When the Differential Ability Scales–Second Edition (DAS-II) was developed, the instrument’s content, structure, and theoretical orientation were amended. Despite these changes, the Technical Handbook did not report results from exploratory factor analytic investigations, and confirmatory factor analyses were implemented using selected subtests across the normative age groups from the total battery. To address these omissions, the present study investigated the theoretical structure of the DAS-II using principal axis factoring followed by the Schmid–Leiman procedure with participants from the 5- to 8-year-old age range to determine the degree to which the DAS-II theoretical structure proposed in the Technical Handbook could be replicated. Unlike other age ranges investigated where at most 14 subtests were administered, the entire DAS-II battery was normed on participants aged 5 to 8 years, making it well suited to test the full instrument’s alignment with theory. Results suggested a six-factor solution that was essentially consistent with the Cattell–Horn–Carroll (CHC)-based theoretical structure suggested by the test publisher and simple structure was attained. The only exception involved two subtests (Picture Similarities and Early Number Concepts) that did not saliently load on a group factor. Implications for clinical practice are discussed.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
2.
BartlettM. S. (1950). Tests of significance in factor analysis. British Journal of Psychology, 3, 71-85.
3.
BartlettM. S. (1954). A further note on the multiplying factors for various χ2 approximations in factor analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16, 296-298.
4.
BeaujeanA. A. (2015a). Adopting a new test edition: Psychometric and practical considerations. Research and Practice in the Schools, 3, 51-57.
5.
BrunnerM.NagyG.WilhelmO. (2012). A tutorial on hierarchically structured constructs. Journal of Personality, 80, 796-846. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00749.x
6.
CanivezG. L. (2008). Orthogonal higher order factor structure of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales–fifth edition for children and adolescents. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 533-541. doi:10.1037/a0012884
7.
CanivezG. L. (2013). Psychometric versus actuarial interpretation of intelligence and related aptitude batteries. In SaklofskeD. H.ReynoldsC. R.SchweanV. L. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of child psychological assessment (pp. 84-112). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
8.
CanivezG. L. (2016). Bifactor modeling in construct validation of multifactored tests: Implications for understanding multidimensional constructs and test interpretation. In SchweizerK.DiStefanoC. (Eds.), Principles (pp. 247-271). Gottingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
9.
CanivezG. L.McGillR. J. (2016). Factor structure of the Differential Ability Scales-Second Edition: Exploratory and hierarchical factor analyses with the core subtests. Psychological Assessment, 28, 1475-1488. doi:10.1037/pas0000279
10.
CanivezG. L.WatkinsM. W.DombrowskiS. C. (2016). Factor structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition: Exploratory factor analyses with the 16 primary and secondary subtests. Psychological Assessment, 28, 975-986. doi:10.1037/pas0000238
11.
CanivezG. L.WatkinsM. W.DombrowskiS. C. (2017). Structural validity of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth Edition: Confirmatory factor analyses with the 16 primary and secondary subtests. Psychological Assessment, 29, 458-472. doi:10.1037/pas0000358
12.
CarrollJ. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13.
CarrollJ. B. (1995). On methodology in the study of cognitive abilities. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30, 429-452. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3003_6
14.
CarrollJ. B. (1997). The three-stratum theory of cognitive abilities. In FlanaganD. P.GenshaftJ. L.HarrisonP. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 183-208). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
15.
CarrollJ. B. (1998). Human cognitive abilities: A critique. In McArdleJ. J.WoodcockR. W. (Eds.), Human cognitive abilities in theory and practice (pp. 5-23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16.
CarrollJ. B. (2003). The higher-stratum structure of cognitive abilities: Current evidence supports g and about ten broad factors. In NyborgH. (Ed.), The scientific study of general intelligence: Tribute to Arthur R. Jensen (pp. 5-21). New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
17.
CattellR. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245-276. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10
18.
CattellR. B.HornJ. L. (1978). A check on the theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence with description of new subtest designs. Journal of Educational Measurement, 15, 139-164. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1978.tb00065.x
19.
ChildD. (2006). The essentials of factor analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Continuum.
20.
CucinaJ. M.ByleK. (2017). The bifactor model fits better than the higher-order model in more than 90% of comparisons for mental abilities tests. Journal of Intelligence, 5, 1-21. doi:10.3390/jintelligence5030027
21.
CudeckR. (2000). Exploratory factor analysis. In TinsleyH. E. A.BrownS. D. (Eds.), Handbook of multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling (pp. 265-296). New York, NY: Academic Press.
