Intelligence and Its Measurement

●​ What is intelligence?
​ Multifaceted capacity that manifests itself in different ways across the
life spans. In general, intelligence includes the abilities to:
❖​ acquire and apply knowledge

❖​ reason logically

❖​ plan effectively

❖​ infer perceptively

❖​ make sound judgments and solve problems

❖​ grasp and visualize concepts

❖​ pay attention

❖​ be intuitive

❖​ find the right words and thoughts with facility

❖​ cope with, adjust to, and make the most of new situations

​ No one definition when it comes to intelligence.

​ Example:

❖​ Young children may define intelligence in terms that emphasize

interpersonal skills – acting nice, being helpful or polite
❖​ For older children, emphasis is placed on academic skills –
reading well
●​ Perspectives on Intelligence
​ Interactionism

❖​ Refers to the complex concept by which heredity and

environment are presumed to interact and influence the
development of one’s intelligence
❖​ Factor-analytic theories of intelligence

▪​ Factor analysis is used to see underlying relationships

between variables – theorists use this to assess the
underlying attributes of intelligence
▪​ Charles Spearman: Two Factor Theory of Intelligence
 o​ General Intellectual Factor (g)
▪​ Variance commonly measured by all
intelligence tests
▪​ Intelligence tests that highly correlated with
each other mostly measure g
▪​ Can include mental energy for problem
solving, thinking of one’s experiences,
making observations, and extracting
principles
▪​ Best measure of g in intelligence test –
Abstract reasoning

o​ Specific Factor of Intelligence (s)

▪​ Variance measured by specific or error
components
▪​ Intelligence tests with low or moderate
correlations with other intelligence tests are
viewed as possible measures of specific
factors – visual or motor ability
o​ The greater the magnitude of g in a test of
intelligence, the better the test in measuring overall
intelligence
o​ Group factors
▪​ Factors of intelligence that are not as
general as g nor as specific as s
▪​ Examples: linguistic, mechanical,
arithmetical abilities
▪​ Louis L. Thurstone: Seven Primary Mental Abilities
o​ Intelligence is composed of primary mental abilities
(PMA):
▪​ Verbal meaning

▪​ Perceptual speed

▪​ Reasoning

▪​ Number facility
 ▪​ Rote memory

▪​ Word fluency

▪​ Special relations
o​ Published the primary mental abilities test which
consisted of separate tests, each designed to
measure one PMA
o​ Each test measuring PMA did not highly correlate
with each other so Thurstone became convinced
that an intelligence test not measuring g is not
difficult or even impossible
▪​ Howard Gardner: Theory of Multiple Intelligences
o​ Multiple intelligences:
▪​ Logical-mathematical

▪​ Bodily-kinesthetic

▪​ Linguistic

▪​ Musical

▪​ Spatial

▪​ Interpersonal

▪​ Intrapersonal

o​ Interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence has

been linked with emotional intelligence.
▪​ Interpersonal intelligence is the ability to
understand other people: what motivates
them, how they work, how to work
cooperatively with them. Successful
salespeople, politicians, teachers, clinicians,
and religious leaders are all likely to be
individuals with high degrees of
interpersonal intelligence. Intrapersonal
intelligence, a seventh kind of intelligence,
is a correlative ability, turned inward. It is a
capacity to form an accurate, veridical
model of oneself and to be able to use that
model to operate effectively in life.
▪​ Raymond B. Cattell
o​ Theory that postulated the existence of two major
types of cognitive abilities:
▪​ Crystallized intelligence (Gc)
●​ Include acquired skills and
knowledge that are dependent on
exposure to a particular culture as
well as on formal and informal
education (vocabulary, for example).
●​ Retrieval of information and
application of general knowledge are
conceived of as elements of
crystallized intelligence.
▪​ Fluid intelligence (Gf)
●​ Include nonverbal, relatively
culture-free, and independent of
specific instruction (such as memory
for digits).
o​ Horn modified Cattell’s theory and added several
factors:
▪​ Visual processing (Gv)

▪​ Auditory processing (Ga)

▪​ Quantitative processing (Gq)

▪​ Speed of processing (Gs)

▪​ Facility with reading and writing (Grw)

▪​ Short-term memory (Gsm)

▪​ Long-term storage and retrieval (Glr)

▪​ Some of these abilities are classified into:

