Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Fifth Edition (WAIS-5) latent factor structure was assessed using complementary hierarchical exploratory factor analyses (EFA) with the Schmid and Leiman procedure and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) using the standardization sample (N = 2,020) correlation matrix and descriptive statistics of the 20 primary and secondary WAIS-5 subtests. The WAIS-5 Technical and Interpretive Manual did not include EFA, CFA with fewer than five first-order (group) factors, CFA with rival bifactor models, or model-based reliability and dimensionality estimates; thus, the present independent structural validity assessment corrects this evidential lacuna to help guide ethical and evidence-based interpretation. EFA results did not support five latent factors with separate Visual Spatial and Fluid Reasoning factors. Instead, a four-factor model with Visual Spatial and Fluid Reasoning factors merged into the former Perceptual Reasoning factor and measurement dominated by a general intelligence (g) factor—similar to the WAIS-IV structure—was supported. CFA results indicated that a bifactor model with four group factors provided the best fit, consistent with the EFA findings. Overall, the EFA and CFA results did not support the purported WAIS-5 structure and instead replicated findings from independent assessments of the WISC-V with standardization and clinical samples, that indicated primary, if not exclusive, interpretation of the FSIQ as an estimate of psychometric g.

Keywords

WAIS-5 exploratory factor analysis confirmatory factor analysis bifactor model hierarchical CFA intelligence

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alfonso

V. C.

Oakland

T. D.

LaRocca

Spanakos

(2000). The course on individual cognitive assessment. School Psychology Review, 29, 52–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2000.12085997

Alfonso

V. C.

Pratt

S. I.

(1997). Issues and suggestions for training professionals in assessing intelligence. In Flanagan

D. P.

Genshaft

J. L.

Harrison

P. L.

(Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 326–347). Guilford Press.

American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.

Bartlett

M. S.

(1954). A further note on the multiplying factors for various chi-square approximations in factor analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 16, 296–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1954.tb00174.x

Beaujean

A. A.

(2015a). Adopting a new test edition: Psychometric and practical considerations. Research and Practice in the Schools, 3, 51–57.

Beaujean

A. A.

(2015b). John Carroll’s views on intelligence: Bi-factor vs. higher-order models. Journal of Intelligence, 3, 121–136. http://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence3040121

Beaujean

A. A.

Parkin

Parker

(2014). Comparing Cattell-Horn-Carroll factor models: Differences between bifactor and higher order factor models in predicting language achievement. Psychological Assessment, 26, 789–805. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0036745

Belter

R. W.

Piotrowski

(2001). Current status of doctoral-level training in psychological testing. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57, 717–726. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.1044

Benson

N. F.

Floyd

R. G.

Kranzler

J. H.

Eckert

T. L.

Fefer

S. A.

Morgan

G. B.

(2019). Test use and assessment practices of school psychologists in the United States: Findings from the 2017 national survey. Journal of School Psychology, 72, 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.12.004

10.

Benson

N. F.

Hulac

D. M.

Kranzler

J. H.

(2010). Independent examination of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Fourth Edition (WAIS–IV): What does the WAIS–IV measure? Psychological Assessment, 22(1), 121–130. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0017767

11.

Brown

T. A.

(2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

12.

Brunner

Nagy

Wilhelm

(2012). A tutorial on hierarchically structured constructs. Journal of Personality, 80, 796–846. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00749.x

13.

Burnham

K. P.

Anderson

D. R.

(2004). Multimodel inference: Understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociological Methods & Research, 33, 261–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124104268644

14.

Byrne

B. M.

(2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.

15.

Camara

W. J.

Nathan

J. S.

Puente

A. E.

(2000). Psychological test usage: Implications in professional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31(2), 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.31.2.141

16.

Canivez

G. L.

(2010). Test review of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test–Fourth Edition. In Spies

R. A.

Carlson

J. F.

Geisinger

K. F.

(Eds.), The eighteenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 684–688). Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

17.

Canivez

G. L.

(2013). Incremental validity of WAIS–IV factor index scores: Relationships with WIAT–II and WIAT–III subtest and composite scores. Psychological Assessment, 25(92), 484–495. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032092

18.

Canivez

G. L.

(2014). Test review of the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence–Fourth Edition. In Carlson

J. F.

Geisinger

K. F.

Jonson

J. L.

(Eds.), The nineteenth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 732–737). Buros Center for Testing.

19.

Canivez

G. L.

(2016). Bifactor modeling in construct validation of multifactored tests: Implications for understanding multidimensional constructs and test interpretation. In Schweizer

DiStefano

(Eds.), Principles and methods of test construction: Standards and recent advancements (pp. 247–271). Hogrefe.

