the wj iv and beyond chc theory: kevin mcgrew's nasp mini-skills workshop

The WJ IV Tests of Cognitive Ability & Beyond CHC Theory

(NASP 2015 Mini-skills workshop)

Kevin S. McGrew, PhD.

Institute for Applied Psychometrics&

University of Minnesota

© Institute for Applied Psychometrics; Kevin McGrew 1-18-15

• Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP)-Director

• University of Minnesota - Visiting Professor (Educ Psych)

• Interactive Metronome - Director of Research and Science (External Consultant) *

• Darhma Berkmana Foundation (YDB; Indonesia) –Intelligence expert for development of first Indonesian CHC-based intelligence battery for children

* Conflict of interest disclosure: Financial relationship and interest in IM; Coauthor of WJ III and WJ IV (royalty interest)

Kevin S McGrew, PhD

Affiliations and Disclosures


The WJ IV Tests of Cognitive Ability & Beyond CHC Theory: Session Outline

1. Big picture overview: Conceptual, theoretical, organizational, and design principles behind the WJ IV COG

2. Show and tell: The new tests and the WJ IV COG clusters

3. “Dare to compare”--“regress for success:” Intracognitive variations and PSW Gf-Gc composite hybrid comparison procedures

4. Breaking Bad: The WJ IV COG/OL table of cognitive elements

5. “In god we trust…all others must show data:”—select COG tech. info.


John Horn, compared the process of classifying and categorizing human abilities and intelligence to

“slicing smoke”. (Horn, 1991)


A fundamental limitation of any theory built on a rectilinear system of factors is that it is not of a form that well describes natural phenomena. It is thus unlikely to be fully adequate. It is a system that can accurately describe rectangular structures built by humans…but not the rounded and irregular structures of mother nature. The phenomena of nature are not usually well described by the linear equations of a Cartesian coordinate system….The equations that describe the out structure and convolutions of brains must be parabolas, cycloids, cissoids, spirals, foliums [sic] exponentials, hyperboles, and the like. (p. 84)


g

General(stratum I)

The CHC taxonomy of cognitive abilities –

The three levels (stratum)Narrow

(stratum III)Broad

(stratum II)

Gf Gc Gwm

Glr Gv Ga Gs

Gc


Gf

Gc Gwm

Glr

Gv

Ga

Gs

GqGrw

g

I am going to be your guide for a “walk in the clouds” of human

cognitive abilities

The CHC model will be our map

The WJ IV COG (and OL)batteries will be our measures

Intelligence Testing Related

Research:Levels of

theoretical reductionism and

explanation

White matter tract organization,

integrity & efficiency

-rate of neural oscillations-neural synchronization-Reaction-time and temporal g-ERP’s (e.g., ABR)

PMA1

T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9T1 T12T10 T11

PMA2 PMA3 PMA4 …etc

…etc

G1 G2 G3

…etc

g ?

(Consensus Cattell-Horn-Carroll Hierarchical Three-Stratum Model)

-Human Connectome-Functional brain networks (Bressler & Menon, 2010)

-“Rich club” network hubs-P-FIT model

(Adapted from conceptual distinctions of Earl Hunt, 2011)


Human Connectome.avi


What is the current status of the CHC taxonomy?

How can this information be used to create or revise WJ IV tests?

Does the WJ IV data analyses suggest additions or revisions to CHC theory?

Key questions


The WJ IV COG psychometric model


Key questions

How can research at these

levels inform interpretation of

the WJ IV psychometric

model indicators (i.e., the tests)?


Time for the WJ IV COG new test “show and tell”

The “new kids (tests) on the block (COG)”


Oral Vocabulary

General Information

Number Series

Concept Formation

Verbal

Attention

Numbers Reversed

Story Recall

Visual-AudLearning

Visualization

Picture Recognition

Letter-Pat Match

Pair

Cancellation

Phon

Processing

Nonword

Repetition

Obj-Num

Sequencing

Analysis-Synthesis

Memory for Words

Number-Pat

Match

The final 18 WJ IV COG tests by CHC domain

Gc Glr Gv Ga GsGwmGf


WJ III test

New test

WJ III COG, DS or ACH test with new twist

COG Test 2: Number Series

• Was in WJ III Diagnostic Supplement• Gf-RQ (Quantitative Reasoning)• Not a “controlled learning” test as are Concept Formation (Gf-I) and Analysis-Synthesis (Gf-RG)

• More Gf “in the wild” – without examiner provided scaffolding• Extensive history as a premier Gf test in the psychometric measurement of intelligence• High in cognitive complexity and g. Best single test predictor of achievement. Best indicator of Gf factor.• In GIA, BIA, Gf-Gc Composite, Gf, Gf-Ext, Quantitative Reasoning (RQ), and one Math Aptitude clusters.