●​ Vulnerable abilities
o​ Abilities that decline with age
and tend not to return to
preinjury levels following brain
damage
o​ Example: Gv
●​ Maintained abilities
 o​ Tend not to decline with age
and may return to preinjury
levels following brain damage
o​ Example: Gq
▪​ John B. Carroll: Three-stratum Theory of Cognitive
Abilities

o​
o​ Hierarchal Model: all abilities are incorporated in
the stratums (see pic above)
o​ Top (Third) stratum
▪​ General intelligence or g
o​ Second stratum
▪​ Eight abilities or processes

▪​ Fluid intelligence (Gf)

▪​ Crystallized intelligence (Gc)

▪​ General memory and learning (Y)

▪​ Broad visual perception (V)

▪​ Broad auditory perception (U)

▪​ Broad retrieval capacity (R)

▪​ Broad cognitive speediness (S)

▪​ Processing/decision speed (T)

o​ Below the second stratum are level or speed
factors which are different depending on which
ability (the 8 above) they are linked to.
▪​ Example:
●​ Gf – level factors: general reasoning,
quantitative reasoning, Piagetian
 reasoning; speed factor: speed of
reasoning
●​ Gc – level factors: language
development, comprehension,
spelling ability, communication ability;
speed factors: oral fluency, writing
ability
▪​ Cattel-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Model of Cognitive Abilities
o​ Combination of the theories of those stated
o​ Differences with Cattell-Horn and Carroll Models
▪​ Cattell-Horn model has no g

▪​ Definitions of abilities

▪​ Some abilities are distinct or broad for

Carroll but not Cattell-Horn
▪​ McGrew-Flanagan CHC Model
o​ Modified the CHC model
o​ Includes 10 “broad-stratum” abilities and over 70
“narrow-stratum” abilities with each broad-stratum
ability having two or more narrow-stratum abilities
o​ 10 “broad-stratum” abilities are:
▪​ Fluid intelligence (Gf)

▪​ Crystallized intelligence (Gc)

▪​ Quantitative knowledge (Gq)

▪​ Reading/ writing ability (Grw)

▪​ Short-term memory (Gsm)

▪​ Visual processing (Gv)

▪​ Auditory processing (Ga)

▪​ Long-term storage and retrieval (Glr)

▪​ Processing speed (Gs)

▪​ Decision/reaction time or speed (Gt)

o​ Does not include g or general intelligence

 ▪​ Was not relevant to cross battery
assessment because the purpose of
Flanagan and McGrew was for educational
assessment of students.
▪​ E. L. Thorndike
o​ Intelligence can be conceived in terms of three
clusters of ability:
▪​ social intelligence (dealing with people)

▪​ concrete intelligence (dealing with objects)

▪​ abstract intelligence (dealing with verbal

and mathematical symbols)
o​ Thorndike also incorporated a general mental
ability factor (g) into the theory, defining it as the
total number of modifiable neural connections or
“bonds” available in the brain.
o​ For Thorndike, one’s ability to learn is determined
by the number and speed of the bonds that can be
gathered
❖​ Information-processing View

▪​ Aleksandr Luria
o​ Focuses on the mechanism by which information
is processed—how information is processed,
rather than what is processed
o​ Two basic types of information-processing styles:
▪​ Simultaneous or Parallel Processing
●​ Information is integrated all at one
time
●​ Synthesized and integrated as a
whole, at once
●​ Example: Looking at a painting in the
museum, map reading
▪​ Successive or Sequential Processing
●​ Each bit of information is individually
processed in sequence
●​ Sequential and logical in nature –
piece by piece and one piece after
the other, information is arranged
 and rearranged so that it makes
sense
●​ Example: Watching murder series
where you take in bits of information
to know who killed the victim
▪​ PASS Model of Intellectual Functioning
o​ PASS – Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, and
Successive
▪​ Planning refers to strategy development for
problem solving
▪​ Attention (also referred to as arousal) refers
to receptivity to information
▪​ Simultaneous and successive refer to the
type of information processing employed.
●​ Measuring Intelligence
​ The measurement of intelligence entails sampling an examinee’s
performance on different types of tests and tasks as a function of
developmental level. At all developmental levels, the intellectual
assessment process also provides a standardized situation from which
the examinee’s approach to the various tasks can be closely observed.
It therefore provides an opportunity for an assessment that can have
great utility in settings as diverse as schools, the military, and business
organizations.
​ Some tasks used to measure intelligence

