Considerations in the use of difference scores to identify learning-disabled children

Schulte, Ann C.; Borich, Gary D.

doi:10.1016/0022-4405(84)90026-8

Cited by 24 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Difference scores such as this are a psychometric challenge, with their use often being strongly discouraged because of unreliability (Cattell, 1982;Levy, 1966;Lord, 1958;Schulte & Borich, 1984;Zimmerman, 1994). For difference scores, error is sourced from the two measures used to derive the scores (Cattell, 1982;Levy, 1966;O'Donnell, 1980;Schulte & Borich, 1984). As neither intelligence nor achievement tests are perfectly reliable, then the scores of X and Y are the product of true scores plus error or Kane, 1996;Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).…”

Section: Measurement Errormentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The calculation of a difference or discrepancy score involves the subtraction of one test's score from another test's score or d¼Y -X, where Y represents reading achievement and X signifies intelligence measures such as the full scale intelligence quotient (FIQ). Difference scores such as this are a psychometric challenge, with their use often being strongly discouraged because of unreliability (Cattell, 1982;Levy, 1966;Lord, 1958;Schulte & Borich, 1984;Zimmerman, 1994). For difference scores, error is sourced from the two measures used to derive the scores (Cattell, 1982;Levy, 1966;O'Donnell, 1980;Schulte & Borich, 1984).…”

Section: Measurement Errormentioning

confidence: 98%

“…This is often symbolized by the formula X ¼ T þ E, where X is the observed score, T is the true score and E is error (Embreston, 1999;Ghiselle et al, 1981;Glutting et al, 1987;Kane, 1996;Payne, 1989;Portney & Watkins, 2000;Schulte & Borich, 1984). The true score is presumed to be a fixed value that would be observed if a psychological test had perfect reliability (Ghiselle et al, 1981;Glutting et al, 1987;Portney & Watkins, 2000).…”

Section: Classic Test Theory and Measurement Errormentioning

confidence: 98%

“…As neither intelligence nor achievement tests are perfectly reliable, then the scores of X and Y are the product of true scores plus error or Kane, 1996;Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). Hence, the intelligence-achievement discrepancy scores have at least twice as much error as a single test score (Schulte & Borich, 1984).…”

Section: Measurement Errormentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Measurement error: implications for diagnosis and discrepancy models of developmental dyslexia

Cotton

Crewther

2005

Dyslexia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The diagnosis of developmental dyslexia (DD) is reliant on a discrepancy between intellectual functioning and reading achievement. Discrepancy-based formulae have frequently been employed to establish the significance of the difference between 'intelligence' and 'actual' reading achievement. These formulae, however, often fail to take into consideration test reliability and the error associated with a single test score. This paper provides an illustration of the potential effects that test reliability and measurement error can have on the diagnosis of dyslexia, with particular reference to discrepancy models. The roles of reliability and standard error of measurement (SEM) in classic test theory are also briefly reviewed. This is followed by illustrations of how SEM and test reliability can aid with the interpretation of a simple discrepancy-based formula of DD. It is proposed that a lack of consideration of test theory in the use of discrepancy-based models of DD can lead to misdiagnosis (both false positives and false negatives). Further, misdiagnosis in research samples affects reproducibility and generalizability of findings. This in turn, may explain current inconsistencies in research on the perceptual, sensory, and motor correlates of dyslexia.

show abstract

Section: Measurement Errormentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Measurement Errormentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Classic Test Theory and Measurement Errormentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Measurement Errormentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Measurement error: implications for diagnosis and discrepancy models of developmental dyslexia

Cotton

Crewther

2005

Dyslexia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, it is acknowledged that use of a difference score (i.e., our basis for operationaliz ing agreement) results in lower reliability because it effectively magnifi es the measurement error found in the individual variables (Cronbach, 1958;Schulte & Borich, 1984). In other words, we duly note that a teacher/parent CEF difference score will contain more errors than either score alone.…”

Section: Limitations Of Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptions of helpfulness in conjoint behavioral consultation: Congruence and agreement between teachers and parents.

Sheridan¹,

Erchul

Brown

et al. 2004

School Psychology Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conjoint behavioral consultation (CBC) can be considered a help-giving model, wherein consultants work with parents and teachers in an effort to develop constructive partnerships aimed at addressing needs of students for whom both parties share responsibility. The development of strong relationships among systems in a child's life is related to positive outcomes for children, and congruence among systems is one relationship variable that has received previous research attention. This study examined the degree to which parent and teacher perceptions of the helpfulness of the CBC consultant are congruent, and its relationship with various case outcomes. Correlational analyses suggest that parents' and teachers' perspectives of the helpfulness of the consultant are not necessarily related to each other, and as differences increase, perceptions of outcomes decrease for both parties. Research implications, limitations, and future directions are offered.Consultation research has evolved over several years to encompass evaluations of outcomes, processes, and social validity (Sheridan, Welch, & Orme, 1996).

show abstract

Predictors of ability-achievement discrepancies in children referred for psychoeducational evaluation

1986

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study evaluated a school district's psychoeducational screening program to determine the best predictors of two difference score variables: (a) WISC-R FSIQ -PIAT reading recognition score and (b) WISC-R FSIQ -PIAT math score. The study also investigated the merit of using scores from a group-administered achievement test (CAT) as predictors. Subjects were 61 first through fifth graders initially referred for testing from 1982-1984. Multiple regression analyses indicated: (a) for reading, the SIQ score and the PPVT-R -CAT reading difference score were significant predictors, together accounting for 27% of the variance, and (b) for math, the PPVT-R score accounted for 28% of the variance, with additional variables producing nonsignificant increments. Results suggest that CAT scores may prove useful predictors when combined with screening IQ tests to form difference scores.

show abstract

Considerations in the use of difference scores to identify learning-disabled children

Cited by 24 publications

References 16 publications

Measurement error: implications for diagnosis and discrepancy models of developmental dyslexia

Measurement error: implications for diagnosis and discrepancy models of developmental dyslexia

Perceptions of helpfulness in conjoint behavioral consultation: Congruence and agreement between teachers and parents.

Predictors of ability-achievement discrepancies in children referred for psychoeducational evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About