The measurement of sociocultural characteristics is an accepted component of research as well as clinical practice; however, few standardized measures exist to assist scholars and clinicians in its assessment. The Sociocultural Scales, an important component of the System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment (Mercer & Lewis, 1977), is one of the few instruments designed for this use. This study examined the factor structure of the Sociocultural Scales, utilizing data on 436 Anglo, Black, and Mexican-American children from middle- and lower-class homes. Both iterated principal axis and principal components factor analyses were used. Modest support is found for the factor structure of the four major Sociocultural Scales, although only 38% of the total test variance is accounted for under this model, and estimates of internal consistency are generally low. A number of test items seem to detract from the Scales' effectiveness. The integrity of the Anglicization factor also is questioned.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Beck, F. W. (1984). Another look at the effects of the System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment. Journal of School Psychology, 22, 347-352.
2.
Bock, R., & Moore, E. (1986). Advantage and disadvantage: A profile of American youth. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3.
Brown, F. G. (1979). The SOMPA: A system of measuring potential abilities?School Psychology Digest, 8, 37-46.
4.
Buriel, & Cardoza, D. (1988). Sociocultural correlates of achievement among three generations of Mexican American high school seniors. American Educational Research Journal, 25, 177-192.
5.
Childs, R. E. (1982). A study of the adaptive behavior of retarded children and the resultant effects of this use in the diagnosis of mental retardation. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 17, 109-113.
6.
Clarizio, H. F. (1982). Intellectual assessment of Hispanic children. Psychology in the Schools, 19, 61-71.
7.
Figueroa, R. A. (1979). The System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment. School Psychology Digest, 8, 28-36.
8.
Goodman, J. (1979). Is tissue the issue? A critique of SOMPA's models and tests. School Psychology Digest, 8, 47-62.
9.
Gorsuch, R. (1983). Factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10.
Grant, C., & Sleeter, C. (1986). Race, class, and gender effects. Review of Educational Research, 56, 195-211.
11.
Heflinger, C., Cook, V., & Thackrey, M. (1987). Identification of mental retardation by the SOMPA: Nondiscriminatory or nonexistent?Journal of School Psychology, 25, 177-183.
12.
Hotelling, H. (1933). Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into principal components. Journal of Educational Psychology, 24, 417-441, 498-520.
13.
Humphreys, L. G. (1985). Review of System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment. In J. V. Mitchell (Ed.), The ninth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 1517-1519). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
14.
Jensen, A. (1981). Straight talk about mental tests. New York: Free Press.
15.
Jirsa, J. E. (1983). The SOMPA: A brief examination of technical considerations, philosophical rationale, and implications for practice. Journal of School Psychology, 21, 13-21.
16.
Kazimour, K. K., & Reschly, D. J. (1981). Investigation of the norms and concurrent validity for the ABIC. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 85, 512-520.
17.
Mascari, B. G., & Forgnone, C. (1982). A follow-up study of EMR students four years afer dismissal from the program. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 17, 288-292.
18.
Mercer, J. M., & Lewis, J. F. (1977). System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment. Parent interview manual. New York: Psychological Corporation.
19.
Minton, H., & Schneider, F. (1988). Differential psychology. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
20.
Montague, D. J. (1981). Relationships between WISC-R IQ SOMPA's Estimated Learning Potential, and adaptive behavior in children with academic problems. Denton, TX: Texas Women's University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service, No. EC 143411).
21.
Oakland, T. (1979). Research on the ABIC and ELP. School Psychology Digest, 8, 63-70.
22.
Oakland, T. (1980). An evaluation of the ABIC, pluralistic norms, and estimated learning potential. Journal of School Psychology, 18, 3-11.
23.
Oakland, T. (1983). Joint use of adaptive behavior and IQ to predict achievement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 293-301.
24.
Oakland, T., & Feigenbaum, D. (1980). Comparison of the psychometric characteristics of the Adaptive Behavior Inventory for Children for different groups of children. Journal of School Psychology, 18, 307-315.
25.
Reiss, A. J. (1961). Occupations and social status. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
26.
Reschly, D. J. (1981). Evaluation of the effects of SOMPA measures on classification of students as mentally retarded. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 86, 16-20.
27.
Reschly, D. J. (1982). Assessing mild retardation: The influence of adaptive behavior, sociocultural status, and prospects for nonbiased assessment. In C. R. Reynolds & T. B. Gutkin (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (pp. 209-242). New York: Wiley Interscience.
28.
Reynolds, C. R. (1985). Evaluating subscale performance on the Adaptive Behavior Inventory for Children. Psychology in the Schools, 22, 14-18.
29.
Sandoval, J. (1985). Review of System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment. In J. V. Mitchell (Ed.), The ninth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 1521-1526). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
30.
Talley, R. C. (1979). Evaluating the effects of implementing the System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment: A qualitative perspective. School Psychology Digest, 8, 71-78.
31.
Yonge, G. D. (1982). Some concerns about the estimation of learning potential from the System of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment. Psychology in the Schools, 19, 482-486.
