AcomparisonoffactorstructuresoftheWISCandWISC-R资源-CSDN下载

论文

需积分: 10 49 浏览量 2021-06-29 20:05:46 上传评论收藏 490KB PDF 举报

资源推荐

资源详情

资源评论

A COMPARISON OF FACTOR STRUCTURES

THE WISC AND WISC-R

MARK

SRERDLIK

JOHN

SCHWEITZER

Iffznois

Sfafe

University Michigan State University

The present study compared

two-

and three-factor solution5 for the

subtests

both the

WISC

and

WISC-R

for

a sample of

164

black, white, and Latino

children aged

referred

school psychologists because

concerns about

their intellectual ability. The results indicated that the factor structures of

the WISC and

WISC-Il

for the

same

group

of subjects are quite similar. They

are

almost identical in the factors of verbal comprehension and perceptual

organization. However, a difference was noted in the third factor of freedoin

from distractibility

Factor analytic studies of both the WISC (1949) and WISC-R (1974) can pro-

vide the school psychologist with valuable information to aid in making meaningful

interpretations of intelligence test data and in developing educational interventions

for school-age students. Since the widely used WISC has now been replaced by the

WISC-R, it is important to know whether factor analytic techniques identify the

same underlying factors for the WISC-R as have been found for the WISC.

should be noted, however, that the results of factor analytic studies are very much

dcpcndent upon the factor model selected, as well as the criteria used to control

factorization.

There have been numerous factor analytic studies of the WISC. Sattler (1974)

reviews

factor analytic studies using the WISC standardization sample (Cohen,1959;

Maxwell, 1959; Silverstein, 1969), normal samples (Blaha, Wallbrown,

Wherry,

1974; Crokctt, Iilonoff,

Bjerring, 1969; Cropley, 1964; Jackson, 1960; Jones,

1962; Klonoff, 1971

;

Osborne, 1963; 1965), various racial groups (Osborne, 1964,

1966; Semmler

Iscoe, 1966; Vance, Huelsman,

Wherry, 1976), learning disabled

children (Leton, 1972) and brain injured children (Grimaldi, 1970).

Cohen (1959), using the 1949 WISC standardization data, identified five fac-

tors at each of three age levels (ages 7M,

lox,

and

13%).

These five factors included

(a) verbal comprehension

(Information, Similarities, and Vocabulary)

;

(b) per-

ceptual organization (Block Design, Object Assembly, and Picture Completion)

;

(d) verbal compre-

hension

(Comprehension, Vocabulary, and Picture Completion)

;

and

(e)

quasi-

specific (Coding and Picture Arrangement). Silverstein (1969) also analyzed the

WISC standardization data, employing a diff erent factor analytic technique, and

identified only two factors (similar to verbal and performance scales). Other re-

searchers cited earlier have identified WISC factors ranging in number from eight

to tn-elve.

The WISC-R content is quite similar to the WISC, with a total

78%

of the

WISC-R items taken directly from the WISC; 5.9% are from the WISC but have

undergone substantial modification; and 16.1% are new items. The WISC-R is also

structurally the same as the WISC, with both tests yielding Verbal, Performance,

and Full Scale

IQs,

with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. For both the

Requests

for

reprints shonld be sent

Mark

Swerdlik, Dept. of Psychology, Illinois State

University, Normal, IL

617G1.

166

Factor Structures

the

WISC

and

WISC-R

167

WISC and WISC-R, the Verbal and Performance Scales are comprised of six sub-

tests, which yield scaled scores, with a mean of

and

standard deviation of

There have been

number of published and unpublished studies comparing

scores from the WISC and WISC-R for the same group of subjects (Swerdlik,

1977).

These studies have documented WISC-WISC-R score differences ranging from two

to eight Full Scale

points, with the WISC-R always yielding lower scores.

Although the WISC

scores appear to be higher than WISC-R scores, one

might expect the factor structures of both the WISC and WISC-R to be similar,

due to their similarity in content and structure. However, there

are

only

small

number of WISC-R factor analytic studies, due to its recent publication date.

Wallbrown, Blaha, Wallbrown, and Engin

(1975)

factor analyzed the WISC-R

subtests for the

age groups included in the WISC-R standardization sample.

There were

200

boys and girls in each of the age groups from

years to

16%

years.

They factor analyzed the matrix of intercorrelations among WISC-R subtests for

each age group, using the Wherry and Wherry

(1969)

hierarchical factor solution.