❖​ Infancy: intellectual assessment consists primarily of

sensorimotor development
▪​ Example: turning over, lifting the head, sitting up,
following a moving object with the eyes, imitating
gestures, reaching for an object
▪​ Important: skills of examiner in establishing rapport

▪​ Most of the assessment will also rely on the interview with

caregivers
❖​ Older children: focus in evaluation is verbal and performance
abilities
▪​ Example: general information, vocabulary, social
judgement, language, reasoning, numerical concepts,
 auditory and visual memory, attention, concentration,
spatial visualization
❖​ Adults: Adult intelligence scales should tap abilities such as
retention of general information, quantitative reasoning,
expressive language and memory, and social judgment
▪​ Intelligence tests for adults are used to gauge clinical
information or to measure learning potential and skill
acquisition
▪​ Data from the administration of an adult intelligence test
may be used to evaluate the faculties of an impaired
individual (or one suspected of being senile, traumatized,
or otherwise impaired) for the purpose of judging that
person’s competency to make important decisions (such
as those regarding a will, a contract, or other legal
matter). Data from adult intelligence tests may also be
used to help make decisions about vocational and career
decisions and transitions.

​ Some tests used to measure intelligence

❖​ The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales: Fifth Edition (SB5)

▪​ 1905: Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon created the

world’s first intelligence test named, “Binet-Simon Scale”
o​ Alfred Binet was charged with the responsibility of
developing a test to screen for children with
developmental disabilities in the Paris schools
▪​ 1916: Lewis Terman, from Stanford University, revised the
Binet-Simon scale which is why it is known today as
Standord-Binet Intelligence Scales
▪​ 1st version of Stanford-Binet
o​ It was the first published intelligence test to provide
organized and detailed administration and scoring
instructions. It was also the first American test to
employ the concept of IQ. And it was the first test
to introduce the concept of an alternate item, an
item to be substituted for a regular item under
specified conditions (such as the situation in which
the examiner failed to properly administer the
regular item).
▪​ 1926: 2nd edition: Lewis Terman together with his former
student, Maud Merrill, revised the test which took 11
years. It was during 1937 where innovations included the
development of two equivalent forms, labeled L (for
Lewis) and M (for Maud, according to Becker, 2003), as
well as new types of tasks for use with preschool-level
and adult-level testtakers.4 The manual contained many
examples to aid the examiner in scoring.
o​ Serious criticism of test remained: lack of
representation for minority groups during the test’s
development
▪​ 1960 revision, 1972: 3rd edition: consisted of only a single
form (labeled L-M) and included the items considered to
be the best from the two forms of the 1937 test, with no
new items added to the test. A major innovation,
however, was the use of the deviation IQ tables in place
of the ratio IQ tables.
o​ Earlier versions of the Stanford-Binet had
employed the ratio IQ, which was based on the
concept of mental age (the age level at which an
individual appears to be functioning intellectually
as indicated by the level of items responded to
correctly). The ratio IQ is the ratio of the
testtaker’s mental age divided by his or her
chronological age, multiplied by 100 to eliminate
decimals. As illustrated by the formula for its
computation, those were the days, now long gone,
when an IQ (for intelligence quotient) really was
a quotient:

▪​

▪​ A child whose mental and chronological age

were equal would have an IQ of 100.
o​ The deviation IQ was used in place of the ratio IQ.
The deviation IQ reflects a comparison of the
performance of the individual with the performance
of others of the same age in the standardization
sample.
▪​ Essentially, test performance is converted
into a standard score with a mean of 100
 and a standard deviation of 16. If an
individual performs at the same level as the
average person of the same age, the
deviation IQ is 100. If performance is a
standard deviation above the mean for the
examinee’s age group, the deviation IQ is
116
o​ As with previous revisions, the representation of
minority groups in the sample is still being
criticized.
▪​ The fourth edition of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale
(SB:FE) significantly moved away from previous versions
of the Stanford-Binet in theoretical organization, test
organization, test administration, test scoring, and test
interpretation.
o​ Previously, different items were grouped by age
and the test was referred to as an age scale. The
Stanford-Binet: Fourth Edition (SB:FE) was a point
scale. A point scale is a test organized into
subtests by category of item, not by age at which
most testtakers are presumed capable of
responding in the way that is keyed as correct.
▪​ Point scale allows the measurement per
category according to content.
o​ The SB:FE manual contained an explicit exposition
of the theoretical model of intelligence that guided
the revision. The model was one based on the
Cattell-Horn model of intelligence.
o​ A test composite—formerly described as a
deviation IQ score—could also be obtained. In
general, a test composite may be defined as a
test score or index derived from the combination
of, and/or a mathematical transformation of, one or
more subtest scores.
▪​ The fifth edition of the Stanford-Binet (SB5; 2003) was
designed for administration to assessees as young as 2
and as old as 85 (or older). The test yields several
composite scores:
o​ Full-Scale IQ derived from the administration of ten
subtests. Subtest scores all have a mean of 10
and a standard deviation of 3.
o​ Abbreviated Battery IQ score
o​ Verbal IQ score
o​ Nonverbal IQ score.
o​ All composite scores have a mean set at 100 and
a standard deviation of 15. In addition, the test
yields five Factor Index scores corresponding to
each of the five factors that the test is presumed to
measure
o​ Based on CHC theory of intellectual abilities

