See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/288494716

Test Review: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale

Article  in  Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment · December 2011

DOI: 10.1177/0734282911408707

CITATIONS READS

17 7,530

2 authors, including:

Emma A. Climie
The University of Calgary
39 PUBLICATIONS   308 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Emma A. Climie on 16 September 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

408707
of Psychoeducational Assessment
JPAXXX10.1177/0734282911408707D. WechslerJournal

Test Reviews
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment

Test Review 29(6) 581­–586

© 2011 SAGE Publications
Reprints and permission: http://www.
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
http://jpa.sagepub.com

D. Wechsler
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (4th ed.). San Antonio, TX:
Psychological Corporation, 2008.

Reviewed by: Emma A. Climie and Kristin Rostad, University of Calgary,

Calgary, Alberta, Canada
DOI: 10.1177/0734282911408707

Test Description
General Description
The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV) is an individually administered
measure of cognitive ability for individuals aged 16 years, 0 months to 90 years, 11 months. Although
administration may be completed by trained technicians, it is stressed in the Administration and
Scoring Manual that interpretation should always be completed by professionals with sufficient train-
ing in assessment and experience with standardized clinical instruments (Wechsler, 2008). Published
by Pearson in 2008, the developers of the WAIS-IV endeavored to provide comprehensive and
updated developmental norms, improve psychometric properties and clinical utility, and enhance the
user-friendliness of the measure. Increased emphasis was also placed on the theoretical constructs of
working memory, processing speed, and fluid reasoning (Lichtenberger & Kaufman, 2009).
In addition to providing an overall assessment of general cognitive functioning, the WAIS-IV
may be utilized in specific instances such as the assessment of intellectual giftedness or disability
(e.g., mental retardation). The inclusion of subtest and composite scores allows for an examina-
tion of individual strengths and weaknesses in a variety of cognitive domains. Finally, when used
in conjunction with other assessment instruments, such as the Wechsler Individual Achievement
Test—Third Edition (WIAT-III; Wechsler, 2009), an examinee’s overall cognitive ability as
assessed by the WAIS-IV can be compared to other more specific areas of functioning to identify
unexpected patterns of strengths or deficits.

Specific Description
As with previous editions, the WAIS-IV provides an overall score of general intellectual ability
termed the Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (FSIQ). The four index scores introduced with the
WAIS-III (Wechsler, 1997) were also maintained: Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI), Perceptual
Reasoning Index (PRI; formerly Perceptual Organization Index), Working Memory Index (WMI),
and Processing Speed Index (PSI). The Verbal Intelligence Quotient (VIQ) and Performance
Intelligence Quotient (PIQ) are no longer used in the WAIS-IV. A General Ability Index (GAI),
derived from the three core subtests on each of the VCI and PRI scales, can also be calculated as
an optional composite score. The GAI may be useful when interpreting results for examinees with
certain neuropsychological problems, such as ADHD or dementia, as it is influenced to a lesser
degree by working memory and processing speed abilities (Psychological Corporation, 2008).
Twelve subtests were retained from the WAIS-III. Two subtests were removed (Picture
Arrangement, Object Assembly), and three new subtests were created (Visual Puzzles, Figure
Weights, Cancellation). The VCI consists of three core subtests (Similarities, Vocabulary, Information),
582 Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 29(6)

and one supplemental subtest (Comprehension). The PRI includes three core subtests (Block
Design, Matrix Reasoning, Visual Puzzles), and two supplemental subtests (Figure Weights,
Picture Completion). The WMI is comprised of two core subtests (Digit Span, Arithmetic) and
one supplemental subtest (Letter–Number Sequencing). Finally, the PSI contains two core sub-
tests (Symbol Search, Coding) and one supplemental subtest (Cancellation). If a core subtest is
invalidated for any reason, one supplemental subtest can be substituted for each index score
(Psychological Corporation, 2008).
The WAIS-IV also contains minor changes to administration and scoring procedures. New
items and scoring criteria were created on some subtests to expand the floor and ceiling limits.
Corrective feedback or additional instructions are provided at the beginning of a number of sub-
tests to improve instructional clarity and to ensure that the same standardized explanations are
provided to all examinees. Time bonuses were reduced or removed entirely so as to not overem-
phasize the importance of performance speed. As a result of these modifications, the manual
reports that average testing time for the core subtests has been reduced to only 67 minutes.

