DownloadWAIS IV






Advertisement
Download Presentation
Comments
aloysius
From:
|  
(120) |   (0) |   (0)
Views: 3758 | Added: 21-02-2012
Rate Presentation: 5 0
Description:
Lichtenberger, E. O.,
WAIS IV

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only and may not be sold or licensed nor shared on other sites. SlideServe reserves the right to change this policy at anytime. While downloading, If for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.











- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -




1. WAIS IV A Guide to Interpretation

2. Lichtenberger, E. O., & Kaufman, A. S. (2009). Essentials of WAIS-IV Assessment. New York: Wiley. References

4. Aims of Revision

5. Updates from WAIS III

6. WAIS-IV Structure

7. Verbal Comprehension Scale Core Subtests: Similarities, Vocabulary Information Supplemental Subtests: Comprehension Perceptual Reasoning Scale Core Subtests Block Design, Matrix Reasoning, Visual Puzzles (New) Supplemental Subtests Picture Completion, Figure Weights (New; 16-69 only) WAIS-IV Structure & Subtests

8. Working Memory Scale Core Subtests: Digit Span, Arithmetic Supplemental Subtests: Letter-Number Sequencing (16-69 only) Processing Speed Scale Core Subtests: Symbol Search, Coding Supplemental Subtests: Cancellation (New; 16-69 only) WAIS-IV Structure & Subtests

9. Average Correlations Between WAIS-IV Subtests and Full Scales

10. Average Correlations Between WAIS-IV Subtests and Full Scales

11. Average Correlations Between WAIS-IV Subtests and Full Scales

12. Average Correlations Between WAIS-IV Subtests and Full Scales [4]

13. Visual Puzzles

14. Figure Weights

15. Cancellation

16. Composite Scores

17. Reliability of WAIS-IV Internal Consistency FSIQ-.98 Index Scores-.90 (PSI) to .96 (VCI) Subtests-.81 (SS) to .94 (Vocab.) Test-retest after average of 22 days FSIQ- .95 Interscorer Agreement-.98-.99 for average of all subtests; .91-.97 for subtests requiring more judgment in scoring (e.g., vocabulary) WAIS-IV: Psychometric Properties

18. Content Validity Comprehensive literature and expert reviews were conducted to examine the content of the WAIS-III and to evaluate proposed new items and subtests designed to improve content coverage and relevance Criterion-Related Validity-correlated with the following WAIS-III corresponding subtests, correlations ranging from.64-.89 WISC-IV corresponding subtests, correlations ranging from .51-.82 WAIS-IV: Validity

19. Construct Validity Factor analyses yielded results consistent with the hypothesized four-factor hierarchical model corresponding to the four Index scores that combine to form the g-factor; supported through SEM Acceptable correlations with measures theoretically related to intelligence Data from clinical groups with various mental disorders such as Alzheimer's Disease, Traumatic Brain Injury, and Borderline Intellectual functioning were analyzed. Scores of persons with these types of disorders were, on the average, lower than those in the standardization sample. WAIS-IV: Validity

20. Interpretation

21. 1. Collect and integrate data from numerous sources 2. Corroborate conclusions with multiple data sources 3. Support conclusions with research 4. Interpretation should be individualized 5. Emphasize reliable and valid conclusions 9 Major Principles of Integrative Test Interpretation

22. 6. De-emphasize subtest profile analysis 7. Minimize calculations 8. View interpretation as an iterative process 9. Emphasize apriori over aposteriori interpretation 9 Principles (con?t.)

23. Interpretive Levels (McCloskey, 2009)

24. This model has four components: 1. Input 2. Integration 3. Storage 4. Output This model provides examiners with a conceptual framework for interpreting IQ scores, factor indexes, and scaled scores The Information-processing model and the WAIS

25. Applicability of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory?

26. Intelligence consists of pervasive, broad, and narrow abilities that are organized hierarchically GENERAL INTELLIGENCE or g (stratum III), oversees BROAD COGNITIVE ABILITIES (stratum II), under which lie NARROW COGNITIVE ABILITIES (stratum I). Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory

