Test Review: Review of Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Second Edition

Abstract

Second Edition (KBIT-2; Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004b) is designed to provide a brief, individualized format for measuring verbal and nonverbal intelligence in children and adults from the ages of 4 years, 0 months through 90 years, 11 months. The test consists of only three subtests. Two are classified as Verbal subtests, and one is classified as a Nonverbal subtest. The KBIT-2 was developed alongside the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition (KABC-II; Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004a) and is primarily associated with the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model of assessment and interpretation (Carroll, 1997). According to the KBIT-2 Manual, the entire test can be administered in approximately 15 to 30 minutes. Kaufman and Kaufman (2004b) recommend that the KBIT-2 be used as a screener for intellectual abilities in situations such as identification of children who are at-risk for academic problems, as part of gifted and talented selection (although full-scale assessment may be necessary to fulfill state guidelines), as part of assessment procedures for job applicants, as part of test batteries where the intellectual profile is not the primary concern, for forensic purposes, for re-evaluations, and for various similar circumstances that do not demand full-scale assessment of cognitive ability. The test authors caution against using the KBIT-2 for the purposes of diagnosis or placement, as more comprehensive assessment would most likely be necessary for these purposes.Unlike full-scale intelligence tests, the KBIT-2 is classified as a Level B instrument and may be administered by psychologists as well as by nonpsychologists such as educators and vocational or medical personnel who have received appropriate training and practice. Kaufman and Kaufman justify this recommendation based on the objective scoring elements. The verbal questions require one-word responses, and visual items require only pointing to the correct choice. Interpretation of test results should be carried out by individuals with formal training in assessment.The original KBIT (Kaufman & Kaufman, 1990) contained three subtests: Expressive Vocabulary, Definitions, and Matrices. In revising the test, the test authors decided to drop the Definitions subtest because of its reading requirement, replacing it with the new Verbal Knowledge Subtest, which requires no reading on the part of the examinee and which was deemed to be a cleaner measure of verbal ability.

Metabolic control and academic achievement over time among adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

“…The mean for the test-retest reliability coefficient was .90 and the mean for the internal consistency coefficient was .93 for the KBIT-2 IQ Composite (Bain & Jaspers, 2010) indicating high reliability. Mean cognitive scores for this sample of youth with type 1 diabetes fell within the average range.…”

Prenatal Cocaine Exposure Impacts Language and Reading Into Late Adolescence: Behavioral and ERP Evidence

“…5 The behavioral data collection procedure took 1.5–2 hours to complete. Each of these behavioral assessments has been shown to have medium-high to high reliability (correlation coefficients > .80) and validity (correlation coefficients > .54) across multiple independent studies (Bain & Jaspers, 2010; Semel et al, 1995; Vladescu, 2007). Behavioral assessment data were analyzed using a MANCOVA, with each of the behavioral assessment measures as a dependent variable, group (PCE, NDE) as a fixed factor, and age, grade, SES, and other drug use (based on self-reported tobacco, marijuana, and alcohol use during the 30 days prior to birth) included as covariates.…”

Note-Taking Instruction for College Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…It reportedly has a mean split-half reliability of 0.93 and a mean test-retest reliability of 0.90 (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004b). Validity has been established in comparisons with other measures of intelligence with correlations ranging from 0.76 to 0.90 (Bain & Jaspers, 2010) Reading We elected to use the Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency (TOSCRF; Hammill, Wiederholt, & Allen, 2006) to measure students' reading ability because the note taking our participants would perform involved quickly processing words that appeared on electronic slides in order to discern relevant information. The TOSCRF consists of a series of increasingly longer text segments written in all capital letters with no spaces between the words.…”