The reliability of subtest composites corresponding to abilities included in Kaufman and Kaufman's (1983) system for interpreting K-ABC profiles was examined. These alternative groupings of subtests demonstrated consistently high reliability. Increasing reliability was related to the number of subtests in a composite. Composites formed by Achievement Scale subtests attained higher reliabilities than those from Mental Processing subtests. The implications for the practitioner analyzing a K-ABC profile are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baron, M. B., & Kaye, D. B. (1984). A validity study of the WISC-R Coding B subtest. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 2, 191-197.
2.
Guilford, J. P. (1965). Fundamental statistics in psychology and education (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
3.
Jensen, A. R. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press.
4.
Kaufman, A. S. (1979). Intelligent testing with the WISC-R. New York: Wiley.
5.
Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (1983). Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children interpretive manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
6.
Piotrowski, R. J., & Siegel, D. J. (1984). Interpreting WISC-R profiles: Reliability of subtest composites. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 2, 183-190.
7.
Salvia, J., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (1978). Assessment in special and remedial education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
8.
Stewart, K. J., & Moely, B. E. (1983). The WISC-R third factor: What does it mean?Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 940-941.