27. At the highest level (Stratum III), a single general factor (g) oversees all cognitive activities. Stratum II capacities, reside beneath general intelligence, include several prominent and well-established abilities. The narrow abilities at stratum I include approximately 70 abilities. Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory

28. Crystallized Knowledge (Gc) Visual-Spatial Abilities (Gv) Fluid Reasoning (Gf) Short-Term Memory (Gsm) Cognitive Processing Speed (Gs) Stratum II: CHC Broad Ability Factors (Keith, 2009)

29. Crystallized Knowledge (Gc) Visual-Spatial Abilities (Gv) Fluid Reasoning (Gf) Short-Term Memory (Gsm) Cognitive Processing Speed (Gs) Similarities, Vocabulary, Comprehension, Information Picture Comp., Block Design, Visual Puzzles Matrix Reason., Figure Weights, Arithmetic Digit Span, Let.-No. Seq. Coding, Symbol Search, Cancellation Keith (2009) Application of CHC Theory to WAIS-IV

30. Keith?s CHC Model [Lichtenberger & Kaufman (2009; p. 31)]

31. Process Scores

32. Subtest Process Analysis

33. Subtest Process Analysis

34. Lichtenberger & Kaufman (2009) scoring program

36. Report the Person?s WAIS-IV Standard Scores (FSIQ and Indexes) and Subtest Scaled Scores. For IQ and indexes, report standard score, confidence interval, percentile rank, and descriptive category. For subtests, report scaled scores and percentile ranks only. Step 1

38. FSIQ: 89 (Not 83; report in book is correct, but the figures are wrong) 95% CI: (85-93) Percentile Rank: 23 Average/Within Normal Limits Step 1: Laura O

39. Determine the Best Way to Summarize Overall Intellectual Ability. Step 2a. To determine whether the FSIQ is interpretable, subtract the Lowest Index from the Highest Index. If DIFFERENCE < 23, the FSIQ may be interpreted as a reliable and valid estimate of a person?s overall intellectual ability. Proceed to Step 3. If DIFFERENCE >= 23, then proceed to Step 2b. Step 2:

40. 97 ? 79 = 13 Since Difference < 23, FSIQ can be interpreted as a reliable and valid estimate of Laura?s intellectual functioning (Thus, would normally skip to Step 3) Because the FSIQ is the most reliable composite score, it is preferable, when it is meaningful Step 2: Laura O

41. Determine the Best Way to Summarize Overall Intellectual Ability. Step 2b. To determine whether the General Ability Index (GAI) may be used to summarize overall intellectual ability, calculate the difference between the VCI and PRI. If DIFFERENCE < 23, the GAI may be interpreted as a reliable and valid estimate of a person?s overall intellectual ability. If DIFFERENCE >= 23, then proceed to Step 3. Step 2 (Cont.):

42. Sum 6 subtest scaled scores of the 3 Verbal Comprehension Index and 3 Perceptual Reasoning Index subtests, and locate the General Ability Index (GAI) that corresponds to this sum in Table C.1 of the WAIS-IV Technical and Interpretive Manual (p. 169). GAI = VC + SI + IN + MR + BD + VP Step 2 (Cont.) Calculating the GAI

43. Sum of scores 47 => GAI of 86 The GAI comprises the 3 best VCI and PRI scores and hence is the best measure of g (esp. when tests of memory and speed deviate from the verbal and nonverbal tests or when FSIQ is uninterpretable due to variability) Step 2 (Cont.): Laura O

45. Determine Whether the Difference between the Person?s General Ability Index (GAI) and Cognitive Proficiency Index (CPI) Is Unusually Large. Step 3a. Determine whether the GAI and CPI represent unitary abilities or processes: Is GAI interpretable (Step 2b)? Is the CPI interpretable (i.e., is the size of the difference between WMI and PSI < 1.5SD (23 points)? Step 3b. Calculate the GAI (Step 2b) and the CPI Step 3

46. CPI combines 2 working memory and 2 processing speed tests. Useful because ?proficient processing, through quick visual speed and good mental control, facilitates fluid reasoning and the acquisition of new material by reducing the cognitive demands of novel tasks? (Weiss et al., 2006) NB: CPI has good psychometric properties (a=.93-.95) but a neurological basis of the construct has yet to be demonstrated What is the Cognitive Proficiency Index (CPI)

47. Step 3b. Calculate the CPI DS + LN + SS + CD = CPI 11 + 7 + 10 + 9 = 37 => 96 Find Appendix A.2 of Lichtenberger & Kaufman (2009) for percentile rank and confidence interval Step 3c/d. If interpretable, is the difference (p<.05 is 8.8; p < .01 is 11.6) uncommonly large (<10%; i.e., difference > 19 points)? | 86 (GAI) ? 96 (CPI) | = 10 Step 3 (Cont.)

