TY - JOUR
T1 - WISC-IV and Clinical Validation of the Four- and Five-Factor Interpretative Approaches
AU - Weiss, Lawrence G.
AU - Keith, Timothy Z.
AU - Zhu, Jianjun
AU - Chen, Hsinyi
PY - 2013/4
Y1 - 2013/4
N2 - The purpose of this study was to determine the constructs measured by the WISC-IV and the consistency of measurement across large normative and clinical samples. Competing higher order four- and five-factor models were analyzed using the WISC-IV normative sample and clinical subjects. The four-factor solution is the model published with the test manual. In the five-factor model, the POI differentiated into a visual-spatial factor (consisting of Block Design and Picture Completion) and a fluid reasoning factor (consisting of Matrix Reasoning and Picture Concepts, with and Arithmetic). The five-factor solution included Inductive Reasoning (IR), consisting of Matrix Reasoning and Picture Concepts, as a narrow ability subsumed under the FRI (Gf). When all 15 WISC-IV subtests were considered, both four- and five-factor models were suitable and showed close model-data fit. Further, both models generally demonstrated full factorial invariance between clinical and nonclinical samples. Interpretation of the fifth factor is discussed.
AB - The purpose of this study was to determine the constructs measured by the WISC-IV and the consistency of measurement across large normative and clinical samples. Competing higher order four- and five-factor models were analyzed using the WISC-IV normative sample and clinical subjects. The four-factor solution is the model published with the test manual. In the five-factor model, the POI differentiated into a visual-spatial factor (consisting of Block Design and Picture Completion) and a fluid reasoning factor (consisting of Matrix Reasoning and Picture Concepts, with and Arithmetic). The five-factor solution included Inductive Reasoning (IR), consisting of Matrix Reasoning and Picture Concepts, as a narrow ability subsumed under the FRI (Gf). When all 15 WISC-IV subtests were considered, both four- and five-factor models were suitable and showed close model-data fit. Further, both models generally demonstrated full factorial invariance between clinical and nonclinical samples. Interpretation of the fifth factor is discussed.
KW - MG-MACS
KW - Wechsler scales
KW - fluid reasoning
KW - measurement Invariance
KW - quantitative reasoning
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84876251311&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84876251311&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0734282913478032
DO - 10.1177/0734282913478032
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84876251311
SN - 0734-2829
VL - 31
SP - 114
EP - 131
JO - Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment
JF - Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment
IS - 2
ER -