Scoring System
Scoring can be done by hand or through the WAIS-IV scoring software computer program. Age-
based conversion charts are provided to convert subtest raw scores to scaled scores, which have a
mean of 10 and a standard deviation of 3. Scaled scores are summed to provide a composite standard
score based on all 10 core subtests (FSIQ) as well as each of the four indexes (VCI, PRI, WMI, PSI)
which are comprised of their respective core subtests. These composite scores have a mean of 100
and a standard deviation of 15. Age-based percentile ranks can also be calculated for each of the
subtests and composites. If desired, a GAI can be calculated by summing the scaled scores from the
VCI and PRI subtests. Examiners also have the ability to conduct discrepancy analyses between
index scores as well as identify relative strengths and weaknesses on subtests within each index.

Test Materials and Stimuli

As with other Wechsler instruments, the manual has a folded cover which allows the book to
serve as its own stand. Examiner guidelines are clearly indicated and verbal instructions are des-
ignated in a differently colored font. The Record Form is well structured and provides the start
points and reverse/discontinue rules at the beginning of each subtest section. The verbal subtests
(e.g., Vocabulary) require the examiner to determine whether an examinee has provided correct
information in sufficient detail to receive a score of 0, 1, or 2. For these subtests, a multitude of
example responses are outlined for each score category, along with any necessary queries.
In addition to the Administration and Scoring Manual and Record Form, there are two Stimulus
Books which contain visual stimuli (e.g., pictures, words) for subtests which require them. The lay-
out of these books was modified to increase ease of administration, and some of the images were
enlarged to reduce demands on visual acuity. Other materials include a set of nine red and white
blocks for Block Design, and one examinee Response Booklet for each of the Symbol Search and
Cancellation subtests. The Technical and Interpretive Manual and the Canadian Manual provide
information regarding standardization, norms development, reliability, and validity.

Technical Adequacy
Test Construction

The WAIS-IV was developed over a 4-year period that incorporated a number of research stages
and scale developments. Throughout the creation and adaptation of this measure, close adherence
Test Review 583

to the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (American Educational Research
Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in
Education, 1999) was ensured. Development of the WAIS-IV incorporated four stages: Conceptual
Development, Piloting, National Tryouts, and Standardization. Together, these stages aimed to
ensure technical excellence and reliability of the WAIS-IV.

Standardization
After completing tryout stages with selected components of the WAIS-IV, a full standardiza-
tion sample was collected. This sample was consistent with the representative proportion of
the population according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census (2005) and was comprised of 2,200
examinees. According to the Technical and Interpretive Manual, this sample was representa-
tive based on age, sex, race/ethnicity (including Whites, African Americans, Hispanics, Asians,
and other racial groups), educational level, and geographic region. Also included in the stan-
dardization trials were individuals from 13 special groups (e.g., individuals with autistic
disorder, traumatic brain injury, major depressive disorder, and various levels of cognitive
impairment).
Canadian standardization. Additionally, beginning in 2007, a smaller standardization sample
(n = 688) was collected according to the 2006 Statistics Canada census (Statistics Canada, 2007).
This sample reportedly consisted of a representative Canadian population. However, because of
the limited sample size, five of Canada’s 13 provinces and territories were not represented in this
sample, with a majority of the sample coming from only three provinces (British Columbia,
Alberta, and Ontario).