49. Step 4a. Is person aged between 16 and 69? If no, use WAIS 4-index (Step 5) else Step 4b. Were supplementary tests administered as well as Letter Number Sequencing and Figure Weights? If no, goto 5 else Step 4c. Which theoretical model do you choose ? Wechsler or Keith/Luria/CHC? Step 4: WAIS-IV or CHC/Luria?

51. WAIS Structure

52. Brain has three functional systems (blocks) 1. Arousal and attention 2. Analyze, code, and store information 3. Application of executive function for planning and behavioral programming Luria (1970)

53. Interpretation of Keith 5 Factor: Short Term Memory (Gsm) Lurian Perspective CHC Perspective Successive or sequential processing (arrange input in linear/temporal order to solve a problem) Conceptualizing, categorizing, and making associations Take in and hold information and use within a few seconds

54. Interpretation of Keith 5 Factor: Visual Processing (Gv) Lurian Perspective CHC Perspective Integrate visiospatial and motor skills and use non-motor visiospatial processing. Simultaneous processing in which stimuli integrated and synthesised in holistic manner to solve visiospatial problem Perceive, store, manipulate, and think with visual patterns

55. Interpretation of Keith 5 Factor: Fluid Reasoning (Gf) Lurian Perspective CHC Perspective High level decision making and executive processes; using flexible strategies and planning (esp. adopt and shift cognitive sets, monitor behaviour and maintain impulse control) Solving novel problems using reasoning abilities (e.g., induction and deduction)

56. Interpretation of Keith 5 Factor: Crystallized Ability (Gc) Lurian Perspective CHC Perspective Ability at receptive and expressive functions of language are evidenced as well as verbal-conceptual and factual knowledge Breadth and depth of knowledge acquired from culture

57. Interpretation of Keith 5 Factor: Processing Speed (Gs) Lurian Perspective CHC Perspective Perceptual and motor capacities involving visual perception and eye-hand coordination Fluently and automatically performing cognitive tasks, esp. under pressure to maintain focused attention and concentration

58. Crystallized Knowledge (Gc) Visual-Spatial Abilities (Gv) Fluid Reasoning (Gf) Short-Term Memory (Gsm) Cognitive Processing Speed (Gs) Vocabulary + Information Block Design + Visual Puzzles Matrix Reason +Figure Weights Digit Span + Let.-No. Seq. Coding + Symbol Search Application of CHC Theory to WAIS by Lichtenbegrer & Kaufman

59. Determine whether each of Wechsler indices is unitary (and thus interpretable) Step 5a: Subtract lowest VCI scaled score from highest VCI scaled score Is size of difference less than 1.5 SDs (<5points)? If YES, then ability presumed to underlie the VCI is unitary and may be interpreted If NO, then the difference is too large and VCI cannot be interpreted as a unitary ability Step 5

60. An ability represented by a cohesive set of scaled scores, each reflecting unique facets of that ability What is a unitary ability?

61. Determine whether each of Wechsler indices is unitary (and thus interpretable) Step 5b: Subtract lowest PRI scaled score from highest PRI scaled score Is size of difference less than 1.5 SDs (<5points)? If YES, then ability presumed to underlie the PRI is unitary and may be interpreted If NO, then the difference is too large and PRI cannot be interpreted as a unitary ability Step 5

62. Determine whether size of difference between the subtests of the PSI is too large (and thus uninterpretable ? although see p.168 for caveat) Step 5c: Subtract lower PSI scaled score from higher PSI scaled score Is size of difference less than 1.5 SDs (<5points)? If YES, then ability presumed to underlie the PSI is unitary and may be interpreted If NO, then the difference is too large and PSI cannot be interpreted as a unitary ability Step 5