o​ Standardization sample: 4800 subjects from age 2

to over 85, nationally representative US residents,
no accommodations were made for persons with
special needs in the standardization sample, (such
accommodations were made in separate studies),
persons were excluded from the standardization
sample if they had limited English proficiency,
severe medical conditions, severe sensory or
communication deficits, or severe
emotional/behavior disturbance
o​ Reliability:
▪​ The calculated coefficients for the SB5 Full
Scale IQ were consistently high (.97 to .98)
across age groups, as was the reliability for
the Abbreviated Battery IQ (average of .91).
Inter-scorer reliability coefficients reported in
the SB5 Technical Manual ranged from .74
to .97 with an overall median of .90. Items
showing especially poor inter-scorer
agreement had been deleted during the test
development process.
o​ Validity:
 ▪​ For the concurrent studies, Roid (2003)
studied correlations between the SB5 and
the SB:FE as well as between the SB5 and
all three of the then-current major Wechsler
batteries (WPPSI-R, WISC-III, and
WAIS-III). High correlations with SB:FE but
low with the Wechsler batteries because the
tests differed in tapping g.
▪​ To establish evidence for predictive validity,
correlations with measures of achievement
(the Woodcock Johnson III Test of
Achievement and the Wechsler Individual
Achievement Test, were employed and are
available in the manual.
o​ Administration
▪​ After the examiner has established a
rapport with the testtaker, the examination
formally begins with an item from what is
called a routing test.
●​ A routing test may be defined as a
task used to direct or route the
examinee to a particular level of
questions.
●​ Two routing tests: Object
Series/Matrices and Vocabulary
●​ Done to show to the testtaker how
difficult the test can be
●​ Contain teaching items: designed to
illustrate the task required and
assure the examiner that the
examinee understands. Qualitative
aspects of an examinee’s
performance on teaching items may
be recorded as examiner
observations on the test protocol.
However, performance on teaching
items is not formally scored, and
performance on such items in no way
enters calculations of any other
scores
▪​ Basal and ceiling level are determined
 ●​ Basal level: lowest criterion that a
testtaker must meet to continue.
Example: consecutively answering
two items correctly
●​ Ceiling level: reached when
testtaker answered consecutive
items wrong. Once this is reached,
testing is discontinued.
▪​ For each subtest on the SB5, there are
explicit rules for where to start, where to
reverse, and where to stop (or discontinue).
For example, an examiner might start at the
examinee’s estimated present ability level.
The examiner might reverse if the examinee
scores 0 on the first two items from the start
point. The examiner would discontinue
testing (stop) after a certain number of item
failures after reversing. The manual also
provides explicit rules for prompting
examinees. If a vague or ambiguous
response is given on some verbal items in
subtests such as Vocabulary, Verbal
Absurdities, or Verbal Analogies, the
examiner is encouraged to give the
examinee a prompt such as “Tell me more.”
▪​ Administration of SB5 is considered as
adaptive testing
●​ Also called tailored testing,
sequential testing, branched testing,
or response-contingent testing
●​ entails beginning a subtest with a
question in the middle range of
difficulty. If the testtaker responds
correctly to the item, an item of
greater difficulty is posed next. If the
testtaker responds incorrectly to the
item, an item of lesser difficulty is
posed