Reliability
The authors provide a thorough explanation and analysis of the reliability and validity estimates
of the WAIS-IV, supported by detailed tables providing clear numbers to support their findings.
All reported values are based on U.S. norms.
Internal consistency. Internal consistency was measured through the use of split-half and
Cronbach’s coefficient alpha. Data are provided for each of the 15 core and supplemental sub-
tests and five composite scores (including the FSIQ). Overall, the average reliability coefficients
for the subtest scores ranged from acceptable (.78) to excellent (≥.90). All subtests included in
the core battery had reliability coefficients of .81 (good) or greater. Of note, as compared to the
WAIS-III, all retained subtests demonstrated an increase in reliability while the new subtests
demonstrated greater reliability than those that they replaced. At the composite level, all four
composite scores had reliability coefficients within the excellent range (all ≥.90), with the FSIQ
reporting a reliability coefficient of .98.
Test–retest reliability. Test–retest reliabilities were obtained through repeated administration
of the WAIS-IV, with time intervals between testing ranging from 8 to 82 days and a mean of
22 days. Test–retest reliabilities were obtaining using Pearson’s product–moment correlation for
four age bands (16-29, 30-54, 55-69, and 70-90). Overall results indicate that the WAIS-IV has
acceptable stability across time for each of the four age bands. Subtest stability coefficients range
from adequate (.74) to excellent (.90), with a majority of scores falling within the good range
(.80s). Composite scores ranged from .87 to .96, with the FSIQ stability coefficient reaching an
excellent value of .96.
Interrater reliability. To ascertain acceptable levels of interrater reliability, all WAIS-IV proto-
cols were scored by two independent scorers. As most of the subtest scoring is relatively straight-
forward (i.e., the participant either did or did not select the correct picture), general interrater
agreement was high (.98 to .99). For the verbal tasks, further examination of answers was
584 Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 29(6)

required. However, even with minimal exposure to test items, raters obtained excellent levels of
reliability for the verbal subtests, ranging from .91 to .97.

Validity
The WAIS-IV is intended to measure intellectual functioning, incorporating verbal, analogical,
sequential, and quantitative reasoning, as well as working memory and psychomotor processing
speed. Confirmation of these measures was done through a thorough examination of examinee
responses, direct questioning of responses, examination of internal structure, and correlations
with other tests.
Examinee responses. During scale construction, developers were careful to identify and exam-
ine any incorrect responses that were frequently given (e.g., items on Matrix Reasoning) to deter-
mine whether there were alternate correct solutions. Changes to items or answers were created
based on the responses of the examinees. Additionally, developers asked examinees about the
problem-solving strategies that they had utilized during test administration. Examinee responses
were considered when determining final items to be included in the WAIS-IV.
Internal structure. During the research process, extreme care was taken to review current theo-
retical literature to ensure that newly created subtests were formed with strong validity. Strong
interrelationships among all subtests, both new items and those previously used, provide strong
support for the internal structure and validity of this measure. Factor analysis procedures were
used to confirm that the newly created subtests aligned with previous indices. Additionally, ade-
quate psychometric support was found for a four-factor model, as indicated by both the technical
manual (Wechsler, 2008) and through further independent research (Benson, Hulac, & Kranzler,
2010; Bowden, Saklofske, & Weiss, 2011; Canivez & Watkins, 2010)
Correlations with other tests. The WAIS-IV was co-normed with a number of other assessment
measures to examine both convergent and discriminant validity. Of particular importance, scores
on the WAIS-IV subtests demonstrated strong correlations with those from the WAIS-III, with
subtest correlations ranging from .65 to .90. Additionally, correlations between composite scores
also indicated high consistency (range .83 to .91).
The WAIS-IV was also correlated with a number of other measures, including commonly
used measures of cognitive ability, achievement, memory, and attention. Overall conclusions
indicate that the WAIS-IV correlated highly with instruments purported to measure similar con-
structs but generally did not correlate with measures that did not examine intelligence.