63. Determine whether size of difference between the subtests of the WMI is too large (and thus uninterpretable ? although see p.168 for caveat) Step 5c: Subtract lower WMI scaled score from higher WMI scaled score Is size of difference less than 1.5 SDs (<5points)? If YES, then ability presumed to underlie the WMI is unitary and may be interpreted If NO, then the difference is too large and WMI cannot be interpreted as a unitary ability Step 5

65. Determine whether each of Five Keith indices is unitary (and thus interpretable) Step 6a: Calculate the standard scores for the 5 Keith factors by summing scaled scores for the 2 subtests that comprise each cluster and convert to scaled score with norms (Appendix A3-6) Step 6b-f: Subtract lowest scaled score from highest scaled score for Gc, Gsm, Gf, Gv, Gs Is size of difference less than 1.5 SDs (<5points)? If YES, then ability presumed to underlie the construct is unitary and may be interpreted If NO, then the difference is too large and construct cannot be interpreted as a unitary ability Step 6

66. Step 6g: If 3 or more factors are interpretable proceed, but if only 1 or 2 are, then use WAIS-IV structure. Calculate the standard scores for the 5 Keith factors by summing scaled scores for the 2 subtests that comprise each cluster and convert to scaled score with norms (Appendix A3-6) Step 6b-f: Subtract lowest scaled score from highest scaled score for Gc, Gsm, Gf, Gv, Gs Is size of difference less than 1.5 SDs (<5points)? If YES, then ability presumed to underlie the construct is unitary and may be interpreted If NO, then the difference is too large and construct cannot be interpreted as a unitary ability Step 6

68. Determine Normative Strengths and Normative Weaknesses in the Index (or Factor) Profile (whether did Step 5 or 6) If an index or factor standard score is over 115, then it is a normative strength If an index or factor standard score is less than 85, then it is a normative weakness If 85-115, then factor or index is within normal limits Step 7

70. Personal strengths and weaknesses refer to indexes or factors that deviate from the person?s own mean for that index or factor Step 8a: Compute the mean of the person?s index or factor standard scores (and round to nearest 10th of a point) Step 8b: Subtract the mean of all index or factor standard scores from each interpretable index or factor score (use Table 5.4; p. 176-177 to determine if difference between means in interpretable) [Should Bonferroni correction be used?] Step 8

71. Step 8c: Determine whether personal strengths and weaknesses are uncommon (using criterion of less than 10% of base rate) Step 8d: Identify ?key assets? and ?high priority concerns? in person?s profile Key Asset: Personal Strength that is uncommon & greater than 115 High Priority Concern: Personal Weakness that is uncommon and less than 85 Step 8

73. Interpret Fluctuations in the Person?s Index of Factor Profile Step 9

74. Conduct Planned Clinical Comparisons Adapted Flanagan and Kaufman?s (2004; 2009) clinical clusters Step 10a: Do the clusters represent unitary abilities? (Is the difference between highest and lowest scaled score in that cluster less than 5?) If YES, clinical cluster is a unitary ability and can be used in the comparison If NO, clinical cluster is not a unitary ability and should not be used in the comparison Step 10

75. Step 10a

76. Step 10b: Sum the scaled scores for the two subtests that comprise the clinical cluster and convert to a standard score using Appendices A.9-17 in L&K (2009; CD-Rom) Step 10c: Determine if the size of the difference between the clusters in the comparison is unusually large or uncommon (i.e., in less than 10% of the population) Step 10

77. Step 10b

78. Step 10c

80. Visual-Motor Speed Block Design+Coding+Symbol Search Require visual motor speed & quick information processing Processing speed related to ageing, mental capacity, and fluid reasoning WAIS-IV Clinical Clusters

81. Problem-Solving W/O Visual-Motor Speed Matrix Reasoning+Visual Puzzles+Picture Completion+Figure Weights Block Design is the only PRI subtest requiring coordination and speed, thus PRI W/O BD is: Fluid reasoning and visual-spatial problem solving without contamination of motor coordination and speed WAIS-IV Clinical Clusters