COG Test 3: Verbal Attention

• Measure of Gwm (working memory-WM; attentional control-AC)

• More ecological “real world” valid measure of working memory

• High in cognitive complexity and g. Within Gwm, the most cognitively complex, one of best indicators of Gwm factor, and best predictor of achievement

• In GIA, BIA, Gwm, Gwm3, Cognitive Efficiency, and one Reading and 1 Written Language Aptitude clusters.

Low

Degree of AttentionalControl (AC)

Memory for

Words

Sentence Repetition

Memory Span (MS)

Tests

High

Degree of Cognitive Complexity ( Cog. Load)

Working Memory

Capacity (WM)Tests

Numbers

Reversed

Understanding

Directions

Object-Number

Sequencing

Verbal

Attention

HighLow

© Institute for

Applied

Psychometrics;

Kevin McGrew 1-18-15

Via multiple regression,the other five Gwmtests (at ages 6-19)

predicted (R=.70) 49 % of Verbal Attention’s score variance. Aftertaking into account Verbal Attention’s

reliability, approximately 35% of

Verbal Attention’s reliable score variance is not accounted for by

the other five Gwm tests

There has been an explosion of research on auditory abilities since Carroll’s (1993) seminal work (Schneider & McGrew, 2012). A wide-ranging collection of Ga characteristics have been related to disorders of reading, speech, and language. For example, Ga abilities are now recognized as playing a pivotal scaffolding role in the development of language and general cognitive abilities (Conway, Pisoni, & Kronenberger, 2009).


Oral Vocabulary

General Information

Number Series

Concept Formation

Verbal

Attention

Numbers Reversed

Story Recall

Visual-AudLearning

Visualization

Picture Recognition

Letter-Pat Match

Pair

Cancellation

Obj-Num

Sequencing

Analysis-Synthesis

Memory for Words

Number-Pat

Match


Gc Glr Gv

Phon

Processing

Nonword

Repetition

Ga GsGwmGf


WJ III test

New test


COG Test 5: Phonological Processing

• Ga (PC) / Glr (LA/FW)•3 subtests (Word Access; Word Fluency; Substitution• Measures three aspects of speech sound processing that requires the efficient construction of sound-based lexical representations• High in cognitive complexity and g. Best single Ga test predictor of achievement. High loading on Ga and secondary low loading on Gc(accessing the lexicon). Also loaded on narrow LA factor in

broard+narrow bottom-up CFA models.• In GIA, Ga, and all reading and writing scholastic aptitude clusters


Examinee listens to a nonsense word and then must repeat the word exactly.

Requires temporary storage of phonological segments in immediate awareness.

Significant body of research has found such tasks to be significantly related to (and be possible “markers”of) reading disabilities, dyslexia and SLI (specific language impairment)

COG Test 12: Nonword Repetition

COG Test 4: Letter-Pattern Matching

• Measure of Gs (perceptual speed) and orthographic processing

• This speeded test (all WJ IV speeded tests) is based on a new rate-based method of scaling the scores that eliminates the need for bonus points

• Within Gs, it matches Number Pattern Matching in g, Gs factor loading, and prediction of achievement. Is more cognitively complex than Number Pattern Matching

• In GIA, Gs, Perceptual Speed (P), Cog. Eff. and Cog. clusters© Institute for Applied Psychometrics; Kevin McGrew 6-20-14

COG Test 7: Visualization

• Measure of Gv-Visualization (Vz)

•Visualization consists of two subtests that each measure Gv-Vz(visualization) via tasks that vary on task complexity and degree of “minds eye” (mental rotation) manipulations

• Within Gv, highest on cognitive complexity, g, Gv factor, and prediction of achievement

• In GIA, Gv and both Math Aptitude clusters


OL Test 3: Segmentation

• Ga (PC)

• Examinee listens to words and identifies word parts

• In OL Phonetic Coding (PC) cluster

• Highest loading test on Ga factor across all ages

• A moderate measure of g and predictor of ach. across all ages; much more so (and more cognitively complex) than Sound Blending.

