This study employed observed factor index scores as well as latent ability constructs from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fourth Edition (WISC-IV; Wechsler, 2003) in estimating reading and mathematics achievement on the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test—Second Edition (WIAT-II; Wechsler, 2002). Participants were the nationally stratified linking sample (N = 498) of the WISC-IV and WIAT-II. Observed scores from the WISC-IV were analyzed using hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Although the factor index scores provided a statistically significant increment over the Full Scale IQ, the size of the improvement was too small to be of clinical utility. Observed WISC-IV subtest scores were also subjected to structural equation modeling (SEM) analyses. Subtest scores from the WISC-IV were fit to a general factor (g) and four ability constructs corresponding to factor indexes from the WISC-IV (Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Reasoning, Working Memory, and Processing Speed). For both reading and mathematics, only g (.55 and .77, respectively) and Verbal Comprehension (.37 and .17, respectively) were significant influences. Thus, when using observed scores to predict reading and mathematics achievement, it may only be necessary to consider the Full Scale IQ. In contrast, both g and Verbal Comprehension may be required for explanatory research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aaron, P.G. (1997). The impending demise of the discrepancy formula . Review of Educational Research, 67, 461—502.
2.
American Psychological Association, Board of Scientific Affairs. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns . The American Psychologist, 51, 77— 101.
3.
Arbuckle, J.L., & Wothke, W. (1999). Amos 4.0 user's guide. Chicago : Small Waters.
4.
Barkley, R.A. (1998). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
5.
Beebe, D.W., Pfiffner, L.J., & McBurnett, K. (2000). Evaluation of the validity of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Third edition comprehension and picture arrangement subtests as measures of social intelligence. Psychological Assessment, 12, 97—101.
6.
Bentler, P.M., & Bonett, D.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin,88, 588—606.
7.
Briggs, S.R., & Cheek, J.M. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality , 54, 106—148.
8.
Brody, N. (2002). g and the one—many problem: Is one enough? In The nature of intelligence (Novartis Foundation Symposium 233; pp. 122—135). New York: Wiley.
9.
Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136—162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
10.
Carroll, J.B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
11.
Cohen, J. (1959). The factorial structure of the WISC at ages 7-6, 10-6, and 13-6. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 23, 285—299.
12.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13.
Cohen, M., Becker, M.G., & Campbell, R. (1990). Relationships among four methods of assessment of children with attention deficit—hyperactivity disorder. Journal of School Psychology, 28, 189—202.
14.
Colom, R., Abad, F.J., Garcia, L.F., & Juan-Espinosa, M. (2002). Education, Wechsler's full scale IQ, and g. Intelligence, 30, 449—462.
15.
Cronbach, L.J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297—334.
16.
Cureton, E.E. (1957). Recipe for a cookbook. Psychological Bulletin,54, 494—497.
17.
Daley, C.E., & Nagle, R.J. (1996). Relevance of WISC-III indicators for assessment of learning disabilities. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment , 14, 320—333.
18.
Detterman, D.K. (2002). General intelligence: Cognitive and biological explanations. In The nature of intelligence (Novartis Foundation Symposium 233; pp. 223—243). New York: Wiley.
19.
Dumont, R., Farr, L.P., Willis, J.O., & Whelley, P. (1998). 30-second interval performance on the Coding subtest of the WISC-III: Further evidence of WISC folklore?Psychology in the Schools, 35, 111—117.
20.
Elliott, C.D. (1990). Di ferential ability scales. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
21.
Fiorello, C.A., Hale, J.B., McGrath, M., Ryan, K., & Quinn, S. (2002). IQ interpretation for children with flat and variable test profiles. Learning and Individual Di ferences,13, 115—125.
22.
Fletcher, J.M., Francis, D.J., Shaywitz, S.E., Lyon, G.R., Foorman, B.R., Stuebing, K.K., et al. (1998). Intelligent testing and the discrepancy model for children with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 13, 186—203.
23.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Speece, D.L. (2002). Treatment validity as a unifying construct for identifying learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly , 25, 33—45.
24.
Glutting, J.J., McDermott, P.A., Konold, T.R., Snelbaker, A.J., & Watkins, M.W. (1998). More ups and downs of subtest analysis: Criterion validity of the DAS with an unselected cohort. School Psychology Review, 27, 599—612.
25.
Glutting, J.J., McDermott, P.A., Watkins, M.W., Kush, J.C., & Konold, T.R. (1997). The base rate problem and its consequences for interpreting children's ability profiles. School Psychology Review, 26, 176—188.
26.
Glutting, J.J., McGrath, E.A., Kamphaus, R.W., & McDermott, P.A. (1992). Taxonomy and validity of subtest profiles on the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. The Journal of Special Education, 26, 85—115.
