In a study of the construct validity of composite and selected subtest scores of the Differential Ability Scales (DAS), scores from the DAS, WISC-R, and Stanford Achievement Test were compared for 46 students in a rural school district. The data were analyzed with multitrait-multimethod matrices to investigate convergent and discriminant validity. The results indicate that while some DAS composites and subtests relate closely to their similar WISC-R counterparts, others do not. It is suggested that while both batteries yield adequate measures of general intelligence, different cognitive processes are reflected in the composites and their constituent subtests. The DAS subtests have been shown to have good specificity for the support of profile analysis, but more research is needed to determine what processes contribute to performance on the subtests.
WISC-III subtest scores of 180 children referred because of academic difficulties were analyzed for differences based on age (M = 9.6, SD = 2.7) and IQ. Rank-orders of all subtests indicated no significant correlations across the six age-IQ groups, suggesting that interpretation of changes in subtest rankings may require consideration of age and IQ, especially for such children. When data were organized into Acquired Knowledge, Spatial Ability, and speed-related task categories, analyses of variance showed a main effect for IQ. Furthermore, scores on Acquired Knowledge were associated with age at the lower category of IQ, whereas Spatial Ability and speed-related tasks were not related to age.
WISC-R subtest scores of 385 children referred for academic difficulties were analyzed for patterns in subtest ranks. No over-all differences in subtest ranks between children low and high in intelligence were found. Differences were discovered, however, which seemed to be related to chronological age, and the implications of this finding for profile analysis are discussed.
WISC-R subtest scores of 162 children referred for academic difficulties were analyzed for patterns in subtest ranks to replicate an earlier study. As in the first study, differences seem to be related to chronological age.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.