This study further examined the Gifted Rating Scales (GRS) at the internal and external stages of test validation by (a) testing structural fidelity as indicated by the number of factors supported as well as the correspondence of the latent factor structure with the scoring model proposed by the authors and (b) examining the external relations of factors underlying GRS ratings with the general factor from two widely used standardized tests of intelligence using the multimethod confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Results of our analyses revealed the presence of a large general factor on both the GRS-Preschool (GRS-P) and the GRS-School (GRS-S) forms. This factor accounted for 80% of the variance on the GRS-P and 72% of the variance on the GRS-S, revealing that the vast majority of what the GRS measures is the general factor. In addition, coefficient ω for both the GRS-P and the GRS-S was .95 and ωH for the GRS-S was .92, demonstrating that this general factor is measured with a high degree of reliability. Results of multimethod CFAs indicated the general factor underlying the GRS correlated substantially with the general factor underlying the Wechsler scales, which may suggest that the GRS primarily reflects general cognitive ability and not multiple dimensions of giftedness. Implications of these results and directions for further research are discussed.
BensonJ. (1998). Developing a strong program of construct validation: A test anxiety example. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 17, 10-17.
2.
CanivezG. L. (2013). Incremental criterion validity of WAIS-IV factor index scores: Relationships with WIAT-II and WIAT-III subtest and composite scores. Psychological Assessment, 25, 484-495.
3.
CanivezG. L. (2014). Construct validity of the WISC-IV with a referred sample: Direct versus indirect hierarchical structures. School Psychology Quarterly, 29, 38-51.
4.
CanivezG. L. (2016). Bifactor modeling in construct validation of multifactored tests: Implications for multidimensionality and test interpretation. In SchweizerK.DiStefanoC. (Eds.), Principles and methods of test construction: Standards and recent advancements (pp. 247-271). Gottingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
5.
CarrollJ. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York, NY: Cambridge.
6.
CattellR. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245-276.
7.
CurranP. J.WestS. G.FinchJ. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16-29.
8.
GlorfeldL. W. (1995). An improvement on Horn’s parallel analysis methodology for selecting the correct number of factors to retain. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 377-393.
9.
GorsuchR. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
JarosewichT.PfeifferS. I.MorrisJ. (2002). Identifying gifted students using teacher rating scales: A review of existing instruments. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20, 322-336.
11.
KaiserH. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151.
12.
KennyD. A.KaniskanB.McCoachD. B. (2015). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44, 3486-3507.
13.
KranzlerJ. H.FloydR. G. (2013). Assessing intelligence in children and adolescents: A practical guide. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
14.
LiH.PfeifferS. I.PetscherY.KumtepeA.MoG. (2008). Validation of the Chinese Gifted Rating Scales-School Form in China. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 160-169.
15.
LoevingerJ. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 635-694.
16.
LuckeJ. F. (2005). The α and the ω of congeneric test theory: An extension of reliability and internal consistency to heterogeneous tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 65-81.
17.
MarguliesA. S.FloydR. G. (2004). Test review: The Gifted Rating Scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 22, 275-282.
18.
MarlandS. P.Jr. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to the Congress of the United States by the U. S., Commissioner of Education. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
19.
McClainM.PfeifferS. (2012). Identification of gifted students in the United States today: A look at state definitions, policies, and practices. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 28, 59-88.
20.
MessickS. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validity of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741-749.
21.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998-2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
22.
No Child Left Behind Act, P.L. 107-110 (2002).
23.
NunnallyJ. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
24.
PetscherY.LiH. (2008). Measurement invariance of the Chinese Gifted Rating Scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 26, 274-286.
25.
PfeifferS. I. (2015). Essentials of gifted assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
26.
PfeifferS. I.BleiS. (2008). Gifted identification beyond the IQ test: Rating scales and other assessment procedures. In PfeifferS. I. (Ed.), Handbook of giftedness in children: Psychoeducational theory, research, and best practices (pp. 177-198). New York, NY: Springer.
27.
PfeifferS. I.JarosewichT. (2003). Gifted Rating Scales. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
28.
PfeifferS. I.JarosewichT. (2007). The gifted rating scales-school form: An analysis of the standardization sample based on age, gender, race, and diagnostic efficiency. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(1), 39-50.
29.
ReiseS. P. (2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 667-696.
30.
RodriguezA.ReiseS. P.HavilandM. G. (2016). Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices. Psychological Methods, 21, 137-150.
31.
SternbergR. J.DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.). (2005). Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
32.
ThompsonB. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
33.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2000). Current population survey, October 2000: School enrollment supplement file [CD-ROM]. Washington, DC: Author.
34.
WagenmakersE. J.FarrellS. (2004). AIC model selection using Akaike weights. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 192-196.
35.
WechslerD. (2002). Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Pearson Assessment.
36.
WechslerD. (2003). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (4th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Pearson Assessment.
37.
ZiglerA.HellerK. A. (2000). Conceptions of giftedness from a meta-theoretical perspective. In HellerK. A.MönksF. J.SternbergR. J.SubotnikR. F. (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 3-21). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