• Such tasks have been reported to be strong predictors of early reading (Bouwmeester et al, 2011; Geuden & Sandra, 2003)


1.Big picture overview: Conceptual, theoretical, organizational, and design principles behind the WJ IV COG




5. “In god we trust…all others must show data:”—select COG tech. info.© Institute for Applied Psychometrics; Kevin McGrew 1-18-15

Oral Vocabulary

General Information

Number Series

Concept Formation

Verbal

Attention

Numbers Reversed

Story Recall

Visual-AudLearning

Visualization

Picture Recognition

Letter-Pat Match

Pair

Cancellation

Phon

Processing

Nonword

Repetition

Obj-Num

Sequencing

Analysis-Synthesis

Memory for Words

Number-Pat

Match




WJ III test

New test


Gc Gwm Gs Ga Glr GvGf

Clusters available from Standard Cognitive easel

(10 tests)

(#) = # tests

Cognitive Efficiency (2)

Other clusters available by combining Standard Cognitive

tests with select tests from Extended Cognitive easel (8 tests)

Cognitive Efficiency (4)

Aud. Proc. (2)

LT Ret.(2)

VisualProc. (2)

Cog. Proc.Speed(2)

Fld. Reas.(2)

Cmp. Knw.(2)

ST Work. Mem. (2)

General Intellectual Ability – g (7)

Brief Intellectual Ability (3)

Gf+GcComposite (4)

Scholastic Aptitude Clusters (each a mix of 4 CHC abilities)

New

Aud. Proc. (2)

LT Ret.(2)

VisualProc. (2)

Cog. Proc.Speed(2)

Fld. Reas.(2)

Cmp. Knw.(2)

ST Work. Mem. (2)

ST Work. Mem. (3)

Cmp. Knw.(3)

Fld. Reas.(3)

Number Facility (2)

Perc.Speed(2)

Qnt. Reas.(2)


g

Gf Gc Gwm

Glr Gv Ga Gs

Gc

© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr Kevin McGrew 4-11-14

Five primary design principles for WJ IV COG GIA

The WJ IV COG GIA cluster tests should:

1. Be the best factor indicators of each CHC broad domain

2. Be the best predictors of achievement from each CHC broad domain

3. Be the most cognitively complex indicators from each CHC broad domain

4. Be the best measures of g (general intelligence) from each CHC broad domain

5. Collectively should have a relatively equal balance of type of stimulus characteristics (verbal, numeric, figural)


WJ IV COG general ability clusters

BIA cluster

General Information

Concept Formation

Gf-Gc cluster



WJ III test

New test


Oral Vocabulary

Number Series

Verbal

AttentionStory Recall Visualization

Letter-Pat Match

Phon

Processing

GIA cluster g

WJ IV COG GIA cluster

.77 .76 .68 .63 .60 .75 .61

GIA test g-loadings (PCA: ages 6-19)


© Institute for Applied Psychometrics;


Oral Vocabulary

Number Series

Verbal


Letter-Pat Match

Phon

Processing

GIA cluster g

WJ IV COG GIA cluster



Oral Vocabulary

Number Series

Verbal


Letter-Pat Match

Phon

Processing

GIA cluster g

.18 .17 .14 .12 .12 .17 .11

Median test g-weights for GIA cluster

g


Gf Gwm

Glr Gv Ga Gs

Gc

Oral Vocabulary

General Information

Number Series

Concept Formation

Verbal

Attention

Numbers Reversed

Story Recall

Visual-AudLearning

Visualization

Picture Recognition

Letter-Pat Match

Pair

Cancellation

Phon

Processing

Nonword

Repetition

The WJ IV Cognitive CHC broad ability clusters



Oral Vocabulary

General Information

Number Series

Concept Formation

Verbal

Attention

Numbers Reversed

The WJ IV Cognitive CHC “extended” broad ability clusters

Picture Vocabulary

Analysis-Synthesis

Obj-Num

Sequencing

Oral Language battery


g

Gf Gc Gwm

Glr Gv Ga Gs

Gc

© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP) Dr Kevin McGrew 4-11-14

The primary action is at the narrow ability level

The WJ IV narrow CHC ability clusters

QuantitativeReas (RQ)