●​ Advantages:
o​ So testtaker will not be
frustrated with difficulty of
items
 o​ So testtaker will not be
careless since items are easy
o​ Collects maximum amount of
information within the
minimum amount of time
o​ Facilitates rapport
o​ Minimizes examinee fatigue
▪​ Most subtests on SB5 are not timed to
accommodate testtakers with special needs
o​ Scoring and interpretation
▪​ Raw scores are converted into standard
scores using the tables available in the
manual
▪​ From standard scores, composite scores
are taken
▪​ Examiner can also take not of extra-test
behavior
●​ Way examinee copes with frustration
●​ How examinee reacts to items
●​ Amount of support examinee
requires
●​ Approach of examinee to task
▪​ The SB5 record form includes a checklist
form of notable examinee behaviors.
Included is a brief, yes–no questionnaire
with items such as Examinee’s English
usage was adequate for testing and
Examinee was adequately cooperative.
There is also space to record notes and
observations regarding the examinee’s
physical appearance, mood, and activity
level, current medications, and related
variables. Examiners may also note specific
observations during the assessment. For
example, when administering Memory for
Sentences, there is usually no need to
record an examinee’s verbatim response.
However, if the examinee produced unusual
elaborations on the stimulus sentences,
good judgment on the part of the examiner
dictates that verbatim responses be
 recorded. Unusual responses on this
subtest may also cue the examiner to
possible hearing or speech problems.
▪​ Full scale IQ cut off boundaries

❖​ The Wechsler Tests: Adult Intelligence Test

▪​ 1930s: Wechsler-Bellevue 1 (W-B 1)

o​ Bellevue hospital, employer of David Wechsler,
needed an instrument to measure the intelligence
of multilingual, multinational, and multicultural
clients. Wechsler started to develop his own test
because of this, and he got it published in 1939.
o​ W-B 1 was a point scale, not an age scale unlike
Stanford Binet test. The items were classified by
subtests rather than by age. The test was
organized into six verbal subtests and five
performance subtests, and all the items in each
test were arranged in order of increasing difficulty.
▪​ 1942: W-B 2
o​ Equivalent alternate form of W-B 1
o​ Never thoroughly standardized
o​ Problems of W-B tests:
▪​ The standardization sample was restricted

▪​ Some subtests lacked sufficient inter-item

reliability
▪​ Some of the subtests were made up of
items that were too easy
▪​ The scoring criteria for certain items were
too ambiguous
▪​ 1955: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)
 o​ Organized into verbal and performance tests
o​ Scoring yielded: Verbal IQ, Performance IQ, Full
Scale IQ

▪​ 1981: WAIS-R
o​ Revised version of WAIS
o​ Addition of new norms and updated materials
o​ The WAIS-R test administration manual mandated
the alternate administration of verbal and
performance tests
▪​ 1997: WAIS-III
o​ contained updated and more user-friendly
materials. In some cases, test materials were
made physically larger to facilitate viewing by older
adults.
o​ Some items were added to each of the subtests
that extended the test’s floor to make the test more
useful for evaluating people with extreme
intellectual deficits.
o​ Extensive research was designed to detect and
eliminate items that may have contained cultural
bias.
o​ Norms were expanded to include testtakers in the
age range of 74 to 89.
o​ The test was co-normed with the Wechsler
Memory Scale-Third Edition (WMS-III), thus
facilitating comparisons of memory with other
indices of intellectual functioning when both the
WAIS-III and the WMS-III were administered.
o​ The WAIS-III yielded a Full Scale (composite) IQ
as well as four Index Scores—Verbal
Comprehension, Perceptual Organization, Working
Memory, and Processing Speed—used for more
in-depth interpretation of findings.
▪​ Current version: WAIS-IV
o​ made up of subtests that are designated either as
core or supplemental. A core subtest is one that
is administered to obtain a composite score. Under
usual circumstances, a supplemental subtest
(also sometimes referred to as an optional
subtest) is used for purposes such as providing
additional clinical information or extending the
 number of abilities or processes sampled. There
are, however, situations in which a supplemental
subtest can be used in place of a core subtest.
The latter types of situation arise when, for some
reason, the use of a score on a particular core
subtest would be questionable. So, for example, a
supplemental subtest might be substituted for a
core subtest if:
▪​ the examiner incorrectly administered a
core subtest
▪​ the assessee had been inappropriately
exposed to the subtest items prior to their
administration the assessee evidenced a
physical limitation that affected
▪​ the assessee’s ability to effectively respond
to the items of a particular subtest
o​ Contains ten core subtests:
▪​ Block Design