22.
DiStefanoC.DombrowskiS. C. (2006). Investigating the theoretical structure of the Stanford-Binet-fifth edition. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 24, 123-136. doi:10.1177/0734282905285244
23.
DombrowskiS. C.DiStefanoC.NoonanK. (2004). Review of the Stanford-Binet, Fifth Edition. Communiqué, 33(1), 12-15.
24.
DombrowskiS. C. (2013). Investigating the structure of the WJ-III Cognitive at school age. School Psychology Quarterly, 28, 154-169. doi:10.1037/spq0000010
25.
DombrowskiS. C. (2014a). Exploratory bifactor analysis of the WJ-III cognitive in adulthood via the Schmid–Leiman procedure. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 32, 330-341. doi:10.1177/0734282913508243
26.
DombrowskiS. C. (2014b). Investigating the structure of the WJ-III cognitive in early school age through two exploratory bifactor analysis procedures. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 32, 483-494. doi:10.1177/0734282914530838
27.
DombrowskiS. C. (2015a). Psychoeducational assessment and reporting. New York, NY: Springer Science.
28.
DombrowskiS. C. (2015b). Exploratory bifactor analysis of the WJ-III Achievement at School Age via the Schmid–Leiman orthogonalization procedure. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 30, 34-50. doi:10.1177/0829573514560529
29.
DombrowskiS. C.CanivezG. L.WatkinsM. W. (2018). Factor structure of the 10 WISC-V primary subtests in four standardization age groups. Contemporary School Psychology, 22, 90-104. doi:10.1007/s40688-017-0125-2
30.
DombrowskiS. C.CanivezG. L.WatkinsM. W.BeaujeanA. (2015). Exploratory bifactor analysis of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fifth Edition with the 16 primary and secondary subtests. Intelligence, 53, 194-201. doi:0.1016/j.intell.2015.10.009
31.
DombrowskiS. C.GolayP.McGillR. J.CanivezG. L. (2018). Investigating the theoretical structure of the DAS-II core battery at school age using Bayesian structural equation modeling. Psychology in the Schools, 55, 190-207. doi:10.1002/pits.22096
32.
DombrowskiS. C.McGillR. J.CanivezG. L. (2017). Exploratory and hierarchical factor analysis of the WJ-IV cognitive at school age. Psychological Assessment, 29, 394-407. doi:10.1037/pas0000350
33.
DombrowskiS. C.McGillR. J.CanivezG. L. (2018). Hierarchical exploratory analyses of the Woodcock-Johnson IV full test battery: Implications for CHC application in school psychology. School Psychology Quarterly, 33, 235-250. doi:10.1037/spq0000221
34.
DombrowskiS. C.WatkinsM. W. (2013). Exploratory and higher order factor analysis of the WJ-III full test battery: A school-aged analysis. Psychological Assessment, 25, 442-455. doi:10.1037/a0031335
35.
ElliottC. D. (1990). Differential Ability Scales. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
36.
ElliottC. D.MurrayD. J.PearsonL. S. (1979). British Ability Scales. Windsor, England: National Foundation for Educational Research.
37.
ElliottC. D. (2007a). Differential Ability Scales (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.
38.
ElliottC. D. (2007b). Differential Ability Scales: Introductory and technical handbook (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.
39.
ElliottC. D. (2012). The Differential Ability Scales—Second Edition. In FlanaganD. P.HarrisonP. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (3rd ed., pp. 99-144). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
40.
FabrigarL. R.WegenerD. T.MacCallumR. C.StrahanE. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272-299. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272
41.
FlanaganD. P.AlfonsoV. C.MascoloJ. T. (2011). A CHC-based operational definition of SLD: Integrating multiple data sources and multiple data-gathering methods. In FlanaganD. P.AlfonsoV. C. (Eds.), Essentials of specific learning disability identification (pp. 233-298). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
42.
FlanaganD. P.OrtizS. O.AlfonsoV. C. (2013). Essentials of cross-battery assessment (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
43.
FrazierT. W.YoungstromE. A. (2007). Historical increase in the number of factors measured by commercial tests of cognitive ability: Are we overfactoring?Intelligence, 35, 169-182. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.07.002
44.
GerbingD. W.HamiltonJ. G. (1996). Viability of exploratory factor analysis as a precursor to confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 3, 62-72. doi:10.1080/10705519609540030
45.
