Much has changed in intelligence testing technology and application since the time of Binet's (1905) breakthrough. Prior to Wechsler's innova tion of measuring verbal and “performance” abilities on a common test, intelligence tests of the first half of the 20th century typically offered one composite score and focused on assessment of the general intelligence construct. Edgar Doll (1953) identified the problem of overapplication and limitations of intelligence testing for the therapeutic programming for indi viduals with developmental disabilities in the 1930s and gave us the first measure of adaptive behavior, the Vineland Social Maturity Scales (Doll, 1935), to act as adjunct information more allied with day-to-day living skills than provided by formal assessment of intellectual functions.
During the latter half of the 20th century, intelligence tests began to offer an increasing array of composite or “part” scores intended to produce a more comprehensive evaluation of individual cognitive strengths and challenges. Consequently, interpretation focused more on patterns of abil ities within individuals (ipsative test score interpretation) as opposed to just considering deviance from normative standards (Kamphaus, in press. At the outset of the 21st century the pendulum is returning to mid-swing with the concept of general intelligence gathering renewed favor in test interpretation, due in part to problems with new test overfactoring that has produced an ever-increasing array of composite scores of dubious clinical or scientific value (Frazier&Youngstrom, 2007).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Binet, A. (1905). New methods for the diagnosis of the intellectual level of subnormals. L'Annee psychologique, 12, 191–244.
Bouchard, T. J., Lykken, D. T., McGue, M., Segal, N. L.&Tellegen, A. (1990). Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota study of twins reared apart. Science, 250, 223–228.
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
DiStefano, C.,&Dombrowski, S.C. (2006). Investigating the theoretical structure of the Stanford-Binet-fifth edition. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 24, 123–136.
Doll, E.A. (1935). The Vineland Social Maturity Scale: Manual of directions. The Train ing School Bulletin, 22, 1–3.
Doll, E.A. (1953). The measurement of social competence. Minneapolis, MN: Educational Test Bureau.
Fiorello, C. A., Hale, J. B., McGrath, M., Ryan, K.,&Quinn, S. (2002). IQ interpretation for children with flat and variable test profiles. Learning and Individual Differences, 13, 115–125.
Frazier, T. W.,&Youngstrom, E. A. (2007). Historical increase in the number of fac tors measured by commercial tests of cognitive ability: Are we overfactoring? Intel ligence, 35, 169–182.
Fuchs, D.,&Fuchs, L. S. (2006). What the inclusion movement and responsiveness-to-intervention say about high-incidence disabilities. Keynote for the Inaugural Inter national Conference of the University of Hong Kong's Center for Advancement in Special Education. Hong Kong.
Fuchs, D..&Young, C. (2006). On the irrelevance of intelligence in predicting respon siveness to reading instruction. Exceptional Children, 73, 8–30.
Gustafsson, J. E. (1999). Measuring and understanding g: Experimental and correla tional approaches. In P. L. Ackerman, P. C. Kyllonon,&R. D. Edwards (Eds.), Learn ing and individual differences: Process, trait and content determinants (pp. 275–289). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hakstian, A. R.&Bennet, R. W. (1977). Validity studies using the Comprehension Abil ity Battery (CAB): 1. Academic achievement criteria. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 37, 425–437.
Hammill, D., Pearson, N.,&Voress, J. (1997). Developmental test of visual perception (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Herschell, A., Calzada, E., Eyberg, S. M.,&McNeil, C. B. (2002). Parent–child inter action therapy: New directions in research. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 9, 9–16.
Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CN: Praeger.
Johnson, W., Bouchard, T. J., Jr., Krueger, R. F., McGue, M.,&Gottesman, I. I. (2004). Just one g: Consistent results from three test batteries. Intelligence, 32, 95–107.
Kamphaus, R. W. (in press). Clinical assessment of child and adolescent intelligence. New York: Springer.
Kaufman, A. S. (1994). Intelligent testing with the WISC–III. New York: Wiley.
Kuse, A. R. (1977). Familial resemblances for cognitive abilities estimated from 2 test batteries in Hawaii. Unpublished dissertation from the University of Colorado at Boulder.
