Responding to a meta-analysis of 94 studies which fails to support the presence of distinctive Wechsler profiles for LD children, Inglis and Lawson contend that a distinctive LD pattern indeed exists. As evidence they cite their own pattern derived from an unrotated principal-components analysis. Although this approach is statistically sound, it nonetheless offers a limited empirical solution with little explanatory power beyond the finding that LD groups seem to find Verbal subscales more difficult than Performance subscales. Further, the authors' response implies a lack of understanding of the purposes of meta-analysis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BellemareF.G.InglisJ.LawsonJ.S. (1986). Learning disability indices derived from a principal components analysis of the WISC-R: A study of learning disabled and normal boys. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 18, 86–91.
2.
BerkR.A. (1984). Screening and diagnosis of children with learning disabilities. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
3.
ColesG.S. (1978). The learning disabilities test battery. Empirical and social issues. Harvard Educational Review, 48, 313–340.
4.
InglisJ.LawsonJ.S. (1987). Reanalysis of a metaanalysis of the validity of the Wechsler scales in the diagnosis of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10 (3), 198–202.
5.
KaufmanA.S. (1981). The WISC-R and learning disabilities assessment: State of the art. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 14, 520–526.
6.
KavaleK.A. (1983). Fragile findings, complex conclusions, and meta-analysis in special education. Exceptional Education Quarterly, 4, 97–106.
7.
KavaleK.A. (1984). Potential advantages of the metaanalysis technique for research in special education. Journal of Special Education, 18, 61–72.
8.
KavaleK.A.FornessS.R. (1984). A meta-analysis assessing the validity of Wechsler scale profiles and recategorization: Patterns or parodies?Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 136–156.
9.
KavaleK.A.FornessS.R. (1985). The science of learning disabilities. San Diego, CA: College-Hill Press.
10.
KavaleK.A.FornessS.R.BenderM. (1987). Handbook of learning disabilities. Volume I: Dimensions and diagnosis. San Diego, CA: College-Hill Press.
11.
KavaleK.A.MattsonP.D. (1983). “One jumped off the balance beam”: Meta-analysis of perceptual-motor training. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 165–173.
12.
LawsonJ.S.InglisJ. (1984). The psychometric assessment of children with learning disabilities: An index derived from a principal components analysis of the WISC-R. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 517–522.
13.
LawsonJ.S.InglisJ. (1985). Learning disabilities and intelligence test results: A model based on a principal components analysis of the WISC-R. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 35–48.
14.
NihiraK. (1985). Assessment of mentally retarded individuals. In WalmanB. (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence: Theories, measurements and applications (pp. 801–824). New York: John Wiley & Sons.)
15.
OttenbacherK. (1982). Sensory integration therapy: Affect or effect?American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 36, 571–578.
16.
ReynoldsC. (1984). Critical measurement issues in learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 18, 451–476.
17.
TittemoreJ.LawsonJ.S.InglisJ. (1985). Validation of a learning disability index (LDI) derived from a principal components analysis of the WISC-R. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 18, 449–454.