27.
Glutting, J.J., Watkins, M.W., & Youngstrom, E.A. (2003). Multifactored and cross-battery ability assessments: Are they worth the effort? In C. R. Reynolds & R. W. Kamphaus (Eds.), Handbook of psychological and educational assessment: Vol. 1. Intelligence and achievement (2nd ed., pp. 343—373). New York: Guilford Press.
28.
Glutting, J.J., Youngstrom, E.A., Ward, T., Ward, S., & Hale, R. (1997). Incremental efficacy of WISC-III factor scores in predicting achievement: What do they tell us?Psychological Assessment, 9, 295—301.
29.
Gottfredson, L.S. (1997). Intelligence and social policy. Intelligence, 24, 288—320.
30.
Gustafsson, J.E., & Balke, G. (1993). General and specific abilities as predictors of school achievement. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28, 407—434.
31.
Gustafsson, J.E., & Undheim, J.O. (1996). Individual differences in cognitive functions . In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 186—242). New York: Macmillan.
32.
Hale, J.B., Fiorello, C.A., Kavanagh, J.A., Hoeppner, J.B., & Gaither, R.A. (2001). WISC-III predictors of academic achievement for children with learning disabilities: Are global and factor scores comparable?School Psychology Quarterly, 16, 31—55.
33.
Haynes, S.N., & Lench, H.C. (2003). Incremental validity of new clinical assessment measures. Psychological Assessment, 15, 456—466.
34.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 76— 99). Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.
35.
Hunsley, J., & Meyer, G.J. (2003). The incremental validity of psychological testing and assessment: Conceptual, methodological, and statistical issues. Psychological Assessment, 15, 446—455.
36.
Jencks, C., Bartlett, S., Corcoran, M., Crouse, J., Eaglesfield, D., Jackson, G., et al. (1979). Who gets ahead? The determinants of economic success in America. New York: Basic Books.
37.
Jensen, A.R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CT: Praeger.
38.
Jones, W.T. (1952). A history of western philosophy. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
39.
Kahana, S.Y., Youngstrom, E.A., & Glutting, J.J. (2002). Factor and subtest discrepancies on the Differential Abilities Scales: Examining prevalence and validity in predicting academic achievement. Assessment,9, 82—93.
40.
Kamphaus, R.W. (1993). Clinical assessment of child and adolescent intelligence . Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
41.
Kamphaus, R.W. (2001). Clinical assessment of child and adolescent intelligence (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
42.
Kaplan, D. (1990). Evaluating and modifying covariance structure models: A review and recommendation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 137—155.
43.
Kaufman, A.S. (179). Intelligent testing with the WISC-R. New York: Wiley.
44.
Kaufman, A.S. (1994). Intelligent testing with the WISC-III. New York: Wiley.
45.
Kavale, K.A., & Forness, S.R. (1984). A meta-analysis of the validity of Wechsler scale profiles and recategorizations: Patterns or parodies?Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 7, 136—156.
46.
Keith, T.Z. (1999). Effects of general and specific abilities on student achievement: Similarities and differences across ethnic groups. School Psychology Quarterly, 14, 239—262.
47.
Kline, R.B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York : Guilford.
48.
Kline, R.B., Snyder, J., Guilmette, S., & Castellanos, M. (1992). Relative usefulness of elevation, variability, and shape information from WISC-R, K-ABC, and Fourth Edition Stanford-Binet profiles in predicting achievement. Psychological Assessment, 4, 426—432.
49.
Kranzler, J.H., & Keith, T.Z. (1999). Independent confirmatory factor analysis of the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS): What does the CAS measure?School Psychology Review, 28, 117—144.
50.
Kuusinen, J., & Leskinen, E. (1988). Latent structure analysis of longitudinal data on relations between intellectual abilities and school achievements. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23, 103—118.
51.
Lipsitz, J.D., Dworkin, R.H., & Erlenmeyer-Kimling, L. (1993). Wechsler comprehension and picture arrangement subtest and social adjustment. Psychological Assessment, 5, 430—437.
52.
Livingston, R.B., Jennings, E., Reynolds, C.R., & Gray, R.M. (2003). Multivariate analyses of the profile stability of intelligence tests for IQs, low to very low for subtest analyses. Archives ofClinical Neuropsychology, 18, 487—507.
53.
Lubinski, D. (2000). Scientific and social significance of assessing individual differences: “Sinking shafts at a few critical points.” Annual Review ofPsychology, 51, 405—444.
54.
Lubinski, D., & Dawis, R.V. (1992). Aptitudes, skills, and proficiencies. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 1—59). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychology Press.