Speed ofLex Access (LA)

PhoneticCoding (PC)

PerceptualSpeed (P)

Number Series

Letter-Pat Match


Picture Vocabulary

Picture Vocabulary

Sound Blending

SegmentationOral Language battery

Retrieval

Fluency

Rapid Picture Naming

Analysis-Synthesis

Aud Mem Span (MS)

Memory for Words

Number-Pat

Match

Oral Vocabulary

Vocabulary(VL)



Number-Pat

Match

The WJ IV COG clinical clusters and one more CHC narrow ability cluster

Number Facility (N)

Numbers Reversed

Gf Glr Gv Ga GsGwmGc


The WJ IV narrow CHC ability clusters(those available when OL battery used)

Speed ofLex Access (LA)

PhoneticCoding (PC)


Picture Vocabulary

Picture Vocabulary

Sound Blending

SegmentationOral Language battery

Retrieval

Fluency


Aud MemSpan (MS)

Memory for Words

Oral Vocabulary

Vocabulary(VL)

Oral Comp

Understanding Directions Listening

Ability (LS)

Gc Glr Gv Ga GsGwmGc


Perc SpdP (2)

Qnt ReasRQ (2)

VocabVL (2)

List AblLS (2)

AMemSpMS (2)

Sp Lex AcMS (2)

Num FacN (2)

Phon CodPC (2)

Narrow CHC ability clusters (8)

Aud Proc(2)

LT Ret(2)

VisualProc (2)

Cog ProcSpeed(2)

Fld Reas(2)

CmpKnw(2)

ST Work Mem (2)

ST Work Mem (3)

CmpKnw(3)

Fld Reas(3) Broad CHC ability clusters (10)

Gf Gs Ga Glr GvGwmGc

WJ IV CHC broad and narrow ability clusters


Gc Gwm Gs Ga Glr GvGf

WJ IV Scholastic Aptitude Cluster Organization

Visualization(Vz)

NumbersReversed

(WM)

OralVocabulary

(LD/VL)

Analysis-Synthesis(RG/RQ)

PairCancellation

(P/EF)

Visualization(Vz)

Oral Vocabulary

(LD/VL)

NumberSeries (RQ)

Num PatternMatching

(P)

PhonologicalProcessing

(PC)

OralVocabulary

(LV/VL)

VerbalAttention

(WM)

Num PatternMatching

(P)


(PC)

OralVocabulary

(LD/VL)

VerbalAttention

(WM)

Num PatternMatching

(P)


(PC)

OralVocabulary

(LV/VL)

Story Recall(MM)

Num PatternMatching

(P)


(PC)

OralVocabulary

(LD/VL)

Concept Formation

(I)

ReadingBroad ReadingReading CompReading Comp-ExtReading FluencyReading Rate

Basic Rdg Skills

WritingBroad WritingWritten Expression

Basic Writing Skills

MathBroad MathMath Calc Skills

Math Prob Solving

WJ IV Ach Clusters

Grw/Gq domain general

Grw domain specific

Gq domain specific


One WJ IV design objective was to use the most contemporary

measurement model of an evolving CHC theory of human cognitive

abilities

“Beyond CHC” – CHC plus contemporary neurocognitive and information processing

research


Evolution of CHC Theory in the WJ IV

•WJ (1977): Scientific-Empirical (pragmatic)

•WJ-R (1989): Extended Cattell-Horn Gf-Gc Theory

•WJ III (2001): CHC Theory

•WJ IV (2014): Beyond CHC Theory


Intelligence Testing Related

Research:Levels of

theoretical reductionism and

explanation

White matter tract organization,

integrity & efficiency

-rate of neural oscillations-neural synchronization-Reaction-time and temporal g-ERP’s (e.g., ABR)

PMA1

T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9T1 T12T10 T11

PMA2 PMA3 PMA4 …etc

…etc

G1 G2 G3

…etc

g ?

