BondGuy L.FayLeo C., “A Comparison of the Performance of Good and Poor Readers on the Individual Items of the Stanford-Binet Scale, Forms L and M.” Journal of Educational Research, XLIII (1950), 475–479.
2.
The Committee on Diagnostic Reading Tests, Inc.Diagnostic Reading Tests: A History of Their Construction and Validation. New York: The Committee on Diagnostic Reading Tests, Inc., 1952.
3.
The Committee on Diagnostic Reading Tests, Inc.Diagnostic Reading Tests: Their Interpretation and Use in the Teaching of Reading. New York: The Committee on Diagnostic Reading Tests, Inc., 1952.
4.
The Committee on Diagnostic Reading Tests, Inc.Diagnostic Reading Tests: Survey Section: Lower Level: Directions for Administering. New York: The Committee on Diagnostic Reading Tests, Inc., 1952.
5.
McCulloughConstance M. “Relationship between Intelligence and Gains in Reading Ability.” Journal of Educational Psychology, XXX (1939), 688–692.
6.
SeashoreHarold G. “Differences between Verbal and Performance IQ's on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children.” Journal of Consulting Psychology, XIII (1951), 62–67.
7.
StrangRuth. Relationships between Certain Aspects of Intelligence and Certain Aspects of Reading. Educational and Psychological Measurement, III (1945), 355–359.
8.
TraxlerArthur E. “A Study of the California Tests of Mental Maturity: Advanced Battery.” Journal of Educational Research, XXXII (1939), 329–335.
9.
TraxlerArthur E.Results of the Diagnostic Reading Tests for Grades 4, 5, and 6, Survey Section, among Independent School Pupils. Educational Records Bulletin, No. 60, (1953), 69–76.
10.
TriggsFrances Oralind. “Where Research in Reading is Leading.” In press.
11.
WechslerDavid, The Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale: Manual for Administering and Scoring the Test. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1946.
12.
WechslerDavid. The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children: Manual for Administering the Test. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1949.
13.
WheelerLester R. “The Relation of Reading to Intelligence.” School and Society, LXX (1949), 225–227.