82. Mental Manipulation Letter-Number-Sequencing+Digit Span Ability to actively maintain information in awareness and perform a cognitive operation or manipulation with it WAIS-IV Clinical Clusters

83. Step 10: Planned Comparisons Wechsler?s Theoretical Model

84. Fluid Reasoning (Gf) Matrix Reasoning+Figure Weights Mental operations (e.g., concept formation, drawing inferences, perceiving relationships among patterns, problem solving) used when faced with novel task that cannot be performed automatically MR = general sequential reasoning (deduction) FW = quantitative reasoning Clinical Clusters CHC Perspective

85. Visual Processing (Gv) Cluster Block Design+Visual Puzzles Ability to generate, perceive, analyze, synthesize, store, retrieve, manipulate, and transform visual patterns and stimuli BD = (narrow ability of) spatial relations (plus motor manipulation) VP = (narrow abilities of) visualization and spatial relations (plus fluid reasoning) Clinical Clusters CHC Perspective

86. Verbal Fluid Reasoning (Gf-Verbal) Cluster Similarities+Comprehension Involves the Broad Gc abilities (accumulated knowledge and culture) Also involves Gf ability of inductive reasoning with verbal stimuli Clinical Clusters CHC Perspective

87. Lexical Knowledge (Gc-VL) Cluster Vocabulary+Similarities Gc is the breadth and depth of accumulated knowledge and culture and the effective use of that knowledge V & S = (narrow ability of) Lexical knowledge Clinical Clusters CHC Perspective

88. General Knowledge (Gc-K0) Cluster Comprehension+Information Measure Gc, but the narrow ability of General Information (range of general knowledge) Clinical Clusters CHC Perspective

89. Long-Term Memory (Gc-LTM) Cluster Vocabulary+Information V & I both measure Gc (General Information) and V measures Gc (Lexical Knowledge), but V & I represent knowledge stored in LTM Clinical Clusters CHC Perspective

90. Short-Term Memory (Gsm-MW) Cluster Letter-Number Sequencing+Digit Span Ability to apprehend and hold information in immediate awareness and use it within a few seconds LNS & DS (Bwd) = Working Memory (temporarily store information and perform operations on it) DS = Memory span (attend and recall an ordered sequence) Clinical Clusters CHC Perspective

91. Step 10: Planned Comparisons CHC Theoretical Model

92. Fluid Reasoning > Visual Processing Good reasoning that, despite difficulty with visual processing, can solve problems by focusing on less visual aspects of the problem Visual Processing > Fluid Reasoning Good concrete visual skills but experiences difficulties when asked to reason with visual material Fluid Reasoning > Verbal Fluid Reasoning Reason better with visual than verbal stimuli Hypotheses for differences

93. Lexical Knowledge > General Information Can reason with words, but has minimal factual information or difficulty applying knowledge in specific situations General Information > Lexical Knowledge Good knowledge of factual information but lacks facility with words and has difficulty reasoning with words LTM > STM Able to retrieve information, but has trouble encoding Hypotheses for differences

94. STM > LTM Can encode information but has trouble retrieving LTM > Verbal Fluid Reasoning Adequate fund of knowledge, but has trouble reasoning with it Visual-Motor Speed > Mental Manipulation Attention to visual stimuli better developed than auditory attention abilities Mental Manipulation > Visual-Motor Speed Auditory attention abilities better developed than ability to attend to visual stimuli Hypotheses for differences

95. Visual-Motor Speed > Problem Solving W/O VM Speed Strong ability to encode and respond to visual information by giving motor response, but has more difficulty with visual material that requires processing through nonverbal reasoning when motor speed not a critical factor Problem Solving W/O VM Speed >Visual-Motor Speed Strong ability to perceive and process visual information using nonverbal reasoning when speed not a critical factor, but more difficulty quickly encoding and responding to visually present information responding motorically Hypotheses for differences

96. Problem Solving W/O VM Speed > Mental Manipulation Attention to visual stimuli is better developed than auditory abilities Mental Manipulation > Problem Solving W/O VM Speed Auditory attention abilities better developed than their ability to attend to visual stimuli Hypotheses for differences


Other Related Presentations

Copyright © 2014 SlideServe. All rights reserved | Powered By DigitalOfficePro