Generalizability of WAIS-R factor structure within and between populations

Abstract

We investigated the reliability of the factor structure of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale‐Revised (WAIS‐R). The WAIS‐R subtests, as administered to 146 head‐injured males, were factor analyzed. Two‐ and three‐factor solutions were extracted that were consistent with past findings. Congruence coefficients were computed to determine degree of association between factor structures from all samples reported in the literature. All coefficients were impressive. Also, congruence coefficients based on factor structures derived from different samples within the same population were compared to coefficients based on different samples from different populations. No significant discrepancies emerged. Apparently, the slight factor structure variation that does exist is due to chance data fluctuation rather than to systematic population bias. This reflects well on the robustness of the WAIS‐R factor structure.

Impaired verbal memory and otherwise spared cognition in remitted bipolar patients on monotherapy with lithium or valproate

“…Immediate verbal memory was assessed by the Logical Memory Subscale of the Wechsler Memory Scale I (WMS) (39). The Information subtest of the full text Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Revised (WAIS‐R) (40) was used to confirm similarity between groups in terms of premorbid level of cognition. This was preferred to the Vocabulary subtest, because Vocabulary scores may not reflect premorbid cognition in patient populations whose cognition is likely to be impaired (41).…”

Structure of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – Revised in the Italian Normal Standardisation Sample

“…In the twofactors model, Information, Vocabulary, Comprehension, Similarities, Arithmetic, and Digit Span load on a verbal factor, whereas Picture Completion, Picture Arrangement, Block Design, Object Assembly, and Digit Symbol load on a nonverbal factor. Still other researchers have found threefactor models to be the most predictive of subtest variability named by Cohen (1957a) as Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Organisation and Memory/Freedom from Distractibility (Atkinson, Cyr, Doxey, & Vigna, 1989;Burgess, Flint, & Adshead, 1992;Crawford, Allan, Stephen, Parker, & Besson, 1989;Laicardi, Frustaci, & Lauriola, 1996;Parker, 1983;Ryan & Schneider, 1986;Waller & Waldman, 1990). Verbal Comprehension factor is typically considered to be composed of Information, Vocabulary, Comprehension, and Similarities subtests, whereas Perceptual Organisation factor is thought to be composed of Picture Completion, Picture Arrangement, Block Design, and Object Assembly subtests.…”

WAIS-R performance following closed-head injury: A comparison of the clinical utility of summary IQs, factor scores, and subtest scatter indices

“…Although this suggestion has a long history (e.g., Maxwell, 1960), factor scores have not been widely employed in clinical practice or research. The present authors are unaware of any research which has examined WAIS or WAIS-R performance in CHI in terms of factor scores, despite the indications that the factor structure of the WAIS-R is preserved in CHI and other neurological disorders (e.g., Atkinson, Cyr, Doxey, & Vigna, 1989;Leckliter, Matarazzo, & Silverstein, 1986). This neglect of the factor score approach may be unfortunate as it has some advantages over the use of summary IQs or subtests; unlike IQs, factor scores are empirically derived composites rather than composites formed a priori, they therefore have superior construct validity.…”