The Validity of Three Brief Measures of Intelligence for Disabled Readers

Pikulski, John J.

doi:10.1080/00220671.1973.10884564

Cited by 10 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, Allen, Haupt, and Jones (1964-) Conversely, numerous studies reviewed showed no significant difference between PPVT IQ's and mental ages and those resulting from the WISC or Stanford-Binet. Such results were reported by Anderson and Flax (1968), Cochran (1970), Cochran and Pedrini (1969), Coyle, Dans, and Cork (1968), Ernhart (1970), Gage and Naumann (1965), Groden, Branson, and l"lann (1976), Hammill and Irwin (1965), Kaufman and Ivanoff (1968), Kicklighter (1966), McArthur and Wakefield (1968), Pikulski (1973), Pilley, Harris, Miller, and Rice (1975), Richmond and Long (1977), Ritter, Duffey, and Fischman (1974), and Wells and Pedrini (1971).…”

Section: Validity With a Developmentally Delayed Populationsupporting

confidence: 56%

Comparison of two receptive language tests (PPVT and TACL) used with the developmentally delayed

Lamb

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Validity With a Developmentally Delayed Populationsupporting

confidence: 56%

Comparison of two receptive language tests (PPVT and TACL) used with the developmentally delayed

Lamb

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A limiting factor with regard to interpreting the SIT-achievement findings is that many of the studies reviewed correlated SIT Table 3 summarizes the SIT-achievement correlational findings. Hammill, 1969Shepherd, 1969Hammill, et al, 1970 Stewart, et al, Hutton, 19721971Johnson, 1972 Martin and Lamp and Rudolph, 1972 Traxler, 1973 Lamp, Traxler, Miller, 1973 and Gust,afson, 1973 Pikulski, 1973 Johnson and Shniedling, Raskin, et al, 1974 Richard Slosson (1963) intended that the S I T be used only as a screening instrument for the evaluation of general intelligence. Nevertheless, whenever a test is made up of different kinds of items (similarities and differences, arithmetical reasoning, vocabulary, auditory attention span, etc.…”

Section: Relationships With Achievementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of the Slosson Intelligence Test: A ten-year review

Stewart

Jones

1976

Psychol. Schs.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ten years of validity research concerning the Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT) is reviewed. The equivalence of the SIT to the Stanford-Binet and the Wechsler Scales is examined and the relationship of the SIT to achievement measures is described. The importance of supplementing correlational findings with regression analysis, mean difference data, and information on misclassification is emphasized by the reviewers. Declsions concerning individuals based on SIT I& scores are viewed as particularly risky in situations involving groups of subjects characterized by a relatively narrow range of I& scores.The last decade has seen an increasing use of the Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT) in a variety of professional and educational settings. In some situations, the SIT is accepted as a valid individual intelligence test and is used for such purposes as special class placement. More and more in the last few years the SIT is being used for retesting purposes where individual intelligence test results are needed or required. In view of these developments, a review and evaluation of validity research concerning the SIT should prove useful t o psychologists, counselors, and educators.The validity of the SIT will be examined within three contexts: (a) comparability or equivalence of the SIT to the Stanford-Binet and Wechsler Scales as an index of general intelligence; (b) usefulness of the SIT in predicting achievement; and (c) comparative usefulness of the SIT for assessment or clinical interpretation purposes. Table 1 presents a summary of SIT-S-B validity results. Of 12 reported correlations, 8 are in the .9Os range. The correlations in the .60 to upper .?Os range all are based on samples of subjects characterized by a restricted range of I& scores (note the standard deviations). The median correlation between the SIT and the S-B is .91 for this group of studies. Thus, the overall correlational picture suggests that with groups of subjects in which the range of scores is not restricted, the SIT relates t o the S-B to such a high degree that one can be confident that subjects are being ranked very nearly in the same order by the two tests. Further, only two of the 14 groups compared in these studies showed more than a two I& point difference between SIT mean IQ and Stanford-Binet mean I&. I n spite of these impressive findings, caution should be used in individual diagnosis and in decision-making in situations where the decisions are in a restricted I& range context, such as identifying an individual as a "slow learner" vs. "mildly retarded," or distinguishing between mild vs. moderate levels of retardation. Even in the above studies where the correlation between the SIT and the StanfordBinet was very high, substantial differences in I& could be observed for a significant percentage of the subjects. For example, in the Stewart, et al., (1971) study, 16% of their subjects had SIT IQs which were 10 or more points different from their Requests for re rints should be sent to Kenneth D. COMPARABILITY OF THE SIT TO THE STANFORD-BINET

show abstract

“…A number of investigators (Covin, 1977;Houston & Otto, 1968;Jongeward, 1969;Lessler & Galinsky, 1971;Pikulski, 1973;Stewart, Wood, & Gallman, 1971;Swanson & Jacobson, 1970) have shown strong statistical relationships between WISC-R or WISC IQs (particularly Verbal IQs) and SIT IQs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of three screening tests and the WISC-R in special education evaluations

Crofoot

Bennett

1980

Psychol. Schs.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eighty public school children referred for psychological assessment for potential special education placement were given the Slosson lntelligence Test, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration, and Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised. Correlational and regression techniques were used to determine the effectiveness of the three former measures in predicting WlSC-R IQ scores. SIT IQs were found to be the best predictors of WISC-R Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale IQs; however, these statistical relationships reveal little about the clinical utility of the screening measures. Problems with use of the current findings and those of other studies are discussed.

show abstract

The Validity of Three Brief Measures of Intelligence for Disabled Readers

Cited by 10 publications

References 1 publication

Comparison of two receptive language tests (PPVT and TACL) used with the developmentally delayed

Comparison of two receptive language tests (PPVT and TACL) used with the developmentally delayed

Validity of the Slosson Intelligence Test: A ten-year review

A comparison of three screening tests and the WISC-R in special education evaluations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About