▪​ Similarities

▪​ Digit Span

▪​ Matrix Reasoning

▪​ Vocabulary

▪​ Arithmetic

▪​ Symbol Search

▪​ Visual Puzzles

▪​ Information

▪​ Coding
o​ Also, five supplemental subtests:
▪​ Letter-Number Sequencing

▪​ Figure Weights

▪​ Comprehension

▪​ Cancellation
 ▪​ Picture Completion
o​ Changes from previous versions:
▪​ Absence of four subtests:
●​ Picture Arrangement
●​ Object Assembly
●​ Coding Recall
●​ Coding Copy-Digit Symbol
▪​ Addition of three new subtests:
●​ Visual Puzzles
o​ Assessee’s task is to identify
the parts that went into
making a stimulus design
●​ Figure Weights
o​ Assessee’s task is to
determine what needs to be
added to balance a two-sided
scale—one that is reminiscent
of the “blind justice” type of
scale
●​ Cancellation
o​ Assessee’s task is to draw
lines through targeted pairs of
colored shapes (while not
drawing lines through
nontargeted shapes presented
as distractors)
●​ All three are timed subtests. Visual
Puzzles and Figure Weights scored
on the WAIS-IV Perceptual
Reasoning Scale while cancellation
on the Processing Speed index.
▪​ More explicit administration instructions

▪​ Expanded use of demonstration and sample

items – an effort to provide assessees with
practice in doing what is required, in
addition to feedback on their performance.
●​ Practice items (or teaching items, as
they are also called) are given so
that low scores are due to a deficit of
some sort and not simply to a
misunderstanding of directions.
▪​ As is now customary in the development of
most tests of cognitive ability, all the test
items were thoroughly reviewed to root out
any possible cultural bias.
▪​ The WAIS-IV improved in terms of its “floor”
and “ceiling.” The floor of an intelligence
test is the lowest level of intelligence the
test purports to measure. The WAIS-III had
a Full Scale IQ floor of 45; the WAIS-IV has
a Full Scale IQ floor of 40. The ceiling of an
intelligence test is the highest level of
intelligence the test purports to measure.
The WAIS-III had a Full Scale IQ ceiling of
155; the WAIS-IV has a Full Scale IQ ceiling
of 160
▪​ Because of longer life expectancies,
normative data was extended to include
information for testtakers up to age 90
years, 11 months.
▪​ Other changes in the WAIS-IV as compared
to the previous edition of this test reflect
greater sensitivity to the needs of older
adults. These improvements include:
●​ Enlargement of the images in the
Picture Completion, Symbol Search,
and Coding subtests
●​ The recommended
non-administration of certain
supplemental tests that tap
short-term memory, hand-eye
coordination, and/or motor speed for
testtakers above the age of 69 (this
to reduce testing time and to
minimize testtaker frustration)
●​ An average reduction in overall test
administration time from 80 to 67
minutes (accomplished primarily by
shortening the number of items the
testtaker must fail before a subtest is
discontinued)
 ▪​ Using factor analysis, developers of
WAIS-IV were able to bring out four main
factors or indices listed below

▪​ There is a fifth index score - the General

Ability Index (GAI), which is a kind of
“composite of two composites.” It is
calculated using the Verbal Comprehension
and Perceptual Reasoning indexes. The
GAI is useful to clinicians as an overall
index of intellectual ability.
▪​ Another composite score that has clinical
application is the Cognitive Proficiency
Index (CPI). Comprised of the Working
Memory Index and the Processing Speed
Index, the CPI is used to identify problems
related to working memory or processing
speed. Some researchers have suggested
that it can be used in conjunction with the
GAI as an aid to better understanding and
identifying various learning disabilities
(Weiss et al., 2010). Like the GAI and the
Full Scale IQ (FSIQ), the CPI was calibrated
to have a mean of 100 and a standard
deviation of 15.
o​ Standardization sample: 2200 adults from the age
16 to 90 years and 11 months – US
o​ Raw scores for each age group are converted to
percentiles and then to a scale with a mean of 10
and a standard deviation of 3
o​ In the old tradition, scores are compared to the
norms for age group 20-34 years old because
 Wechsler believed that this were the years of
optimal performance, but this was dropped starting
with WAIS-III so scores are now compared to
specific age groups
❖​ The Wechsler Tests: Children Intelligence Scales

