Validity of the Draw a Person: A Quantitative Scoring System with the WISC-R

Wisniewski, Jack J.; Naglieri, Jack A.

doi:10.1177/073428298900700408

Cited by 15 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When the analysis was conducted without controlling for sex, r = 0.30, p = 0.002. The magnitude of this partial correlation is slightly lower than the correlations between 6- to 11-year-old children's scores on the DAP:IQ and the WISC-III that are reported in the DAP:IQ manual [11], but it is consistent with previous studies which have typically found modest to moderate correlations between children's standard scores on earlier versions of HFD tests of intelligence (e.g., DAP:QSS) and the Wechsler tests [10], [26], [27], [28], [29], [31], [32], [33], [34], [45].…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Drawing a Close to the Use of Human Figure Drawings as a Projective Measure of Intelligence

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The practice of using children's human figure drawings (HFDs) to assess their intellectual ability is pervasive among psychologists and therapists in many countries. Since the first systematic scoring system for HFDs was published in 1926, their continued popularity has led to the development of several revised versions of the test. Most recently, the Draw-A-Person Intellectual Ability Test for children, adolescents, and adults (DAP:IQ) was published. It is the most up-to-date form of HFD test designed to assess intellectual functioning across a wide age range. In the present study, we assessed the validity of the DAP:IQ as a screening measure of intelligence in both children and adults. In Experiment 1, 100 4- to 5-year-old children completed the DAP:IQ and the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-Third Edition. In Experiment 2, 100 adults completed the DAP:IQ and the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence. In both experiments, we found only weak to modest correlations between scores on the DAP:IQ and the Wechsler tests. Furthermore, when we compared individual's scores on the two tests, the DAP:IQ yielded high false positive and false negative rates when screening for borderline and superior intellectual functioning. Based on these findings, and based on the lack of validity of previous HFD tests, we conclude that practitioners should not rely on HFD tests as a projective measure of intelligence.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Taken together, these findings suggest that the DAP:IQ is a highly reliable measure, however, its correlations to other measures of intelligence are moderate at best. Similar findings have been reported for previous HFD tests such as the DAMT [26], GHDT [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], and the DAP:QSS [10], [21], [28], [32], [33], [34].…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Drawing a Close to the Use of Human Figure Drawings as a Projective Measure of Intelligence

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The relationship between the DAP:QSS and measures of intelligence and academic functioning has been reported in previous research (Naglieri, 1988;Prewett, Bardos, & Naglieri, 1988, 1989Wisniewski & Naglieri, 1989). The results of these studies provide initial support for using the DAP:QSS as a screening measure of cognitive abilities.…”

supporting

confidence: 78%

The relationship between young children's academic achievement and measures of intelligence

Lassiter

Bárdŏs

1995

Psychol. Schs.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To test the construct validity of brief measures of intelligence and explore how well these instruments relate to academic performance, the WPPSI-R, the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Scale (K-BIT), Draw-A-Person: Quantitative Scoring System (DAP:QSS), and the K-ABC Achievement Scale were administered to 50 kindergarten and firstgrade children. Results indicated that all measures provide similar scores, all in the average range. All brief measures related significantly to academic achievement. Implications of the findings are discussed, and a battery for screening young children is offered.

show abstract

“…In addition, Prewett and colleagues (1989) reported correlation coefficients ranging from .34 to .41 between the DAP:QSS and the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-Comprehensive Form (KTEA) (Kaufman & Kaufman, 1985) for developmentally handicapped (DH) children. Similar correlations have been reported for the DAP:QSS when compared with the Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale scores of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R) (Wechsler, 1974) and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-III (WISC-III) (Wechsler, 1991); correlation coefficients ranged from .29 to .55 (Abell, Wood, & Liebman, 2001;Wisniewski & Naglieri, 1989).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 69%