An ability arrangement congruent with Vernon’s

(1950)

structural paradigm was

found at all age levels. The researchers found a “strong general (g) factor and two

subgenera1 factors corresponding to the verbal-educational (V :ed) and spatial-per-

ceptual (K:m) parameters from Vernon’s paradigm. The g factor was defined by

loadings from all subtests, while the V:ed factor was defined by all verbal subtests,

and the K:m factor was defined by performance subtests exclusive of coding”

(p.

223).

Kaufman

(1975)

also factor analyzed the WISC-R standardization sample

data

at ages

16%

200

per age group), but employed two- and three-factor

solutions similar to the Wallbrown, et. al.,

(1975)

study. The factor structure that

emerged was quite similar across age levels. The three factors identified were as

follows: (a) Verbal Comprehension (Vocabulary, Information, Comprehension,

Similarities, Arithmetic, Picture Completion, and Picture Arrangement; (b) Per-

ceptual organization (Block Design, Object Assembly, Picture Completion, Picture

Arrangement, and Mazes; (c) Freedom from Distractibility (Arithmetic, Digit

Span, Information, and Coding

B).

These factors are similar to those identified for

the

1949

WISC standardization sample using the same factor solutions, although

they are more stable.

The preceding factor analytic studies utilized samples of normal children in-

eluded in the WISC-R standardization sample. Van Hagen and Kaufman

(1975)

factor analyzed the WISC-R for a sample of atypical children which included ment-

ally retarded children and adolescents ranging in age from

16.

The factors that

emerged using two- and three-factor solutions were

(a) Verbal Comprehension

(Information, Similarities, Arithmetic, Vocabulary, Comprehension, and Digit

Span)

;

(b) Perceptual Organization (Picture Completion, Picture Arrangement,

Block Design, Object Assembly, Coding, and Mazes)

;

ibility (Arithmetic, Digit Span, Coding, and Picture Arrangement).

The reader will note slight differences between the factor structures for the

normal children included in the WISC-R standardization sample and the atypical

sample of mentally retarded children and adolescents. These differences are to be

expected (Wallbrown, Blaha, Wallbrown,

Engin,

1975;

Wallbrown, Blaha,

剩余6页未读，继续阅读

评论收藏

内容反馈

weixin_38562130

粉丝: 10

A comparison of factor structures of the WISC and WISC-R

最新资源

A comparison of factor structures of the WISC and WISC-R

A comparison of the WISC and WISC-R

WISC 和 WISC-R 因子结构的比较

Direct comparisons of the factor structures of the WISC and the WISC-R

A longitudinal comparison of the WISC-R and WAIS-R

A comparison of the factor structure of the WISC-R for blacks and whites

Comparison of the PPVT-R and WISC-R with urban educable mentally retarded students

A comparison of the WISC-R and the Woodcock-Johnson tests of cognitive ability

A comparison of the PPVT-R and WISC-R with rural children referred for assessment

A longitudinal comparison of the WISC and WISC-R with special education pupils

Matched pair comparison of WISC and WISC-R scores

A comparison between the WISC and WISC-R among a clinical referred population

Comparison of the PPVT-R and WISC-R: A validation study with second-grade students

Investigation of the WISC-R for use with retarded children: Correlation with the 1972 Stanford-Binet and comparison of WISC and WISC-R profiles

A comparison of three screening tests and the WISC-R in special education evaluations

WISC-R 对黑人和白人的因子结构比较

The Stanford-Binet mental age and the WISC-R test age: A comparison study

A comparison of the criterion-related validity (academic achievement) of the WPPSI and the WISC-R

A comparison between the WISC and WISC-R among educable mentally retarded students

A comparison of WISC-R and WAIS-R IQS in a mentally retarded residential population

A comparison of WISC and WISC-R results of urban educable mentally retarded students

Comparison of bilingual children on the WISC-R and the Escala de Inteligencia Wechsler Para Ninos

A follow-up comparison of WISC-R and WAIS-R IQs in a residential mentally retarded population

PPVT-R 和 WISC-R 与城市受教育弱智学生的比较

WISC-R 和 Woodcock-Johnson 认知能力测试的比较

Comparison of California Test of Mental Maturity and WISC-R IQs among children suspected of being EMR or LD

A comparison of WISC-R and stanford-binet intelligence scale classifications of developmentally disabled children

A comparison of the Slosson intelligence test and the WISC-R with elementary school children

Comparison of scores for intellectually gifted students on the WISC-R and the fourth edition of the Stanford-Binet

Comparison of the WISC-R and PPVT for a group of mentally retarded students

2021.0827 快手摸底（一）JVM

Spring AI Alibaba入门到进阶实战完整教程！RAG+Function Calling+MCP实战+电商智能客服项目

最新资源