▪​ *The popularity of WAIS prompted an extension of

intelligence scales for children
▪​ 1949: Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC)
o​ Currently in its fifth edition (WISC-V)
o​ Some of the current version’s subtests are revised
for computer administration
▪​ 1967: Wechsler Pre-School and Primary Scale of
Intelligence (WPPSI)
o​ Currently in its fourth edition (WPPSI-IV)
❖​ The Wechsler Tests:

▪​ Consistent remaining characteristics:

o​ The Wechsler tests are all point scales that yield
deviation IQs with a mean of 100 (interpreted as
average) and a standard deviation of 15.
o​ On each of the Wechsler tests, a testtaker’s
performance is compared with scores earned by
others in that age group.
o​ The tests have in common clearly written manuals
that provide descriptions of each of the subtests,
including the rationale for their inclusion.
o​ The manuals also contain clear, explicit directions
for administering subtests as well as several
standard prompts for dealing with a variety of
questions, comments, or other contingencies.
o​ There are similar starting, stopping, and
discontinue guidelines and explicit scoring
instructions with clear examples among the tests.
o​ For test interpretation, all the Wechsler manuals
come with myriad statistical charts that can prove
very useful when it comes time for the assessor to
make recommendations based on the
assessment.
❖​ Short forms of intelligence tests

▪​ Short form refers to a test that has been abbreviated in

length, typically to reduce, the time need for test
administration, scoring, and interpretation.
▪​ Sometimes, particularly when the testtaker is believed to
have an atypically short attention span or other problems
 that would make administration of the complete test
impossible, a sampling of representative subtests is
administered
▪​ Examples:
o​ 1917: short form of Binet-Simon scale
o​ 1958: Wechsler endorsed a short form of his tests
for screening purposes
o​ 1999: Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence
(WASI)
▪​ Designed to answer the need for a short
instrument to screen intellectual ability in
testtakers from 6 to 89 years of age. The
test comes in a two-subtest form (consisting
of Vocabulary and Block Design) that takes
about 15 minutes to administer and a
four-subtest form that takes about 30
minutes to administer. The four subtests
(Vocabulary, Block Design, Similarities, and
Matrix Reasoning)
▪​ Standardized with 2,245 cases including
1,100 children and 1,145 adults
o​ 2011: WASI-2
▪​ More user friendly, increases psychometric
soundness
▪​ Short forms are practical and useful for organizations who
are backed up with assessment orders – hospital,
companies
▪​ Issues to be focused on in the development of short
forms (Silverstein, 1990):
o​ How to abbreviate the original test
o​ How to select subjects
o​ How to estimate scores on the original test
o​ The criteria to apply when comparing the short
form with the original
o​ It was advised that scores from short forms should
be followed by “est” to show that it is an estimate
(Ryan and Ward, 1999).
❖​ Group tests of intelligence
▪​ After the Binet-Simon scale was published in 1916,
people started wondering about the group administration
of intelligence tests
▪​ April 7, 1917
o​ Robert Yerkes, president of American
Psychological Association (APA), to help in world
war I, decided to create group intelligence tests
▪​ July 7, 1917
o​ Yerkes and his team developed two tests: Army
Alpha Test and Army Beta Test
o​ Army Alpha Test
▪​ Administered to army recruits who could
read
▪​ Contained tasks such as general
information questions, analogies, and
scrambled sentences to reassemble
o​ Army Beta Test:
▪​ Designed for administration to foreign-born
recruits with poor knowledge of English or
to illiterate recruits (defined as “someone
who could not read a newspaper or write a
letter home”)
▪​ Contained tasks such as mazes, coding,
and picture completion (wherein the
examinee’s task was to draw in the missing
element of the picture).
▪​ Group tests are still administered today for screening
because of they are cheaper and easier to administer
❖​ Other measure of intellectual abilities

▪​ Creativity
o​ Thought to have similar components with
intelligence – problem solving, originality in
perception, originality in abstraction
o​ Common terms associated with creativity:
▪​ Originality refers to the ability to produce
something that is innovative or nonobvious.
It may be something abstract like an idea or
something tangible and visible like artwork
or a poem.
▪​ Fluency refers to the ease with which
responses are reproduced and is usually
measured by the total number of responses
produced. For example, an item in a test of
word fluency might be “In the next thirty
seconds, name as many words as you can
that begin with the letter w”.
 ▪​ Flexibility refers to the variety of ideas
presented and the ability to shift from one
approach to another.
▪​ Elaboration refers to the richness of detail in
a verbal explanation or pictorial display
o​ Intelligence tests are commonly criticized for
heavily relying on whether the answer is correct or
not. This is because it measures convergent
thinking.
▪​ Convergent thinking is a deductive
reasoning process that entails recall and
consideration of facts as well as a series of
logical judgments to narrow down solutions
and eventually arrive at one solution. –
More related to achievement tests
▪​ Divergent thinking is a reasoning process
in which thought is free to move in many
different directions, making several
solutions possible. Divergent thinking
requires flexibility of thought, originality, and
imagination. There is much less emphasis
on recall of facts than in convergent
thinking. – More related to creativity
●​ What are the issues in the assessment of Intelligence?
​ Culture and measured intelligence

