Long-term stability of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–fifth edition scores in a clinical sample

Watkins, Marley W.; Canivez, Gary L.; Dombrowski, Stefan C.; McGill, Ryan J.; Pritchard, Alison E.; Holingue, Calliope; Jacobson, Lisa A.

doi:10.1080/21622965.2021.1875827

Cited by 14 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The clinical use of profiles has been hotly debated within the domain of intelligence testing (McGill et al, 2018; Watkins & Canivez, 2022), as well as outside this domain, for example for the diagnosis of learning disabilities (Fletcher & Miciak, 2017). Many studies have been conducted that question the reliability and validity of patterns of strengths and weaknesses (Canivez et al, 2017; Macmann & Barnett, 1997; Miciak et al, 2018; Watkins et al, 2022). The current study examined the validity of a profile of strengths and weaknesses for the Dutch WISC-V.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Validity of WISC-V Profiles of Strengths and Weaknesses

Jong

2023

Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition (WISC-V; Wechsler, 2014 ) provides a general intelligence score, representing g, and five index scores, reflecting underlying broad factors. Within person differences between the overall performance across subtests and index scores, denoted as index difference scores, are often used to examine profiles of strengths and weaknesses. In this study, the validity of such profiles was examined for the Dutch WISC-V. In line with previous studies, broad factors explained little variance in index scores. A simulation study showed that variation in index difference scores also reflected little broad factor variance. The simulation study further revealed that, as a consequence, a significant discrepancy between an index score and overall performance was accompanied in only 40%–74% of the cases by a discrepancy on the underlying broad factor. Overall, these results provide little support for the validity and thereby clinical use of WISC-V profiles.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Validity of WISC-V Profiles of Strengths and Weaknesses

Jong

2023

Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nonetheless, practitioners continue to interpret scores in a manner that does not align with the research ( Kranzler et al 2020 ). Independent investigations of popular cognitive measures have shown problems with longitudinal stability ( Styck et al 2019 ; Watkins and Canivez 2004 ; Watkins et al 2022 ; Watkins and Smith 2013 ) and structural validity ( Canivez et al 2017 ; Dombrowski et al 2017 , 2018 ; McGill and Spurgin 2017 ). Additionally, studies examining the diagnostic utility of certain interpretive practices (i.e., Profiles of Strengths and Weaknesses) have consistently produced negative results ( Kranzler et al 2016 , 2019 ; Maki et al 2022b ; Miciak et al 2014 ; Stuebing et al 2002 , 2012 ).…”

Section: Reliability and Validity Of Remote Assessment With Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Remote Assessment: Origins, Benefits, and Concerns

Mulligan

Ayoub

2023

J. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although guidelines surrounding COVID-19 have relaxed and school-aged students are no longer required to wear masks and social distance in schools, we have become, as a nation and as a society, more comfortable working from home, learning online, and using technology as a platform to communicate ubiquitously across ecological environments. In the school psychology community, we have also become more familiar with assessing students virtually, but at what cost? While there is research suggesting score equivalency between virtual and in-person assessment, score equivalency alone is not sufficient to validate a measure or an adaptation thereof. Furthermore, the majority of psychological measures on the market are normed for in-person administration. In this paper, we will not only review the pitfalls of reliability and validity but will also unpack the ethics of remote assessment as an equitable practice.

show abstract