(Consensus Cattell-Horn-Carroll Hierarchical Three-Stratum Model)

-Human Connectome-Functional brain networks (Bressler & Menon, 2010)

-“Rich club” network hubs-P-FIT model

(Adapted from conceptual distinctions of Earl Hunt, 2011)




The WJ IV COG psychometric model


Key questions

How can research at these

levels inform interpretation of

the WJ IV psychometric

model indicators (i.e., the tests)?


CHC Theory Described and Refined (v2.5)

Gsm has been renamed Gwm at the round table of cognitive CHC abilities

During the past two decades, and the last decade in particular, cognitive neuroscience has indicated that the more narrow Gsm definition was outdated and incorrect (Dehn, 2008).

Working memory refers to a dynamic, temporary storage system that allows information to be held immediate awareness and be manipulated.

Working memory refers to individual differences in both the capacity (size) of primary memory and to the efficiency of attentional control mechanisms that manipulate information within primary memory.

Short-term memory refers to tasks that involve significant storage but only minimal processing or manipulation.


Attentional Control (AC). The ability to focus on task-relevant stimuli and ignore task-irrelevant stimuli. The ability to regulate intentionality and direct cognitive processing. Sometimes referred to as spotlight or focal attention, focus, control of attention, executive controlled attention or executive attention.

Memory for Sound Patterns (UM). Ability to retain (on a short-term basis) auditory codes such as tones, tonal patterns, or speech sounds.

Speed of Lexical Access (LA). Ability to rapidly and fluently retrieve words from an individual's lexicon; verbal efficiency or automaticity of lexical access.

Word Fluency (FW). Ability to rapidly produce words that share a phonological (e.g., fluency of retrieval of words via a phonological cue) or semantic feature (e.g., fluency of retrieval of words via a meaning-based representation). Also includes the ability to rapidly produce words that share non-semantic features (e.g., fluency of retrieval of words starting with the letter “T”.

Proposed changes/additions to CHC narrow ability taxonomy

The CHC abilities of attentional

control (AC) and speed of lexical access (LA) (and

the WJ IV tests of these abilities)

draw from these three levels

Working Memory

Long-Term Memory

Storage Retrieval

Central Executive (Executive

functions or control?

• Inhibit•Shift•Update

PerceptionSensation

Efficiency of Attentional Control = Working Memory Capacity Complex cognitive processing.

????

Focus of Attention

Information processing(mechanical models)

Central Executive (Executive

functions or control?

• Inhibit•Shift•Update

Working Memory

Focus ofattention

•Focus•Attentional Control

•Working Memory•Executive Functioning

Executive control theory

Hunt (2011) refers to this as the working memory—attention

complex


© Institute for Applied Psychometrics, Dr. Kevin

S. McGrew, 012314

Attention

Motor Power, Speed & Timing

(Gp,Gps)

(feedback loop)

Central Executive

Working Memory Capacity (WMC) = Efficiency of Attentional Control

(AC)

Gs=Attentional Fluency

Learning (storage) efficiency (Glr)

Retrieval fluency (Glr)

Focus of Attention

Short-Term Working Memory (Gwm)

Sensory & PerceptualSystems

Gf = Complexity of Reasoningwithin Working Memory

(feedback loop)

Beyond CHC TheoryAdapted from Schneider & McGrew

(2012, 2013)

Visual (Gv)

Auditory (Ga)

Tactile (Gh)

Kinesthetic (Gk)

Olfactory (Go)

Motor Control

(Note: e.g.., Gv, Ga, etc. are not simple visual perceptual or sensory processing but the complexity of visual processing that a person can handle)

Gt = Speed of Elem.Perc. Processing

Cognitive Processing Speed (Gs)

Acquired Knowledge Systems (aka, long-term memory)

Etc. (what)

Etc. (how)

Etc. (what)

Etc. (how)

Motor Sequences

(what)

Motor Sequences

(how)

Grw (what)

Grw(how)

Gc(what)

Gc (how)

Nonverbal (e.g., motor)