GorsuchR. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
46.
HaigB. D. (2005). Exploratory factor analysis, theory generation, and scientific method. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 303-329. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr4003_2
47.
HornJ. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179-185. doi:10.1007/BF02289447
48.
HornJ. L. (1989). Models of intelligence. In LinnR. L. (Ed.), Intelligence: Measurement, theory, and public policy (pp. 29-75). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
49.
HornJ. L. (1991). Measurement of intellectual capabilities: A review of theory. In McGrewK. S.WerderJ. K.WoodcockR. W. (Eds.), Woodcock-Johnson technical manual (Rev. ed., pp. 197-232). Itasca, IL: Riverside.
50.
KaiserH. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31-36.
51.
KeithT. Z.LowJ. A.ReynoldsM. R.PatelP. G.RidleyK. P. (2010). Higher-order factor structure of the Differential Ability Scales-II: Consistency across ages 4 to 17. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 676-697. doi:10.1002/pits.20498
52.
McClainA. L. (1996). Hierarchical analytic methods that yield different perspectives on dynamics: Aids to interpretation. Advances in Social Science Methodology, 4, 229-240.
53.
McGillR. J.DombrowskiS. C. (2017). Factor structure of the CHC model for the KABC-II: Exploratory factor analyses with the 16 core and supplementary subtests. Contemporary School Psychology. doi: 10.1007/s40688-017-0152-z
54.
McGillR. J.SpurginA. R. (2017). Exploratory higher order analysis of the Luria interpretive model on the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children-Second Edition (KABC-II) school-age battery. Assessment, 24, 540-552. doi:10.1177/1073191115614081
55.
NiilekselaC. R.ReynoldsM. R.KeithT. Z.McGrewK. S. (2016). A special validity study of the WJ IV: Acting on evidence for specific abilities. In FlanaganD. P.AlfonsoV. C. (Eds.), WJ IV clinical use and interpretation: Scientist-practitioner perspectives (pp. 65-102). New York, NY: Academic Press.
56.
O’ConnorB. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 396-402. doi:10.3758/BF03200807
57.
R Development Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
58.
ReeM. J.CarrettaT. R.GreenM. T. (2003). The ubiquitous role of g in training. In NyborgH. (Ed.), The scientific study of general intelligence: Tribute to Arthur R. Jensen (pp. 262-274). New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
59.
ReiseS. P. (2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 667-696. doi:10.1080/00273171.2012.715555
60.
ReiseS. P.BonifayW. E.HavilandM. G. (2013). Scoring and modeling psychological measures in the presence of multidimensionality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95, 129-140. doi:10.1080/00223891.2012.725437
61.
RevelleW. (2012). psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research (Version 1.2.4) [Computer software]. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
62.
SchmidJ.LeimanJ. M. (1957). The development of hierarchical factor solutions. Psychometrika, 22, 53-61. doi:10.1007/BF02289209
63.
SchmittT. A. (2011). Current methodological considerations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 304-321. doi:10.1177/0734282911406653
64.
SchneiderW. J.McGrewK. S. (2012). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence. In FlanaganD. P.HarrisonP. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (3rd ed., pp. 99-144). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
65.
SchneiderW. J. (2013). What if we took our models seriously? Estimating latent scores in individuals. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31,186-201. doi: 10.1177/0734282913478046
66.
StraussE.SpreenO.HunterM. (2000). Implications of test revisions for research. Psychological Assessment, 12, 237-244. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.12.3.237
67.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
68.
TatarynD. J.WoodJ. M.GorsuchR. L. (1999). Setting the value of k in promax: A Monte Carlo study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 384-391. doi:10.1177/00131649921969938
69.
ThompsonB. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
70.
ThurstoneL. L. (1947). Multiple-factor analysis: A development and expansion of the vectors of mind. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
71.
VelicerW. F. (1976). Determining the number of components form the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika, 31, 321-327. doi:10.1007/BF02293557
72.
WatkinsM. W. (2013). Omega [Computer software]. Phoenix, AZ: Ed & Psych Associates.
73.
WolffH.-G.PreisingK. (2005). Exploring item and higher order factor structure with the Schmid-Leiman solution: Syntax codes for SPSS and SAS. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 48-58. doi:10.3758/BF03206397
74.
WoodJ. M.TatarynD. J.GorsuchR. L. (1996). Effects of under- and overextraction on principal axis factor analysis with varimax rotation. Psychological Methods, 1, 354-365.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
