Cognitive Assessment System: drew on theoretical
writings of A.R. Luria
OTHER MEASURES OF INTELLIGENCE:
INDIVIDUAL ADMINISTRATION
 Differential Ability Scales (DAS): widely used in
educational settings
 Draw-A-Person: Goodenough-Harris scoring
system; controversial in the use to assess
intelligence
OTHER MEASURES OF INTELLIGENCE:
GROUP ADMINISTRATION
 Army Alpha Test: administered to those who could
read
 Army Beta Test: designed for administration to
foreign-born recruits with poor knowledge of English
or illiterate recruits
 Contained tasks: mazes, coding, and picture completion
 1919: nearly 2 million recruits had been tested, 8,000
of whom had been recommended for immediate
discharge on the basis of test results
OTHER MEASURES OF INTELLIGENCE:
GROUP ADMINISTRATION
 Objective:Measure the ability to be a good soldier
 Army General Classification Test (AGCT):
administered to more than 12 million recruits
 Group Tests: administered for screening purposes
 Screening tool: instrument or procedure used to
identify a particular trait or constellation of traits at a
gross or imprecise level
QUALIFYING TESTS
 Officer Qualifying Test: 115 multiple-choice test
used by US Navy as admissions test to Officer
Candidate School
 Airman Qualifying Exam: 200-item multiple-
choice test given to all U.S. Air Force Volunteers
 Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery
(ASVAB): administered to prospective new
recruits in all the armed services
GROUP TESTS IN SCHOOLS
 Group Intelligence Tests
 Provide school personnel with valuable information
for instruction-related activities
 Increased understanding of the individual pupil
 Primary function of data is to alert educators to
students who might profit from more extensive
assessment with individually administered ability
tests
TESTS ADMINISTERED IN
SCHOOLS
 CaliforniaTest of Mental Maturity
 Kuhlmann-Anderson Intelligence Tests
 Henmon-Nelson Tests of Mental Ability
 Cognitive Abilities Test
 Otis-Lennon School Ability Test: designed to
measure abstract thinking and reasoning ability
and placement-decision-making
MEASURES OF SPECIFIC
INTELLECTUAL ABILITIES
 Creativity: originality, fluency, flexibility, orientation
 Originality: ability to produce something innovative or
nonobvious
 Fluency: easy with which responses are reproduced,
measured by total number of responses produced
 Flexibility: variety of ideas presented and ability to
shift from one approach to another
 Elaboration: richness of detail in verbal explanation or
pictorial display
THOUGHT PROCESSES
 Convergent thinking: deductive reasoning that
entails recall and consideration of facts and a
series of logical judgments to narrow down
solutions and arrive at one solution (Guilford)
 Divergent thinking: thought is free to move in
many different directions, making several
solutions possible; requires flexibility of thought,
originality, and imagination
PSYCHOEDUCATIONAL
BATTERIES
 Tests developed to test intelligence AND related
abilities in educational settings