Exploratory Bifactor Analysis of the WJ-III Cognitive in Adulthood via the Schmid–Leiman Procedure

Abstract

The Woodcock–Johnson-III cognitive in the adult time period (age 20 to 90 plus) was analyzed using exploratory bifactor analysis via the Schmid–Leiman orthogonalization procedure. The results of this study suggested possible overfactoring, a different factor structure from that posited in the Technical Manual and a lack of invariance across both age ranges under study. Even when forcing the seven-factor fit, the structure was problematic. The results from the 20 to 39 age group displayed patterns of convergence with and divergence from the Technical Manual’s structure. The results from the 40 and above age group were generally consistent with the Technical Manual’s structure except for retrieval fluency. This study is consistent with the body of exploratory factor analysis structural validity evidence suggesting that contemporary tests of cognitive ability, particularly those based on Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory, are overfactored and lack alignment with their respective Technical Manual’s presented structure.

Investigating the theoretical structure of the DAS‐II core battery at school age using Bayesian structural equation modeling

“…Similarly, the high H values (>.80) also suggests a dominant general factor that portends to be stable across studies. Thus, consistent with other frequentist EFA and CFA studies (e.g., Bodin, Pardini, Burns, & Stevens, ; Canivez, ; Canivez & McGill, ; Canivez, Watkins, & Dombrowski, , ; DiStefano & Dombrowski, ; Dombrowski, , , ; Dombrowski, Watkins, & Brogan, ; Dombrowski, Canivez, & Watkins, ; Dombrowski, Canivez, Watkins, & Beaujean, ; Dombrowski, McGill, & Canivez, , ; Watkins & Beaujean, ) and consistent with Frazier and Youngstrom (), the DAS–II appears to be an instrument dominated by a general factor.…”

Construct validity of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fourth UK Edition with a referred Irish sample: Wechsler and Cattell–Horn–Carroll model comparisons with 15 subtests

“…However, the WISC–IV UK factor structure identified by Watkins et al . () with the Irish sample was consistent with results from other WISC–IV studies using both EFA and CFA (Bodin, Pardini, Burns, & Stevens, ; Canivez, ; Keith, ; Nakano & Watkins, ; Styck & Watkins, ; Watkins, , ; Watkins, Wilson, Kotz, Carbone, & Babula, ), with other versions of Wechsler scales (Canivez & Watkins, ,b; Dombrowski, McGill, & Canivez, ; Gignac, , ; Golay & Lecerf, ; Golay, Reverte, Rossier, Favez, & Lecerf, ; Lecerf, Rossier, Favez, Reverte, & Coleaux, ; McGill & Canivez, ; Nelson, Canivez, & Watkins, ; Niileksela, Reynolds, & Kaufman, ; Watkins & Beaujean, ), and intelligence tests in general (Canivez, , ; Canivez, Konold, Collins, & Wilson, ; Canivez & McGill, ; DiStefano & Dombrowski, ; Dombrowski, , ,b; Dombrowski & Watkins, ; Dombrowski, Watkins, & Brogan, ; Nelson & Canivez, ; Nelson, Canivez, Lindstrom, & Hatt, ) in showing the largest portions of variance were captured by the g factor and small portions of variance were associated with group factors. Three recent studies of the WISC–V have also yielded identical results (Canivez, Watkins, & Dombrowski, , ; Dombrowski, Canivez, Watkins, & Beaujean, ) with general intelligence dominating explained common variance and little unique explained common variance among the group factors.…”

“…It was noted that such results were difficult to place in context as no other studies of the WISC-IV UK factor structure with British (normative or clinical) or Irish samples were available for comparison. Further, because only the 10 WISC-IV UK core subtests were used (archival data), it was not possible to examine rival structural models based on the Cattell-Horn-Carroll framework (CHC; McGrew, 1997McGrew, , 2005Schneider & McGrew, 2012 However, the WISC-IV UK factor structure identified by Watkins et al (2013) with the Irish sample was consistent with results from other WISC-IV studies using both EFA and CFA (Bodin, Pardini, Burns, & Stevens, 2009;Canivez, 2014;Keith, 2005;Nakano & Watkins, 2013;Styck & Watkins, 2016;Watkins, 2006Watkins, , 2010Watkins, Wilson, Kotz, Carbone, & Babula, 2006), with other versions of Wechsler scales (Canivez & Watkins, 2010a,b;Dombrowski, McGill, & Canivez, 2017;Gignac, 2005Gignac, , 2006Golay & Lecerf, 2011;Golay, Reverte, Rossier, Favez, & Lecerf, 2013;Lecerf, Rossier, Favez, Reverte, & Coleaux, 2010;Nelson, Canivez, & Watkins, 2013;Niileksela, Reynolds, & Kaufman, 2013;Watkins & Beaujean, 2014), and intelligence tests in general (Canivez, 2008(Canivez, , 2011Canivez, Konold, Collins, & Wilson, 2009;DiStefano & Dombrowski, 2006;Dombrowski, 2013Dombrowski, , 2014aDombrowski & Watkins, 2013;Dombrowski, Watkins, & Brogan, 2009;Nelson & Canivez, 2012;Nelson, Canivez, Lindstrom, & Hatt, 2007) in showing the largest portions of ...…”

“…This has been documented in both EFA and CFA studies of the WISC–IV (Bodin et al ., ; Canivez, ; Keith, ; Nakano & Watkins, ; Styck & Watkins, ; Watkins, , ; Watkins et al ., ) and with other versions of Wechsler scales (Canivez & Watkins, ,b; Canivez et al ., , ; Dombrowski et al ., ; Golay & Lecerf, ; Golay et al ., ; Gignac, , ; Lecerf et al ., ; McGill & Canivez, ; Watkins & Beaujean, ; Watkins et al ., ). Further, these results are not unique to Wechsler scales as similar results were also observed with the DAS–II (Canivez & McGill, ), SB5 (Canivez, ), WASI and WRIT (Canivez et al ., ), RIAS (Dombrowski et al ., ; Nelson & Canivez, ; Nelson et al ., ), CAS (Canivez, ), WJ III (Dombrowski, , ,b; Dombrowski & Watkins, ; Strickland, Watkins, & Caterino, ), and the WJ IV Cognitive (Dombrowski et al ., ). The implication of these consistent findings is that primary interpretive weight should be placed on the omnibus FSIQ rather than the first‐order group factor‐based index scores.…”

Incremental validity of WISC–IVUK factor index scores with a referred Irish sample: Predicting performance on the WIAT–IIUK

“…These structural results were similar to those found in other studies of Wechsler scales (Bodin, Pardini, Burns, & Stevens, ; Canivez, ; Canivez & Watkins, ,b; Gignac, , ; Gignac & Watkins, ; Golay & Lecerf, ; Golay et al ., ; Nelson, Canivez, & Watkins, ; Niileksela, Reynolds, & Kaufman, ; Watkins, ; Watkins & Beaujean, ; Watkins, Wilson, Kotz, Carbone, & Babula, ) and other intelligence tests (Canivez, , ; Canivez, Konold, Collins, & Wilson, ; Dombrowski, , ,b; Dombrowski & Watkins, ; Dombrowski, Watkins, & Brogan, ; Nelson & Canivez, ; Nelson, Canivez, Lindstrom, & Hatt, ).…”