The present study examined the interrelations among performance in school, friendship choices in the classroom, and the importance of various school-related' activities for a child's self-definition. Children named as friends those classmates whose performance (both actual and distorted) was better than their own on irrelevant activities and somewhat inferior to their own on relevant activities. There was also a striking similarity effect. Friends' overall performance was highly similar to the subject's own overall performance, and both the subjects and friends performed better on the subject's relevant activity than on the subject's irrelevant activity. The performance of a distant other, in this case a disliked other, was derogated on both relevant and irrelevant activities. ReflectionPeople will often attempt to bask in the reflected glory of another's accomplishments.

No abstract

No abstract

This study assesses the utility o f Bannatyne's recategorization o f subtest scaled scores on the WISC-R (Wechsler 1974). The WISC-R was administered to 208 school-verified learning disabled (L D) children. The obtained subtest scaled scores were recategorized in the manner suggested by Bannatyne (1974) into Spatiol, Conceptual, Sequential, and Acquired Knowledge categories. The mean Spatial score was significantly greater than the mean Conceptual score, which, in turn, exceeded the Sequential and Acquired Knowledge scores. The total sample was also subdivided into high and low IQ subgroups to determine if the SpatiaDConceptuaIXequentia1 pattern was affected by or independent of the level of intellectual functiobing. Relatively high and low IQ subgroups ex.hibited similar patterns o f recategorized scores. The relationship did not hold true, however, when the recategorized scores of children who obtained Full Scale IQs o f 75 or less (N=26) were examined. The implications for educational practice and future research are discussed in a final section.A major barrier t o further inquiry into the nature of learning disabilities (LD) is the lack of reliable and valid instruments that will discriminate the LD child from the larger school population as well as differentiate the child who fails academically for reasons other than LD. While a plethora of tests exists that claims psychoeducational utility in diagnosing LD, most of these have such speculative psychometric properties that the experienced practitioner would be reluctant to employ them for diagnostic evaluation.One exception t o these tests is the Wechsler Intelligence S c a l e f o r Children-Revised (Wechsler 1974). Since its origination in 1949, the WlSC has been subjected t o more rigorous empirical investigation than any other standardized instrument commonly used in educational settings. In studies ranging from predictive validity t o factorial analysis, the WlSC has c o n s i s t e n t l y demonstrated powerful psychometric properties.In 1968, Bannatyne indicated the possible use of WlSC results in determining LD. This paper first reviews research on his suggested recategorization of WlSC subtest scaled scores and then presents an updated assessment of the utility of the recategorization in interpreting the WISC-R. PREVIOUS RESEARCHFor purposes of identifying children with genetic dyslexia, Bannatyne (1968) suggested the recategorization of WlSC scaled scores into Spatial, Conceptual, and Sequential categories.

Stability of the WISC-R subtest profile for 161 learning disabled (LD) children over a 7-month test-retest interval was examined. A unique subtest profile reported earlier (Smith, Coleman, Dokecki, & Davis 1977a) was replicated.Performance IQ was significantly greater than Verbal at both testing occafor Verbal I&.sions. A mean test-retest increase was observed for Per 9 ormance IQ, but not Several investigators have examined WISC subtest scaled scores for learning disabled (LD) children in search of a unique profile possibly possessing psychoeducational diagnostic utility. Rugel (1974) reviewed and summarized the findings from 25 such investigations, and concluded that a unique profile was manifest overall, with lowest mean scores on Arithmetic, Digit Span, and Coding, and highest scores on Object Assembly, Block Design, Picture Completion, and Picture Arrangement.Huelsman (1970) reviewed a substantial body of literature to determine if there was a characteristic WISC subtest profile for disabled readers. He concluded that the WISC patt>ern for disabled readers included low scores in Arithmetic (100% of studies reviewed), Coding (95%), Information (80%), and Digit Span (60%). The subtests most consistently elevated were Block Design, Picture Completion, and Picture Arrangement.Not all investigators reported a unique WISC subtest scaled score profile. In a recent review of the literature, however, Smith (Note 1) observed that: (a) sample sizes ranged from 11 to 240, for clinic and classroom samples; (b) data were collected over a 25-year span; (c) examinations of quantitative indices of academic disabilities were not consistent; (d) children in some samples were characterized as emotionally disturbed; (e) various ages were represented; and (f) considerations of such variables as SES, race, time since diagnosis and/or special placement were the exception rather than the rule. With these methodological and conceptual shortcomings, perhaps it is remarkable that any consistent WISC subtest profile emerged.