20.

Canivez

G. L.

(2025). Ethics, test standards, and test interpretation: Measurement matters! In Canivez

G. L.

(Ed.), Assessing psychometric fitness of intelligence tests: Toward evidence-based interpretation practices (pp. 1–84). Rowman & Littlefield.

21.

Canivez

G. L.

Dombrowski

S. C.

Watkins

M. W.

(2018). Factor structure of the WISC–V for four standardization age groups: Exploratory and hierarchical factor analyses with the 16 primary and secondary subtests. Psychology in the Schools, 55, 741–769. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22138

22.

Canivez

G. L.

Kush

J. C.

(2013). WISC–IV and WAIS–IV structural validity: Alternate methods, alternate results. Commentary on Weiss et al. (2013a) and Weiss et al. (2013b). Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31(2), 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282913478036

23.

Canivez

G. L.

McGill

R. J.

Dombrowski

S. C.

Watkins

M. W.

Pritchard

A. E.

Jacobson

L. A.

(2020). Construct validity of the WISC–V in clinical cases: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the 10 primary subtests. Assessment, 27(2), 274–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191118811609

24.

Canivez

G. L.

Watkins

M. W.

(2010a). Investigation of the factor structure of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS–IV): Exploratory and higher order factor analyses. Psychological Assessment, 22(4), 827–836. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020429

25.

Canivez

G. L.

Watkins

M. W.

(2010b). Exploratory and higher-order factor analyses of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS–IV) adolescent subsample. School Psychology Quarterly, 25, 223–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022046

26.

Canivez

G. L.

Watkins

M. W.

(2016). Review of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition: Critique, commentary, and independent analyses. In Kaufman

A. S.

Raiford

S. E.

Coalson

D. L.

(Eds.), Intelligent testing with the WISC–V (pp. 683–702). Wiley.

27.

Canivez

G. L.

Watkins

M. W.

Dombrowski

S. 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000238

28.

Canivez

G. L.

Watkins

M. W.

Dombrowski

S. 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000358

29.

Canivez

G. L.

Youngstrom

E. A.

(2019). Challenges to the Cattell-Horn-Carroll Theory: Empirical, clinical, and policy implications. Applied Measurement in Education, 32(2), 232–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2019.1619562

30.

Carroll

J. B.

(1993). Human cognitive abilities. Cambridge University Press.

31.

Carroll

J. B.

(1995). On methodology in the study of cognitive abilities. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30, 429–452. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3003_6

32.

Carroll

J. B.

(2003). The higher-stratum structure of cognitive abilities: Current evidence supports g and about ten broad factors. In Nyborg

(Ed.), The scientific study of general intelligence: Tribute to Arthur R. Jensen (pp. 5–21). Pergamon Press.

33.

Cattell

R. B.

(1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10

34.

Chen

F. F.

(2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834

35.

Cheung

G. W.

Rensvold

R. B.

(2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5

36.

Child

(2006). The essentials of factor analysis (3rd ed.). Continuum.

37.

Cho

Kim

(2015). Cronbach’s coefficient alpha: Well known but poorly understood. Organizational Research Methods, 18(2), 207–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114555994

38.

Crawford

A. V.

Green

S. B.

Levy

W. J.

Scott

Svetina

Thompson

M. S.

(2010). Evaluation of parallel analysis methods for determining the number of factors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70, 885–901. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164410379332

39.

Cucina

J. M.

Byle

(2017). The bifactor model fits better than the higher-order model in more than 90% of comparisons for mental abilities test batteries. Journal of Intelligence, 5(27), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence5030027

40.

Dombrowski

S. C.

(2025). Contributing to the reproducibility crisis in Psychology: The role of statistical software choice on factor analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 110, Article 101462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2025.101462

41.

Dombrowski

S. C.

Canivez

G. L.

Watkins

M. W.

(2018). Factor structure of the 10 WISC–V primary subtests across four standardization age groups. Contemporary School Psychology, 22, 90–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-017-0125-2

42.

Dombrowski

S. C.

McGill

R. J.

(2024). Clinical assessment in school psychology: Impervious to scientific reform? Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 39(4), 297–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/08295735231224052

43.

Dombrowski

S. C.

McGill

R. J.

Canivez

G. L.

Watkins

M. W.

Pritchard

A. E.

Jacobson

L. A.

(2025). Conjectures and refutations in cognitive ability structural validity research: Insights from Bayesian structural equation modeling. Journal of School Psychology, 110, Article 101432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2025.101432

44.