❖​ Different cultures may define intelligence in different ways. Also,

it can mean that people from different cultures have different
levels of ability, achievement, and motivation.
▪​ Example: English and Zambian children were assessed.
English children did well using paper and pencil while
Zambian children did well using clay and wires. Both
groups performed equally well.
❖​ Culture-free Intelligence Test

▪​ Assumptions:
o​ Cultural factors can be controlled so differences
between cultural groups can be lessened
 o​ Effect of culture can be controlled through the
elimination of verbal items and reliance on
nonverbal, performance items
▪​ Problem: Nonverbal items are not as good
as predicting future performance compared
to verbal tests
▪​ Development of culture-free tests remains difficult and
close to impossible because tests reflect, to a minimum,
the culture in which they were devised and will be used.
❖​ Culture loading

▪​ The extent to which a test incorporates the vocabulary,

concepts, traditions, knowledge, and feelings associated
with a particular culture
▪​ Example: Items about love here in the Philippines may
include, “How do you show respect to elders?” – to which
the answer can be “mano po” which is not common in
other cultures.

❖​ Culture-fair Intelligence Test

▪​ A test or assessment process designed to minimize the

influence of culture about various aspects of the
evaluation procedures, such as administration
instructions, item content, responses required of
testtakers, and interpretations made from the resulting
data
▪​ The rationale for culture-fair test items was to include only
those tasks that seemed to reflect experiences,
knowledge, and skills common to all different cultures
▪​ Culture-fair tests tended to be nonverbal and to have
simple, clear directions administered orally by the
examiner.
▪​ The nonverbal tasks typically consisted of assembling,
classifying, selecting, or manipulating objects and
drawing or identifying geometric designs.

▪​ Sample items:
▪​ Problem: Still lacks predictive validity

▪​ Solution to problems with culture-free and culture-fair

tests: development of alternate forms of intelligence tests
for specific cultures (culture-specific intelligence tests)
o​ Example: Black Intelligence Test of Cultural
Homogeneity (BITCH)
▪​ Test of intelligence for African Americans

▪​ Problem: still lacks predictive validity, too

tedious given numerous cultures
 ▪​ Ways to reduce cultural bias:
o​ Panels of experts may evaluate the potential bias
inherent in a newly developed test, and those
items judged to be biased may be eliminated.
o​ The test may be devised so that relatively few
verbal instructions are needed to administer it or to
demonstrate how to respond.
o​ Related efforts can be made to minimize any
possible language bias.
o​ A tryout or pilot testing with ethnically mixed
samples of testtakers may be undertaken.
o​ If differences in scores emerge solely as a function
of ethnic group membership, individual items may
be studied further for possible bias.
​ The Flynn Effect

❖​ Progressive rise in intelligence test scores that is expected to

occur on a normed test intelligence from the date when the test
was first normed
❖​ According to Flynn (2000), the exact amount of the rise in IQ will
vary as a function of several factors, such as how
culture-specific the items are and whether the measure used is
one of fluid or crystallized intelligence
❖​ The use of intelligence tests in critical decisions should be wary
of the Flynn effect

●​ Construct Validity of Intelligence Tests

​ For intelligence tests, it is essential to understand how the test
developer defined intelligence. If, for example, intelligence was defined
in a particular intelligence test as Spearman’s g, then we would expect
factor analysis of this test to yield a single large common factor. Such a
factor would indicate that the different questions or tasks on the test
largely reflected the same underlying characteristic (intelligence, or g).
​ By contrast, if intelligence were defined by a test developer in
accordance with Guilford’s theory, then no one factor would be
expected to dominate. Instead, one would anticipate many different
factors reflecting a diverse set of abilities. Recall that, from Guilford’s
perspective, there is no single underlying intelligence for the different
test items to reflect. This means that there would be no basis for a
large common factor.