Kyllonen, P. C. (1996). Is working memory capacity Spearman's g? In I. Dennis&P. Tapsfield (Eds.), Human abilities: Their nature and measurement (pp. 49–75). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Livingston, R. B, Jennings, E., Reynolds, C. R.,&Gray, R. M. (2003). Multivariate analyses of the profile stability of intelligence tests: High for IQs, low to very low for subtest analyses. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 18, 487–507.
Lubinski, D. (2004). Introduction to the special section on cognitive abilities: 100 Years after Spearman's (1904) “ ‘General intelligence,’ objectively determined and meas ured.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 96–111.
McDermott, P. A., Fantuzzo, J. W.,&Glutting, J.J. (1990). Just say no to subtest analysis: A critique on Wechsler theory and practice. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 290–302.
McGrew, K.S. (2005). The Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory of cognitive abilities: Past, present, and future. In D. P. Flanagan&P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intel lectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 136–182). New York: Guilford Press.
Pfeiffer, S. I., Reddy, L. A., Kletzel, J. E., Schmelzer, E. R.,&Boyer, L. M. (2000). The practitioner's view of IQ testing and profile analysis. School Psychology Quarterly, 15, 376–385.
Reynolds, C. R. (2008). RTI, neuroscience, and sense: Chaos in the diagnosis and treat ment of learning disabilities. In E. Fletcher-Janzen&C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Neu-ropsychological perspectives on learning disabilities in the era of RTI (pp. 14–27). New York: John Wiley&Sons.
Reynolds, C. R. (2007). Koppitz-2: The Koppitz developmental scoring system for the Bender-gestalt test revised and expanded. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Reynolds, C. R. (2002). Comprehensive trail-making test. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Reynolds, C. R.,&Kamphaus, R. W. (2003). Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS). Odessa, FL: PAR.
Reynolds, C. R.,&Kamphaus, R. W. (2004). Manual: Behavior Assessment System for Children-Second edition. Circle Pines: MN: American Guidance Service.
Reynolds, C. R.,&Voress, J. (2007). Test of memory and learning (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Reynolds, C. R., Voress, J.,&Pearson, N. (2008). Developmental test of auditory percep tion. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Sattler, J. M. (2001). Assessment of children: Cognitive applications (4th ed.). La Mesa, CA: Author.
Schmid, J.&Leiman, J.M. (1957) The development of hierarchical factor solutions, Psychometrika 22, 53–61
Schmidt, F. L.&Hunter, J. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work: Occu pational attainment and job performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol ogy. 2004, 86 162–173.
Siegel, L. S. (1989). IQ is irrelevant to the definition of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 469–478.
Sparrow, S. S., Cicchetti, D. V.&Balla, D. A. (2006). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition – Survey Interview Form. Pearson Education, Inc. Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man. New York: Macmillan.
Wallace, G.&Hammill, D. (2002). Comprehensive receptive and expressive vocabulary test (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Watkins, M. W. (2006). Orthogonal higher order structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–fourth edition. Psychological Assessment, 18, 123–125.
Watkins, M. W.,&Canivez, G. L. (2004). Temporal stability of WISC–III subtest compos ite: Strengths and weaknesses. Psychological Assessment, 16, 133–138.
Watkins, M. W.,&Glutting, J. J. (2000). Incremental validity of WISC–III profile eleva tion, scatter, and shape information for predicting reading and math achievement. Psychological Assessment, 12, 402–408.
Wechsler, D. (1955). Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. New York: Psycho logical Corporation.
Wechsler, D. (2003). Wechsler, Manual for the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children Fourth edition. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Woodcock, R. W. McGrew, K. S.,&Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock—Johnson III Tests of Achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science + Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kamphaus, R.W., Reynolds, C.R., Vogel, K.K. (2009). Intelligence Testing. In: Matson, J.L., Andrasik, F., Matson, M.L. (eds) Assessing Childhood Psychopathology and Developmental Disabilities. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09528-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09528-8_4
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-09527-1
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-09528-8
eBook Packages: Behavioral ScienceBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)