Dombrowski

S. C.

McGill

R. J.

Morgan

G. B.

(2021). Monte Carlo modeling of contemporary intelligence test (IQ) factor structure: Implications for IQ assessment, interpretation, and theory. Assessment, 28(3), 977–993. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191119869828

45.

Dombrowski

S. C. J.

McGill

Farmer

R. L.

Kranzler

J. H.

Canivez

G. L.

(2022). Beyond the rhetoric of evidence-based assessment: A framework for critical thinking in clinical practice. School Psychology Review, 51(6), 771–784. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966x.2021.1960126

46.

Frazier

T. W.

Youngstrom

E. A.

(2007). Historical increase in the number of factors measured by commercial tests of cognitive ability: Are we overfactoring? Intelligence, 35, 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2006.07.002

47.

Frisby

C. L.

Beaujean

A. A.

(2015). Testing Spearman's hypotheses using a bi-factor model with WAIS–IV/WMS–IV standardization data. Intelligence, 51, 79–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.04.007

48.

Gignac

(2008). Higher-order models versus direct hierarchical models: G as superordinate or breadth factor? Psychology Science Quarterly, 50, 21–43.

49.

Gignac

G. E.

(2005). Revisiting the factor structure of the WAIS-R: Insights through nested factor modeling. Assessment, 12, 320–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191105278118

50.

Gignac

G. E.

(2006). The WAIS-III as a nested factors model: A useful alternative to the more conventional oblique and higher-order models. Journal of Individual Differences, 27, 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001.27.2.73

51.

Gignac

G. E.

(2016). The higher-order model imposes a proportionality constraint: That is why the bifactor model tends to fit better. Intelligence, 55, 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2016.01.006

52.

Gignac

G. E.

Watkins

M. W.

(2013). Bifactor modeling and the estimation of model-based reliability in the WAIS-IV. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 48, 639–662. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2013.804398

53.

Glorfeld

L. 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164495055003002

54.

Glutting

J. J.

Watkins

M. W.

Konold

T. R.

McDermott

P. A.

(2006). Distinctions without a difference: The utility of observed versus latent factors from the WISC-IV in estimating reading and math achievement on the WIAI-II. Journal of Special Education, 40, 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669060400020101

55.

Goh

D. S.

Teslow

C. J.

Fuller

G. B.

(1981). The practice of psychological assessment among school psychologists. Professional Psychology, 12, 696–706. https://doi.org/10.1037//0735-7028.12.6.696

56.

Golino

Christensen

A. P.

Garrido

L. E.

Jamison

(2022). EGAnet: Exploratory graph analysis—A framework for estimating the number of dimensions in multivariate data using network psychometrics (Version 1.2.3). R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

57.

Gorsuch

R. L.

(1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.

58.

Green

S. B.

Hershberger

S. L.

(2000). Correlated errors in true score models and their effect on coefficient alpha. Structural Equation Modeling, 7(2), 251–270. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0702_6

59.

Wen

Fan

(2017). Examining and controlling for wording effect in a self-report measure: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 24(4), 545–555. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2017.1286228

60.

Gustafsson

J.-E.

Balke

(1993). General and specific abilities as predictors of school achievement. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28, 407–434. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2804_2

61.

Hancock

G. R.

Mueller

R. O.

(2001). Rethinking construct reliability within latent variable systems. In Cudeck

Du Toit

Sorbom

(Eds.), Structural equation modeling: Present and future (pp. 195–216). Scientific Software International.

62.

Horn

J. L.

(1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrica, 30, 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447

63.

L.-T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 5, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

64.

Hutton

J. B.

Dubes

Muir

(1992). Assessment practices of school psychologists: Ten years later. School Psychology Review, 21, 271–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1992.12085614

65.

IBM Corp. (2024). IBM SPSS statistics for Macintosh (version 29.0) [Computer software].

66.

Ivnik

R. J.

Malec

J. F.

Smith

G. E.

Tangalos

E. G.

Petersen

R. C.

Kokmen

Kurland

L. T.

(1992). Mayo’s older Americans normative studies: Updated AVLT norms for ages 56 to 97. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 6(Suppl), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854049208401880

67.

Kaiser

H. F.

(1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000116

68.

Kaiser

H. F.

(1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575

69.

Kaufman

A. S.

(1994). Intelligent testing with the WISC–III. Wiley.

70.

Kaufman

A. S.

Lichtenberger

E. O.

(2000). Essentials of WISC–III and WPPSI–R assessment. Wiley.

71.

Kline

R. B.

(2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.

72.

