Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Cited by 3 publications
References 13 publications
Since its introduction five years ago (1974), 113 articles or papers have appeared regarding the WISC-R, including empirical investigations of its nature, as well as its comparability with a variety of other measures of intelligence and achievement, including the WISC. While not all this research has been carefully done, two general conclusions can be derived from the review. First, although the WISC-R involves modification in administration, design, and presentation of items, as well as a complete restandardization, the literature substantially suggests that it remains very similar in nature to its predecessor, the WISC. Investigations of factor analytic structures, standard errors, reliability coefficients, and subtest intercorrelations support the conclusion that individuals perform on the WISC-R largely the same as they do on the WISC. The second conclusion points out (with few exceptions): consistently lower scores were obtained on the WISC-R than on several other measures, including the WISC, the WAIS, the Slosson Intelligence Test, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, and the Stanford Binet, which was revised shortly before the WISC. These lower scores on the WISC-R may be due to a variety of influences, including examiner variance, an artifact of design leading to inflated scores on the WISC, and finally and most obviously, the restandardization of the scale. The amount of literature that has appeared over the five-year period suggests that practitioners and researchers are as interested in learning about the WISC-R as they were about the WISC. Despite this fact and the conclusion that the WISC and WISC-R are substantially similar, the present authors encourage caution in the overgeneralization of findings until additional literature develops.The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) was developed by David Wechsler in 1949 as a downward extension of the adult intelligence test called the Wechsler-Bellevue (Wechsler, 1939). The content for the WISC came largely from the Wechsler-Bellevue Form 11, although there were some easier items added to provide a floor for the younger child (Edwards, 1972). As the WISC Manual (Wechsler, 1949) points out, the test was intended for children from ages 5 through 15 and was standardized separately from the Wechsler-Bellevue Form 11.The WISC quickly'became one of the most commonly used tests with children who were having learning or emotional problems (Edwards, 1972). This test has continued in wide use and has been revised and restandardized as the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R) (Wechsler, 1974). A comparison of the two scales and a review of the current literature on the WISC-R follows. STANDARDIZATION Wechsler Intelligence Scale for ChildrenEdwards (1972) points out that the WISC was standardized on 100 boys and 100 girls at each of the age levels from 5 through 15. An attempt was made to use children who were at mid-year age. The total sample consisted of 2,200 cases. Although many more children were tested, this final 2,200 cases...
Since its introduction five years ago (1974), 113 articles or papers have appeared regarding the WISC-R, including empirical investigations of its nature, as well as its comparability with a variety of other measures of intelligence and achievement, including the WISC. While not all this research has been carefully done, two general conclusions can be derived from the review. First, although the WISC-R involves modification in administration, design, and presentation of items, as well as a complete restandardization, the literature substantially suggests that it remains very similar in nature to its predecessor, the WISC. Investigations of factor analytic structures, standard errors, reliability coefficients, and subtest intercorrelations support the conclusion that individuals perform on the WISC-R largely the same as they do on the WISC. The second conclusion points out (with few exceptions): consistently lower scores were obtained on the WISC-R than on several other measures, including the WISC, the WAIS, the Slosson Intelligence Test, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, and the Stanford Binet, which was revised shortly before the WISC. These lower scores on the WISC-R may be due to a variety of influences, including examiner variance, an artifact of design leading to inflated scores on the WISC, and finally and most obviously, the restandardization of the scale. The amount of literature that has appeared over the five-year period suggests that practitioners and researchers are as interested in learning about the WISC-R as they were about the WISC. Despite this fact and the conclusion that the WISC and WISC-R are substantially similar, the present authors encourage caution in the overgeneralization of findings until additional literature develops.The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) was developed by David Wechsler in 1949 as a downward extension of the adult intelligence test called the Wechsler-Bellevue (Wechsler, 1939). The content for the WISC came largely from the Wechsler-Bellevue Form 11, although there were some easier items added to provide a floor for the younger child (Edwards, 1972). As the WISC Manual (Wechsler, 1949) points out, the test was intended for children from ages 5 through 15 and was standardized separately from the Wechsler-Bellevue Form 11.The WISC quickly'became one of the most commonly used tests with children who were having learning or emotional problems (Edwards, 1972). This test has continued in wide use and has been revised and restandardized as the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R) (Wechsler, 1974). A comparison of the two scales and a review of the current literature on the WISC-R follows. STANDARDIZATION Wechsler Intelligence Scale for ChildrenEdwards (1972) points out that the WISC was standardized on 100 boys and 100 girls at each of the age levels from 5 through 15. An attempt was made to use children who were at mid-year age. The total sample consisted of 2,200 cases. Although many more children were tested, this final 2,200 cases...
The “Flynn effect” refers to the observed rise in IQ scores over time, resulting in norms obsolescence. Although the Flynn effect is widely accepted, most approaches to estimating it have relied upon “scorecard” approaches that make estimates of its magnitude and error of measurement controversial and prevent determination of factors that moderate the Flynn effect across different IQ tests. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the magnitude of the Flynn effect with a higher degree of precision, to determine the error of measurement, and to assess the impact of several moderator variables on the mean effect size. Across 285 studies (N = 14,031) since 1951 with administrations of two intelligence tests with different normative bases, the meta-analytic mean was 2.31, 95% CI [1.99, 2.64], standard score points per decade. The mean effect size for 53 comparisons (N = 3,951) (excluding three atypical studies that inflate the estimates) involving modern (since 1972) Stanford-Binet and Wechsler IQ tests (2.93, 95% CI [2.3, 3.5], IQ points per decade) was comparable to previous estimates of about 3 points per decade, but not consistent with the hypothesis that the Flynn effect is diminishing. For modern tests, study sample (larger increases for validation research samples vs. test standardization samples) and order of administration explained unique variance in the Flynn effect, but age and ability level were not significant moderators. These results supported previous estimates of the Flynn effect and its robustness across different age groups, measures, samples, and levels of performance.
Despite Kaufman, Raven's Progressive Matrices and the Wechsler subtest Similarities are tests whose gains call for special explanation. The spread of "scientific spectacles" is the key, but its explanatory potential has been exhausted. Three trends force us to look elsewhere: (a) gains on Wechsler subtests such as Picture Arrangement, (b) gains in developed nations persisting into the 21st century, (c) the growing gap between the active vocabularies of parents and their children.Concerning Zhou, Zhu, and Weiss (2010), I have not advocated altering IQs in routine clinical practice. A psychologist whose clinical judgment wavers because of a few IQ points is incompetent. But courts that use inflated IQs to kill people are morally remiss. It is better to apply an approximate rule (Flynn, 2009a). Zhou et al.'s (2010) findings confirm that my rule (0.30 points per year) applies a conservative adjustment in the retardate range. The adjustment should also be made when law forbids benefits unless an IQ score of 70 or below is on record. Kaufman (2010) argues that Raven's and Similarities gains may have been no greater than other cognitive gains, that is, that they proceeded throughout most of this century at about 0.30 IQ points per year. I will discuss Kaufman's case, scientific spectacles, and a problem with Vocabulary.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
Contact Info
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Product
Resources
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.