55.
Lubinski, D., & Humphreys, L.G. (1997). Incorporating general intelligence into epidemiology and the social sciences. Intelligence , 24, 159—201.
56.
Maller, S.J., & McDermott, P.A. (1997). WAIS-R profile analysis for college students with learning disabilities. School Psychology Review, 26, 575—585.
57.
Marsh, H.W., Ellis, L.A., Heubeck, B.G., Parada, R.H., & Richards, G. (2005). A short version of the Self Description Questionnaire II: Operationalizing criteria for short-form evaluation with new applications of confirmatory factor analyses. Psychological Assessment,17, 81—102.
58.
McClain, A.L. (1996). Hierarchical analytic methods that yield different perspectives on dynamics: Aids to interpretation. Advances in Social Science Methodology,4, 229—240.
59.
McDermott, P.A., Fantuzzo, J.W., & Glutting, J.J. (1990). Just say no to subtest analysis: A critique of Wechsler theory and practice. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 290—302.
60.
McDermott, P.A., Fantuzzo, J.W., Glutting, J.J., Watkins, M.W., & Baggaley, A.R. (1992). Illusions of meaning in the ipsative assessment of children's abilities. The Journal of Special Education, 25, 504—526.
61.
McDermott, P.A., & Glutting, J.J. (1997). Informing stylistic learning behavior, disposition, and achievement through ability subtest patterns: Practical implications for test interpretation [Special issue]. School Psychology Review, 26, 163—175.
62.
McDermott, P.A., Goldberg, M.M., Watkins, M.W., Stanley, J.L., & Glutting, J.J. (in press). A nationwide epidemiological modeling study of learning disabilities: Risk, protection, and unintended impact. Journal of Learning Disabilities.
63.
McGrew, K.S., Keith, T.Z., Flanagan, D.P., & Vanderwood, M. (1997). Beyond g: The impact of Gf-Gc specific cognitive ability research on the future use and interpretation of intelligence tests in the schools. School Psychology Review , 26, 189—201.
64.
Meehl, P.E., & Rosen, A. (1955). Antecedent probability and the efficiency of psychometric signs, patterns, and cutting scores. Psychological Bulletin,52, 194—216.
65.
Mueller, H.H., Dennis, S.S., & Short, R.H. (1986). A meta-exploration of WISC-R factor score profiles as a function of diagnosis and intellectual level. CanadianJournal of School Psychology, 2, 21—43.
66.
Oh, H.J., Glutting, J.J., Watkins, M.W., Youngstrom, E.A., & McDermott, P.A. (2004). Correct interpretation of latent versus observed abilities: Implications from structural equation modeling applied to the WISC-III and WIAT linking sample. The Journal of Special Education, 38, 159—173.
67.
Pedhazur, E.J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research: Explanation and prediction (3rd ed.). New York: Harcourt Brace.
Ree, M.J., & Earles, J.A. (1991). Predicting training success: Not much more than g. Personnel Psychology, 44, 321—331.
70.
Ree, M.J., Earles, J.A., & Treachout, M.S. (1994). Predicting job performance: Not much more than g. TheJournal of Applied Psychology, 79, 518—524.
71.
Reeve, C.L. (2004). Differential ability antecedents of general and specific dimensions of declarative knowledge: More than g. Intelligence, 32, 621— 652.
72.
Reinecke, M.A., Beebe, D.W., & Stein, M.A. (1999). The third factor of the WISC-III: It's (probably) not freedom from distractibility. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 38, 322— 328.
Riccio, C.A., Cohen, M.J., Hall, J., & Ross, C.M. (1997). The third and fourth factors of the WISC-III: What they don't measure. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment , 15, 27—39.
75.
Rispens, J., Swaab, H., van den Oord, E.J., Cohen-Kettenis, P., van Engeland, H., & van Yperen, T. (1997). WISC profiles in child psychiatric diagnosis: Sense or nonsense?Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 36, 1587—1594.
76.
Rutter, M. (1989). Isle of Wright revisited: Twenty-five years of child psychiatric epidemiology. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 28, 633—653.
77.
Salgado, J.F., Anderson, N., Moscoso, S., Bertua, C., & de Fruyt, F. (2003). International validity generalization of GMA and cognitive abilities: A European community meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 56, 573— 605.
78.
Sattler, J.M. (1974). Assessment of children's intelligence (Revised reprint). Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders .
79.
Sattler, J.M. (1982). Assessment of children's intelligence and special abilities (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
80.
Sattler, J.M. (1988). Assessment of children (3rd ed.). San Diego: Author.
81.