Kline

R. B.

(2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.

73.

Kranzler

J. H.

Benson

Floyd

R. G.

(2015). Using estimated factor scores from a bifactor analysis to examine the unique effects of the latent variables measured by the WAIS-IV on academic achievement. Psychological Assessment, 27(4), 1402–1416. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000119

74.

Kush

J. C.

Spring

M. B.

Barkand

(2011). Advances in the assessment of cognitive skills using computer-based measurement. Behavior Research Methods, 44(1), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0136-2

75.

Landis

R. S.

Edwards

B. D.

Corina

J. M.

(2009). On the practice of allowing correlated residuals among indicators in structural equation models. In Lance

C. E.

Vandenberg

R. J.

(Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in organizational and social sciences (pp. 193–215). Routledge.

76.

Little

T. D.

Lindenberger

Nesselroade

J. R.

(1999). On selecting indicators for multivariate measurement and modeling with latent variables: When “good” indicators are bad and “bad” indicators are good. Psychological Methods, 4, 192–211. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.2.192

77.

MacCallum

Roznowski

Necowitz

L. B.

(1992). Model modifications in covariance structure analysis: The problem of capitalization on chance. Psychological Bulletin, 111(3), 490–504. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.111.3.490

78.

Mansolf

Reise

S. P.

(2017). When and why the second-order and bifactor models are distinguishable. Intelligence, 61, 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2017.01.012

79.

McDonald

R. P.

(2010). Structural models and the art of approximation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 675–686. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610388766

80.

McDonald

R. P.

M.-H. R.

(2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7, 64–82. https://doi.org/10.1037//1082-989X.7.1.64

81.

McGill

R. J.

Dombrowski

S. C.

Canivez

G. L.

(2025). Beyond primary assessment on the WISC–V: An investigation of the structural validity of the ancillary scores. Psychology in the Schools, 62, 2164–2177. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23457

82.

Morgan

G. B.

Hodge

K. J.

Wells

K. E.

Watkins

M. W.

(2015). Are fit indices biased in favor of bi-factor models in cognitive ability research?: A comparison of fit in correlated factors, higher-order, and bi-factor models via Monte Carlo simulations. Journal of Intelligence, 3, 2–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence3010002

83.

Murray

A. L.

Johnson

(2013). The limitations of model fit in comparing the bi-factor versus higher-order models of human cognitive ability structure. Intelligence, 41, 407–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2013.06.004

84.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(2021). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.).

85.

Najera

Abad

F. J.

Sorrel

M. A.

(2025). Is exploratory factor analysis always to be preferred? A systematic comparison of factor analytic techniques throughout the confirmatory-exploratory continuum. Psychological Methods, 30(1), 16–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000579

86.

Nasser

Benson

Wisenbaker

(2002). The performance of regression–based variations of the visual scree for determining the number of common factors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62, 397–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/00164402062003001

87.

NCS Pearson. (2009). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test—Third edition.

88.

Nelson

J. M.

Canivez

G. L.

Watkins

M. W.

(2013). Structural and incremental validity of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS–IV) with a clinical sample. Psychological Assessment, 25(2), 618–630. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032086

89.

O’Connor

B. 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. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200807

90.

Pfeiffer

S. I.

Reddy

L. A.

Kletzel

J. E.

Schmelzer

E. R.

Boyer

L. M.

(2000). The practitioner’s view of IQ testing and profile analysis. School Psychology Quarterly, 15, 376–385. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0088795

91.

Psychological Corporation. (2002). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test—Second edition.

92.

Reise

S. P.

(2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47, 667–696. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2012.715555

93.

Reise

S. P.

Bonifay

W. E.

Haviland

M. G.

(2013). Scoring and modeling psychological measures in the presence of multidimensionality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95, 129–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2012.725437

94.

Reise

S. P.

Mansolf

Haviland

M. G.

(2023). Bifactor measurement models. In Hoyle

R. H.

(Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (2nd ed., pp. 329–348). Guilford Press.

95.

Reise

S. P.

Moore

T. M.

Haviland

M. G.

(2010). Bifactor models and rotations: Exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 544–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.496477

96.

Rodriguez

Reise

S. P.

Haviland

M. G.

(2016a). Applying bifactor statistical indices in the evaluation of psychological measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(3), 223–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2015.1089249

97.

Rodriguez

Reise

S. P.

Haviland

M. G.

(2016b). Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices. Psychological Methods, 21(2), 137–150. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000045

98.

Schmid

Leiman

J. M.

(1957). The development of hierarchical factor solutions. Psychometrika, 22, 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289209

99.

