Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the WISC-IV with gifted students.

Abstract

These 2 studies investigated the factor structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-4th edition (WISC-IV; Wechsler, 2003a) with exploratory factor analysis (EFA; Study 1) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA; Study 2) among 2 independent samples of gifted students. The EFA sample consisted of 225 children who were referred for a cognitive assessment as part of the application for gifted programming in their schools. The CFA sample consisted of 181 students who were tested the following year. All students included in the analyses were either accepted to school-based gifted programs following the assessment or were already participating in one. Across the 2 studies, there were approximately equal numbers of boys (205) and girls (201) with a mean age of 8-years-old. The mean composite scores for both samples varied from high average to superior and evidenced substantial differences among the index scores. In the EFA, the 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-factor solutions were considered. The first 3 models, as well as an additional model reflecting the Verbal and Performance (V-P) IQ scores from previous versions of the WISC, were then compared using CFA. The CFA fit indices and parameter estimates supported the 4-factor, first-order WISC-IV model. This is the measurement model that includes the 4 index scores. Parameter estimates for the higher-order model reflecting g suggested that combining factors into a single, overarching score may not be the best way to represent the varying cognitive scores of gifted students.

Usefulness of WISC-IV in Determining Intellectual Giftedness

“…The second order four-factor model obtained very similar results to the first order results, although its χ² value was slightly higher. Therefore, Rowe et al (2014) concluded that the results supported the first order four-factor solution of the WISC-IV, which establishes the general structure of the scale for gifted children.…”

Assessment in Gifted Education: A Review of the Literature From 2005 to 2016

“…Prifitera, Saklofske, and Weiss (2005) suggested that the collection of such information may be conducive to the optimal interpretation of test results. Among traditional ability tests, the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale appears to have the longest history (Rowe, Dandridge, Pawlush, Thompson, & Ferrier, 2014). Based on large normative samples of individuals, the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale measures the cognitive performance of individuals across the life span on five cognitive factors that are broadly based on the CHC hierarchical model: knowledge, quantitative reasoning, visual-spatial processing, working memory, and fluid reasoning (Naglieri, 2008;Newton, McIntosh, Dixon, Williams, & Youman, 2008).…”

“…In comparison, the Wechsler family of tests, and particularly the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC), have been recognized as being the most commonly used ability tests for the identification of gifted students (Rowe et al, 2014). Unlike other traditional ability tests, the Wechsler family of tests is comprised of three different individual tests to be administered with different age groups: Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI; 2:7 to 7:7 years old), the WISC (6:00 to 16:11years old), and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS; 16:00 to 90:11 years old).…”

Invigorating science, practice, and policy relevant to school psychology throughout the world.

“…Volume 29, number 4 also included general articles about the use and barriers to using evidence-based interventions in the schools (Hicks et al, 2014), evaluation of flu ency gains related to a performance feedback writing intervention (Hier & Eckert, 2014), whether fear appeals predict motivation and exam scores (Putwain & Remedios, 2014), measuring engagement among school-age chil dren grades four through 12 (Wang, Bergin, & Bergin, 2014), exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the WISC-IV with gifted stu dents (Rowe et al, 2014), the association of life satisfaction and maladaptive behaviors in early adolescents (Lyons et al, 2014), and the use of a culturally adapted version of the Strong Teens program to promote socialemotional learning in adolescent Latino Eng lish Language Learners (Castro-Olivo, 2014).…”