Date post: | 23-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | andrew-miles |
View: | 216 times |
Download: | 0 times |
WISC-IV VS. RIAS: Will the Real IQ Please Stand Up!!A 2-year study comparing the two IQ instruments.
HYPOTHESIS
• RESEARCHER HYPOTHESIZED THAT THE RIAS WOULD SCORE HIGHER GIVEN THE ADDITIONAL PSYCHOMOTOR PROCESSING AND WORKING MEMORY FACTORS ON THE WISC-IV.
• PLEASE REFER TO THE GAI DATA AND SUPPLENTAL TABLES FOR WISC-IV UPDATES.
• ADDITIONALLY, BOTH INSTRUMENTS MEASURE DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTS. THEREFORE, WE ARE MEASURING SIMILAR YET DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF COGNITION. “SQUARE FEET VS. CUBIC FEET” THINKING.
WISC and RIAS Verbal Comparisons
• WISC• 3 Subtests• General fund of
knowledge• Verbal associative
reasoning• Vocabulary –
expressive language• Moral judgment,
common sense, independent thinking
• RIAS• 2 Subtests• General fund of
knowledge• Verbal associative
reasoning• Vocabulary – one-
word responses
WISC and RIAS Comparisons Performance IQ
• WISC• 3 Subtests• Nonverbal
associative and categorical reasoning
• Analyze and synthesize abstract visual information
• RIAS• 2 Subtests• Nonverbal
associative and categorical reasoning
• Deduce essential elements missing in pictures from gestalt
WISC and RIAS Comparisons – Working Memory
• WISC• 2 Subtests
measuring attention, concentration, sequencing, and short-term auditory memory
• RIAS
• 0 Subtests• Not part of the
CIX
WISC and RIAS Comparisons – Processing Speed
• WISC• 2 Subtests• Graphomotor
processing speed involving timed paper and pencil tasks
• Visual-motor coordination
• Concentration and visual memory
• RIAS• 0 Subtests• Timed nonverbal
tasks involving cognitive efficiency and speed w/o paper and pencil
DESIGNRandom Select Selection
• Select ‘fine’ Psychologists from St. Johns County school district randomly selected students ranging from 6-16 years of age and administered both the WISC-IV and RIAS IQ instruments. All students were referred by the CST.
• Abundance of data from the 2005-06 SY. Psychologists gave raw data to researcher to tabulate.
DESIGN
• ONLY THE AGE OF THE STUDENTS WAS USED AS “PREDICTOR VARIABLE.” AGES RANGED FROM 6-16. MAJORITY OF STUDENTS WERE IN THE 7 YR. OLD THROUGH 10 YR. OLD RANGE.
RACE AND GENDER NOT USED FOR COMPARISONS GIVEN LIMITED NUMBER
• Only less than a handful of minority African American and Hispanics tested.
• Gender not a major contributing factor on how data is to be used.
Pearson Correlation Coefficient • The Full Scale IQ’s and the Factor
Scores will be compared to check for correlation coefficients.
• WESSA.NET was used as the software program to calculate Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficients.
TOTAL N = 121
BREAKDOWN BY AGEN = Number
• 6 YEAR OLDS 09• 7 YEAR OLDS 18• 8 YEAR OLDS 33• 9 YEAR OLDS 32• 10 YEAR OLDS 18• 11 YEAR OLDS 02• 12 YEAR OLDS 02• 13 – 16 YEAR OLDS 07___________________________________
TOTAL SAMPLE N = 121
Age 6 (9 students)
9488 89 90
73
110103
86
97
124
97
126
404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899
100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131
Mean Factor Scores
Sta
nd
ard
sco
re
WISC 97 94 88 89 90 73 124
RIAS 97 110 103 86 126
VIQ PIQ WM PS FSIQ FSIQ Low FSIQ High
Age 7 (18 students)
9297 99
71
105
85
99
121
106104
135
106
60616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899
100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139
Mean Factor Scores
Sta
nd
ard
sco
re
WISC 99 106 92 97 99 71 121
RIAS 104 106 105 85 135
VIQ PIQ WM PS FSIQ FSIQ Low FSIQ High
Age 8 (33 students)
9692 91
94
75
107 105
89
99
127
103
129
60616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899
100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133
Mean Factor Scores
Sta
nd
ard
sco
re
WISC 99 96 92 91 94 75 127
RIAS 103 107 105 89 129
VIQ PIQ WM PS FSIQ FSIQ Low FSIQ High
Age 9 (32 students)
101
9194 96
71
103 102
79
99
128
101
128
60616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899
100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132
Mean Factor Scores
Sta
nd
ard
sco
re
WISC 99 101 91 94 96 71 128
RIAS 101 103 102 79 128
VIQ PIQ WM PS FSIQ FSIQ Low FSIQ High
Age 10 (18 students)
93 9084
87
45
10297
40
90
102
92
119
404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899