Sattler, J.M. (1992). Assessment of children (3rd ed., revised and updated). San Diego: Author.
82.
Sattler, J.M. (2001). Assessment of children: Cognitive applications (4th ed.). San Diego: Author.
83.
Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin,124, 262—274.
84.
Siegel, L.S. (1998). The discrepancy formula: Its use and abuse. In B. K. Shapiro, P. J. Accardo, & A. J. Capute (Eds.), Specific reading disability: A view of the spectrum (pp. 123—135). Timonium, MD: York Press.
85.
Smith, C.B., & Watkins, M.W. (2004). Diagnostic utility of the Bannatyne WISC-III pattern . Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 19, 49— 56.
86.
Tanaka, J.S. (1993). Multifaceted conceptions of fit in structural equation models. In K. S. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 10—39). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
87.
Teeter, P.A., & Korducki, R. (1998). Assessment of emotionally disturbed children with the WISC-III. In A. Prifitera & D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), WISC-III clinical use and interpretation: Scientist—practitioner perspectives (pp. 119—138). New York: Academic Press.
88.
Thorndike, R.L. (1986). The role of general ability in prediction. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 29, 332—339.
89.
Ullman, J.B., & Bentler, P.M. (2003). Structural equation modeling. In J. A. Schinka & W. F. Velicer (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Research methods in psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 607—634). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
90.
Vellutino, F.R., Scanlon, D.M., & Lyon, G.R. (2000). Differentiating between difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: More evidence against the IQ—achievement discrepancy definition for reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 223—238.
91.
Venter, A., & Maxwell, S.E. (2000). Issues in the use and application of multiple regression analysis. In H. E. A. Tinsley & S. D. Brown (Eds.), Handbook of applied statistics and mathematical modeling (pp. 151— 182). New York: Academic Press.
92.
Ward, S.B., Ward, T.J., Hatt, C.V., Young, D.L., & Mollner, N.R. (1995). The incidence and utility of the ACID, ACIDS, and SCAD profiles in a referred population. Psychology in the Schools, 32, 267—276.
93.
Watkins, M.W. (1996). Diagnostic utility of the WISC-III developmental index as a predictor of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 305—312.
94.
Watkins, M.W. (1999). Diagnostic utility of WISC-III subtest variability among students with learning disabilities. CanadianJournal of School Psychology, 15, 11—20.
95.
Watkins, M.W. (2000). Cognitive profile analysis: A shared professional myth. School Psychology Quarterly, 15, 465—479.
96.
Watkins, M.W. (2003). IQ subtest analysis: Clinical acumen or clinical illusion. Scientific Review ofMental Health Practice, 2, 118—141.
97.
Watkins, M.W. (in press). Diagnostic validity of Wechsler subtest scatter. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal.
98.
Watkins, M.W., & Kush, J.C. (1994). WISC-R subtest analysis of variance: The right way, the wrong way, or no way?School Psychology Review, 23, 640—651.
99.
Watkins, M.W., Kush, J.C., & Glutting, J.J. (1997a). Discriminant and predictive validity of the WISC-III ACID profile among children with learning disabilities . Psychology in the Schools, 34, 309—319.
100.
Watkins, M.W., Kush, J.C., & Glutting, J.J. (1997b). Prevalence and diagnostic utility of the WISC-III SCAD profile among children with disabilities. School Psychology Quarterly, 12, 235—248.
101.
Watkins, M.W., Kush, J.C., & Schaefer, B.A. (2002). Diagnostic utility of the learning disability index. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 35, 98— 103.
102.
Watkins, M.W., & Worrell, F.C. (2000). Diagnostic utility of the number of WISC-III subtests deviating from mean performance among students with learning disabilities . Psychology in the Schools, 37, 29—41.
103.
Wechsler, D. (1949). Wechsler intelligence scale for children. New York: Psychological Corp.
104.
Wechsler, D. (1991). Wechsler intelligence scale for children (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
105.
Wechsler, D. (2002). Wechsler individual achievement test (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
106.
Wechsler, D. (2003). Wechsler intelligence scale for children (4th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
107.
Weiss, L.G., Saklofske, D.H., & Prifitera, A. (2005). Interpreting the WISC-IV index scores. In A. Prifitera, D. H. Saklofske, & L. G. Weiss (Eds.), WISC-IV clinical use and interpretation: Scientist—practitioner perspectives (pp. 71—100). New York: Elsevier Academic Press.
108.
Wielkiewicz, R.M. (1990). Interpreting low scores on the WISC-R third factor: It's more than distractibility. Psychological Assessment, 2, 91—97.
109.
Wiggins, J.S. (1973). Personality and prediction: Principles of personality assessment. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley .
