This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Riccio, C. A. Articles by Ross, C. M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Third and Fourth Factors of the WISC-III: What they Don't Measure

The University of Alabama

Morris J. Cohen

The Medical College of Georgia, The University of Georgia

Josh Hall

The University of Georgia, The Medical College of Georgia

Carl M. Ross

The University of Alabama

Factor analysis of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition (WISC-III) continues to demonstrate support for the Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale IQs, as well as for the Verbal Comprehension (VC) and Perceptual Organization (PO) factors. With the addition of the Symbol Search subtest, however, the factor analysis reported in the examiner's manual yielded two additional factors rather than just one. There is, however, no early evidence that the third and fourth factors are clinically interpretable. This study examined the relationship between the WISC-III third and four factors and other neuropsychological and behavioral measures. Results indicated that although Freedom From Distractibility (EFD) and Processing Speed (PS) correlated significantly with VC and PO factors, the FD and PS factors did not correlate significantly with any of the other measures of attention. The most robust correlations were between measures of immediate/working memory and FFD and PS. When comparing clinical groups (LD/no ADHD, ADHD Predominantly Inattentive, and ADHD Combined Type), no differences emerged on the FFD or PS factors. The clinical validity of these factors remains questionable. The significant relationship between WISC-III factors and measures of immediate/working memory is promising, but in need of additional research.

Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, Vol. 15, No. 1, 27-39 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/073428299701500103


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. C. Kush and M. W. Watkins Structural Validity of the WISC-III for a National Sample of Native American Students Canadian Journal of School Psychology, December 1, 2007; 22(2): 235 - 248. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. J. Glutting, M. W. Watkins, T. R. Konold, and P. A. McDermott Distinctions Without a Difference: The Utility of Observed Versus Latent Factors From the WISC-IV in Estimating Reading and Math Achievement on the WIAT-II Journal of Special Education, August 1, 2006; 40(2): 103 - 114. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. A. McDermott, M. M. Goldberg, M. W. Watkins, J. L. Stanley, and J. J. Glutting A Nationwide Epidemiologic Modeling Study of LD: Risk, Protection, and Unintended Impact J Learn Disabil, June 1, 2006; 39(3): 230 - 251. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Y. Kahana, E. A. Youngstrom, and J. J. Glutting Factor and Subtest Discrepancies on the Differential Ability Scales: Examining Prevalence and Validity in PredictingAcademic Achievement Assessment, March 1, 2002; 9(1): 82 - 93. [Abstract] [PDF]