100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123
Mean Factor Scores
Sta
nd
ard
sco
re
WISC 90 93 90 84 87 45 102
RIAS 92 102 97 40 119
VIQ PIQ WM PS FSIQ FSIQ Low FSIQ High
Ages 11 thru 16 (11 students)
8076
82
76
63
93 91
61
84
104
92
124
60616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899
100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128
Mean Factor Scores
Sta
nd
ard
sco
re
WISC 84 80 76 82 76 63 104
RIAS 92 93 91 61 124
VIQ PIQ WM PS FSIQ FSIQ Low FSIQ High
All Ages 6-16 (121 students)
9690 91 92
104
96
128
100
135
102
60616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899
100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139
Mean Factor Scores
Sta
nd
ard
sco
re
WISC 96 96 90 91 92 45 128
RIAS 100 104 102 40 135
VIQ PIQ WM PS FSIQ FSIQ Low FSIQ High
WISC-III IQVerbal IQ Performance
IQWorking Memory
Processing Speed
FSIQ
RIAS Index
Mean IQ
Mean IQ
Mean IQ
Mean IQ
Mean IQ
Mean IQ
108.2 104.6 ------ ------ 107.8
VIX 102.1 .86 ---- ---- ---- ----
NIX 101.0 ---- .33 ---- ---- ----
CIX 100.3 ---- ---- ---- ---- .76
Correlations Between the RIAS Index Scores and the
WISC-III IQ Scores – Reynolds Manual pg. 105.
WISC-IV IQVerbal
ComprehensionPerceptual
OrganizationWorking Memory
Processing Speed
FSIQ
RIAS Index
Mean IQ Mean IQ
Mean IQ
Mean IQ
Mean IQ
Mean IQ
96.2 95.8 89.7 90.7 92.2
VIX 99.9 .83 ---- ---- ---- ----
NIX 104.1 ---- .54 ---- ---- ----
CIX 101.6 ---- ---- .62 .45 .79
Pearson Correlations Between the RIAS Index Scores and the WISC-IV Factor
Scores Ages 6 – 16 (N = 121)
WISC-IV IQVerbal
ComprehensionPerceptual
OrganizationWorking Memory
Processing Speed
FSIQ
RIAS Index
Mean IQ Mean IQ
Mean IQ
Mean IQ
Mean IQ
Mean IQ
99.0 100.0 91.7 93.4 95.6
VIX 102.5 .83 ---- ---- ---- ----
NIX 105.4 ---- .42 ---- ---- ----
CIX 103.7 ---- ---- .58 .36 .75
Pearson Correlations Between the RIAS Index Scores and the WISC-IV
Factor Scores – Primary Grade Ages 7 – 9 (N = 83)
Limitations of Study
• The sample was taken from students already referred for assessment. Approximately 90% were referred for Special Needs/reevals and 10% for Gifted evaluation.
• Majority of sample from 7-10 year old range. Older MS/HS population not adequately represented in sample.
• Majority of sample Caucasian and from Middle Class SES. Minorities and/or Low SES not adequately represented.
CONCLUSIONS
• RIAS tends to score approximately 10 points higher than the WISC-IV on global cognitive ability measure.
• Strongest correlations between RIAS VIX and WISC-IV VC of .83 followed by RIAS CIX and WISC-IV FSIQ of .79 correlation.
• Weakest link between RIAS CIX and WISC-IV PS of .45 correlation.
IMPLICATIONS• The range of scores among all age groups
tends to favor the RIAS in regards to scoring higher on both ends of the distribution. This may influence ESE placement decisions.
• Working Memory and Processing Speed tends to depress the WISC FSIQ by approximately 4 points. This may influence ESE placement decisions.
• Even though RIAS scores higher on all measures and through all age groups, both instruments correlate fairly well with a high degree of confidence when comparing global IQ scores. This indicates fairly good reliability and validity.
FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS
• Assess minority populations and compare results with current data.
• Assess Low SES w/o regard for race and compare with current data.
• Assess middle and high school students to a larger extent.
• Assess pre-K students with WPPSI-III and RIAS and compare data.
Excerpt from Dr. Cecil Reynolds e-mail …..
• It is clear the difference is really in the nonverbal sections of the tests, just as we
have argued for some time. The WISC-IV in my view confounds nonverbal intelligence with a host of tangentially related factors
(speed confounded with motor for example, and the differential acquiescence of kids .. to work as quickly as they can, etc.), especially for referral samples wherein you also see a far higher incidence of mild motor issues. I
think the RIAS gives a more accurate view of NV intelligence for these kids and that seems to be your conclusion as well—we do not see
this difference in nonreferred samples—random samples of normal kids score at
about the same level on both. • Cecil R. Reynolds, PhD
• Professor of Educational Psychology• Professor of Neuroscience