Differences in the intellectual profile of children with intellectual vs. learning disability

Clinical Psychological Science

Cornoldi

2017

Self Cite

The consideration of intelligence has always been crucial for the diagnosis of specific learning disorders (SLDs). In particular, the hypothesis of a discrepancy between normal to high general intellectual abilities and poor academic achievement has traditionally been stressed (Mercer, Jordan, Allsopp, & Mercer, 1996). However, the traditional view of SLD has been criticized (e.g., Siegel, 1988). First of all, the dimensional distribution of academic and intellectual performances (i.e., a continuum of severity with no break points) has been emphasized, raising doubts on the use of specific cut points (Francis et al., 2005; see also Branum-Martin, Fletcher, & Stuebing, 2013). Another criticism concerns the fact that the discrepancy hypothesis treats intelligence as a unitary construct, contrasting a single, overall measure of intelligence (e.g., the full-scale intelligence quotient [FSIQ]) with achievement measures. However, many formulations of the construct of intelligence suggest that it can be better accounted for by considering different aspects (Carroll, 1993). Particularly in the case of children with SLD, using a battery of intelligence tests can help to detect strengths and weaknesses that could not emerge when a unitary IQ is considered (Giofrè & Cornoldi, 2015). In this respect, the different factor scores obtained using the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV (WISC-IV; Wechsler, 2003)-that is, the most widely used tool for assessing children intelligence in the Western countries (Evers et al., 2012)-can be useful. Recent research has shown that the intellectual profile of children with SLD differs from that of typically developing (TD) children. In particular, it has been shown that

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

Strengths and Weaknesses in the Intellectual Profile of Different Subtypes of Specific Learning Disorder

Toffalini

Clinical Psychological Science

Cornoldi

2017

Self Cite

“…This incomplete overlap between WM and intelligence seems to indicate that the two constructs are distinguishable and not isomorphic (Conway, Kane, & Engle, 2003. The literature also suggests a partial independence between WM and intelligence. For example, children with learning disabilities typically have WM difficulties despite being normally intelligent (e.g., Swanson & Siegel, 2001; see also Cornoldi, Giofrè, Orsini, & Pezzuti, 2014); and children with ADHD may struggle with WM tasks despite revealing a high level of intelligence (Martinussen, Hayden, Hogg-Johnson, Tannock. 2005; see also Cornoldi, Giofrè , Calgaro, & Stupiggia, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between working memory and intelligence in children: Is the scoring procedure important?

Mammarella

2014

Intelligence

Self Cite

Different procedures have been proposed for scoring working memory (WM) tasks. The Absolute Credit Score (ACS) only considers performance in perfectly recalled trials, while the Partial Credit Score (PCS) considers imperfectly recalled ones too. Research indicates that different relationships between WM and general intelligence (the g-factor) may emerge using the ACS or the PCS. We reanalyzed the ACS and PCS obtained in a sample of 176 children in the 4 th and 5 th grades, and found that the PCS strengthened the relationship between WM and intelligence, and the relationships between visuospatial short-term memory (STM-VS), active WM and intelligence. When the number of items to be remembered (set size) was considered, however, the PCS only strengthened the relationship between STM-VS, active WM and intelligence in the case of larger set sizes. Practical and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.

“…The test, and the WISC-IV version in particular, not only affords a measure of general IQ, but also enables us to investigate different aspects of the performance of children with SLD. To give an example, recent studies using the ten core subtests and the classical four-factor structure found the performance of children with SLD strongly impaired in the Working Memory and, to a lesser extent, in the Processing Speed, but not in the Perceptual Reasoning or Verbal Comprehension indexes (Cornoldi, Giofrè, Orsini, & Pezzuti, 2014;De Clercq-Quaegebeur et al, 2010;Poletti, 2014). Such evidence suggests that the intelligence of children with SLD may be organized differently from that of typicallydeveloping children, especially as regards the role of working memory (WM) and processing speed (PS).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The structure of intelligence in children with specific learning disabilities is different as compared to typically development children

Cornoldi

2015

Intelligence

Self Cite

Children with specific learning disabilities (SLDs) are characterized by a poor academic achievement despite an average intelligence. They are therefore typically assessed not only with achievement tests, but also with intelligence tests, usually the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC). The assumption of a discrepancy between IQ and achievement in children with SLD has been questioned, however, and the implications of using different measures in batteries of intellectual subtests have not been thoroughly investigated. The present study examined these issues, taking advantage of a large database of scores obtained in the ten core subtests of the WISC-IV by a group of 910 Italian children with a clinical diagnosis of SLD, who were compared with the children considered for national standardization purposes. Our results support the doubts raised concerning the IQ-achievement discrepancy model, showing that relevant discrepancies can emerge even within the WISC profile. The four main WISC-IV indexes were found differently related to intelligence (measured by means of the g-factor) and the g content of many subtests differed in children with SLD vis-à-vis typically-developing children. These results have important implications both theoretical, indicating that the g-factor is weakly identified in children with SLD children, and practical, indicating that the QI obtained with the WISC-IV may not be a good measure of intellectual functioning for children with SLD, which are discussed.  There are differences in the g content of the indexes and many subtests between SLD cases and controls.Intelligence, WISC-IV and SLD 2 The structure of intelligence in children with specific learning disabilities is different as compared to typically development childrenIntelligence is one of the most important and most often assessed constructs in psychology (Gottfredson, 1997a). It has been demonstrated, for instance, that intelligence tests such as the WISC, the WAIS and the Raven progressive matrices are among the psychological tests most commonly used in Europe, taking first, second and fourth places, respectively (Evers et al., 2012). This may be due to the importance of intelligence, which is also confirmed by the fact that intelligence can predict important academic and occupational outcomes, and performance in everyday life (e.g., Deary, Strand, Smith, & Fernandes, 2007;Gottfredson, 1997b;Schmidt & Hunter, 2004).The WISC, and particularly the WISC-IV (Wechsler, 2003), which is the latest version to become available in many countries, is one of most often used psychological tests. The popularity of the WISC-IV is probably due to the fact that it is relatively quick to administer and it measures important cognitive factors of relevance to the assessment of both typical populations and clinical groups (Prifitera, Saklofske, & Weiss, 2008). The WISC-IV, as presented in the test manuals, is structured around four factors, considered among the main basic factors underlying intelligence: i) the verbal comprehension ...