Commentary and Recommendations

The WAIS-IV was designed with a number of specific goals including updated norms, increased
user friendliness, improved reliability and validity, as well as stimuli modifications to enhance
test administration for both examiner and examinee (Psychological Corporation, 2008). Recent
research on intelligence theory was also consulted, leading to a greater emphasis on the constructs
of fluid reasoning, working memory, and processing speed (Lichtenberger & Kaufman, 2009).
The changes and accompanying justifications were clearly delineated in the test manuals, and are
easily visible in the WAIS-IV materials. Information regarding reliability and validity is detailed
and appears to meet, and in most cases exceed, the necessary requirements. In addition to a large
standardization sample, 13 special group studies were conducted which will allow examiners to
consider within-group norms when working with an individual from any of those populations.
Our examination of the WAIS-IV has been largely positive. User friendliness has increased
for examiners, and instructions and items have been modified so as to give examinees an
enhanced opportunity to understand the tasks and to respond appropriately. The removal of old
Test Review 585

subtests and the creation of new subtests appears to be based on solid evidence and has improved
validity estimates. The Record Form is well-structured, and highlights the start points and
reverse/discontinue rules at the beginning of each subtest. The computer scoring software allows
for efficient and straightforward data entry, and quickly created and detailed reports. A great deal
of additional information is provided in the Technical and Interpretive Manual and the Canadian
Manual to aid in the interpretation of WAIS-IV examinee profiles. Additionally, a number of
review books on the WAIS-IV have been published (e.g., Lichtenberger & Kaufman, 2009;
Weiss, Saklofske, Coalson, & Raiford, 2010), aiding examiners in furthering their understanding
of this measure.
However, there are a number of minor issues which we would hope to see improved in future
versions of the WAIS. Although most of the subtest instructions are appropriate and unambigu-
ous, the addition of practice items and corrective feedback has created some decidedly long-
winded instruction sections. There are also a number of situations where the examiner is asked
to repeatedly query the examinee (e.g., “Do you have an answer?” on the Figure Weights subtest)
which may be more distracting than helpful (Lichtenberger & Kaufman, 2009). The removal of
the Object Assembly and Picture Arrangement subtests, while certainly reducing motor demands,
has also lessened the opportunity to observe examinees interacting with and physically handling
materials (Lichtenberger & Kaufman, 2009). Also, the requirement that the Cancellation subtest
be completed from left-to-right and top-to-bottom seems unjustified, as observing how an indi-
vidual proceeds without explicit instruction may actually provide useful information. Finally, on
a number of instances, the example responses for verbal subtest items were spread across the
front and back of a single page. Though certainly a small complaint, flipping back and forth to
search for responses while the examinee is providing answers is an awkward experience.
The Wechsler intelligence scales have been around for many decades, and continue to be an
ever-present force in the assessment of individual cognitive abilities. The WAIS-IV adds to this
long and well-established history with a number of significant improvements over its predeces-
sor. In addition to providing a FSIQ, four composite scores can be calculated allowing for an
examination of various domains within an individual’s overall cognitive ability. The many
strengths noted above, with only a few identified weaknesses, indicates that the WAIS-IV should
soon be the quintessential assessment measure of adult intelligence.

References
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on
Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington,
DC: Author.
Benson, N., Hulac, D., & Kranzler, J. (2010). Independent examination of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence
Scale—Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV): What does the WAIS-IV measure? Psychological Assessment,
22(1), 121-130.
Bowden, S.C., Saklofske, D.H., & Weiss, L.G. (2011). Invariance of the measurement model underlying the
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV in the United States and Canada. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 71, 186-199.
Canivez, G.L. & Watkins, M. (2010). Investigation of the factor structure of the Wechsler Adult Intelli-
gence Scale—Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV): Exploratory and higher order factor analyses. Psychological
Assessment, 22, 827-836.
Lichtenberger, E.O., & Kaufman, A.S. (2009). Essentials of WAIS-IV assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
Psychological Corporation. (2008). WAIS-IV technical and interpretive manual. San Antonio, TX: Author.
Statistics Canada. (2007). 2006 census of population (20% sample database) [CD-ROM]. Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada: Author.
586 Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 29(6)

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2005). Current population survey, October, 2005: School enrolment supple-
ment file [CD-ROM]. Washington, DC: Author.
Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Wechsler, D. (2008). WAIS-IV administration and scoring manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological
Corporation.
Wechsler, D. (2009). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological
Corporation.
Weiss, L.G., Saklofske, D.H., Coalson, D., & Raiford, S.E. (2010). WAIS-IV clinical use and interpretation:
Scientist-practitioner perspectives. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.

View publication stats