The AVOM: A model-derived, age-limited, and modality-related test of intellectual functioning

Abstract

The m e n t statue of intellectual assessment is reviewed. Traditional psychometric techniques are criticized for yielding only a single score that purportg to measure the individual's intellectual ability. Such a unified score gives no indication of what specific deficit is present, nor does it suggest a strategy for remediation. The AVOM Test is presented as a potentially useful device.This experimental test measures performance in two input channels, auditory and visual, and two output channels, oral and manual. AVOM was sdministered to over 200 elementary school students. Scores increased with age, and the other results were supportive of the potential utility of the device.The purpose of this paper is to present an age-limited (9-10-11 years), modalityrelated (Auditory-Visual-Oral-Manual) measure of cognitive functioning that was finally constructed to test directly a psgchodiagnostic model based on information processing proposed originally by L'Abate (1969). Early tests of this model were made by a hodgepodge of already existing techniques (L'Abate, 1971) that were indirectly and unsatisfactorily related to the model itself. On the basis of these unclear and unsatisfactory results, it becomes important to construct a modelderived test that would directly test its validity.There are several problems with existing theories of intelligence (Guilford, 1956; Spearman, 1904; Thurstone, 1938). First of all, no single theory can account for all of the data concerning intellectual abilities. Secondly, and most importantly, tests derived from these theories are of little or no utility in specifying rehabilitative techniques that are appropriate for various intellective deficiencies. Bateman (1963) listed a number of very convincing reasons for her conclusion that the use of a single I& score, the usual outcome of traditional psychometric devices, is inadequate for specifying the appropriate rehabilitation techniques. She cited a case study in which a child was found to be deficient in the reception of visual stimuli and in motor expression. Substantial improvements in the child's functioning were observed following specific tutoring in these problem areas. Obviously, a unitary I& measure could not have yielded this valuable information.A great deal of concern among intelligence researchers has been devoted to the presence of a general factor and to the verbal-nonverbal distinction. As undeniably important as both areas may be (or have been), we submit instead that a much more important distinction has been neglected by investigators and clinicians alike (Cancro, 1971;Eysenck, 1973;Hunt, 1972;Riegel, 1973; Sattler, 1975), and that is: the reception, recognition or input, and decoding vs. expression, cncoding, and performance that has received much more attention from linguists (Chomski, 1Ap reciation is extended to the officials of the Atlanta Public School System for their moperation wi g this study, as well as to the student0 who helped us with the collection and scoring of the &a, especially Janet Campbell, Bpnnie...