Sellbom

Tellegen

(2019). Factor analysis in psychological assessment research: Common pitfalls and recommendations. Psychological Assessment, 31(12), 1428–1441. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000623

100.

Spearman

(1927). The abilities of man. Cambridge University Press.

101.

Stinnett

T. A.

Havey

J. M.

Oehler-Stinnett

(1994). Current test usage by practicing school psychologists: A national survey. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 12, 331–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/073428299401200403

102.

Sudarshan

N. J.

Bowden

S. C.

(2023). Common factor structure of the ten subtest Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-fourth edition in a clinical sample and 15 subtest version in the standardization sample. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 38(8), 1646–1658. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acad035

103.

Tabachnick

B. G.

Fidell

L. S.

(2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.

104.

Thurstone

L. L.

(1947). Multiple-factor analysis. University of Chicago Press.

105.

Velicer

W. F.

(1976). Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika, 41, 321–327. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02293557

106.

Watkins

C. E.

Jr Campbell

V. L.

Nieberding

Hallmark

(1995). Contemporary practice of psychological assessment by clinical psychologists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26, 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1037//0735-7028.26.1.54

107.

Watkins

M. W.

(2004). MacOrtho [Computer software]. Ed & Psych Associates.

108.

Watkins

M. W.

(2007). SEscree [Computer software]. Ed & Psych Associates.

109.

Watkins

M. W.

(2013). Omega [Computer software]. Ed & Psych Associates.

110.

Watkins

M. W.

(2017). The reliability of multidimensional neuropsychological measures: From alpha to omega. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 31, 1113–1126. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2017.1317364

111.

Watkins

M. W.

(2018). Exploratory factor analysis: A guide to best practice. Journal of Black Psychology, 44, 219–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798418771807

112.

Watkins

M. W.

Canivez

G. L.

(2022). Assessing the psychometric utility of IQ scores: A tutorial using the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth Edition. School Psychology Review, 51(5), 619–633. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2020.1816804

113.

Watkins

M. W.

Canivez

G. L.

Dombrowski

S. C.

McGill

R. J.

Pritchard

A. E.

Holingue

C. B.

Jacobson

L. A.

(2022). Long-term stability of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth Edition scores in a clinical sample. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, 11(3), 422–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2021.1875827

114.

Watkins

M. W.

Dombrowski

S. C.

Canivez

G. L.

(2018). Reliability and factorial validity of the Canadian Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth Edition. International Journal of School and Educational Psychology, 6, 252–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2017.1342580

115.

Wechsler

(2003). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–fourth edition: Technical and interpretive manual. Psychological Corporation.

116.

Wechsler

(2008a). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition. Pearson.

117.

Wechsler

(2008b). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition: Technical and interpretive manual. Pearson.

118.

Wechsler

(2014a). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition. NCS Pearson.

119.

Wechsler

(2014b). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition: Technical and interpretive manual. NCS Pearson.

120.

Wechsler

(2024). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (5th ed.).

121.

Wechsler

Raiford

S. E.

Presnell

(2024). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale: Technical and interpretive manual (5th ed.). NCS Pearson.

122.

Weiner

I. B.

(1989). On competence and ethicality in psychodiagnostic assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53(4), 827–831. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5304_18

123.

Weiss

L. G.

Keith

T. Z.

Zhu

Chen

(2013a). WAIS–IV and clinical validation of the four- and five-factor interpretative approaches. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31(2), 94–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282913478030

124.

Weiss

L. G.

Keith

T. Z.

Zhu

Chen

(2013b). WISC–IV and clinical validation of the four- and five-factor interpretative approaches. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31(2), 114–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282913478032

125.

Wood

J. M.

Tataryn

D. J.

Gorsuch

R. L.

(1996). Effects of under- and overextraction on principal axis factor analysis with varimax rotation. Psychological Methods, 1, 254–265. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.4.354

126.

Zinbarg

R. E.

Revelle

Yovel

(2005). Cronbach’s alpha, Revelle’s beta, and McDonald’s omega h: Their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Psychometrika, 70, 123–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-003-0974-7

127.

Zinbarg

R. E.

Yovel

Revelle

McDonald

R. P.

(2006). Estimating generalizability to a latent variable common to all of a scale’s indicators: A comparison of estimators for h. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30, 121–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621605278814

128.

Zoski

K. W.

Jurs

(1996). An objective counterpart to the visual scree test for factor analysis: The standard error scree. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 443–451. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164496056003006

Construct Validity of the WAIS- 5: Complementary Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analyses of the 20 Primary and Secondary Subtests

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References