Cognitive

Environmental Input

Includes both tacit andexplicit knowledge systems;

declarative (what) and procedural (how) knowledge

Cognitive performance

Motor performance



S. McGrew, 012314

The working memory-attentional complex system is a resource limited (constrained) system: The information “bottleneck”


Motor Power, Speed & Timing

(Gp,Gps)

(feedback loop)

Learning (storage) efficiency (Glr)

Retrieval fluency (Glr)

Sensory & PerceptualSystems

(feedback loop)

Beyond CHC TheoryAdapted from Schneider & McGrew

(2012, 2013)

Visual (Gv)

Auditory (Ga)

Tactile (Gh)

Kinesthetic (Gk)

Olfactory (Go)

Motor Control

(Note: e.g.., Gv, Ga, etc. are not simple visual perceptual or sensory processing but the complexity of visual processing that a person can handle)

Gt = Speed of Elem.Perc. Processing

Cognitive Processing Speed (Gs)

Acquired Knowledge Systems (aka, long-term memory)

Etc. (what)

Etc. (how)

Etc. (what)

Etc. (how)

Motor Sequences

(what)

Motor Sequences

(how)

Grw (what)

Grw(how)

Gc(what)

Gc (how)

Nonverbal (e.g., motor)

Cognitive

Environmental Input

Cognitive performance

Motor performance



S. McGrew, 012314

(Parameters are median values across 6 WJ IV age groups: Broad+narrow bottom-up model)

Lexical Access

(LA)

Gc

Gc tests

.43

Gwm

Gwm tests

.48

Retrieval Fluency

.71

Phonological Processing

.40

Ga


.41

Gs

Speed of Lexical Access (LA). Ability to rapidly and

fluently retrieve words from an individual's lexicon;

verbal efficiency or automaticity of lexical

access.

Gc/Gwm (broad) influenced Speed of LexicalAccess (LA) narrow factor


Auditory Processing (Ga) abilities should no longer be considered the Rodney Dangerfield of CHC abilities

School psych. and SLD have had a myopic “lamp post-search ” blinder focus on only one part of the very broad domain of Ga

There has been an explosion of research (since Carroll’s 1993 treatise) that has identified potentially new important and cognitively complex Ga narrow abilities


Remember that there was a paucity of Ga factor studies when Carroll completed his 1993 treatise


The WJ IV Auditory Processing (Ga) cluster is not your father's Ga measure

WJ IV still has the Oldsmobile Ga (Phonetic Coding) in OL: COG now has more cognitively

complex Ga measures

The WJ IV has taken a broader contemporary view of the domain of Ga


Auditory Processing (Ga) abilities, when properly measured, should have a prominent chair at the

roundtable of cognitive CHC abilities


Loadings on first unrotated common factor

CommunalityEstimates

Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI) 0.809 0.654

Auditory Processing (Ga) 0.804 0.646

Fluid Reasoning (Gf) 0.804 0.646

Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI) 0.800 0.639

Comprehension-Knowledge (Gc) 0.779 0.607

Short-Term Work. Memory (Gwm) 0.764 0.584

Working Memory Index (WMI) 0.749 0.562

Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) 0.683 0.466

Visual Processing (Gv) 0.604 0.365

Processing Speed Index (PSI) 0.569 0.323

Cog. Processing Speed (Gs) 0.537 0.288

1-factor (unrotated) common-factor solution for WJ IV COG / WISC-IV composite scores (n=173)


-2 -1 0 1 2

-2

-1

0

1

2

GIA

GC

GF

GWM

GS

GA

GLR

GV

VCI

PRI WMIPSI

2 MDS solution for WJ IV / WISC-IVcomposite and g-scores (n=173)

•The WJ IV GIA score is as good (better?) a measure of general intelligence (g) as the WISC-IV FS IQ when defined by g-loadings and MDS cognitive complexity analysis.

• The WJ IV Ga cluster is a measure of complex cognitive abilities; comparable to WJ IV & WISC-IV Gf/PRI composites.

•The WJ IV measures cognitive abilities not represented in the WISC-IV (Ga, Glr, and possibly Gv).

Measures closer to the center of the radex of more cognitively

complex

FSIQ


One WJ IV design objective was to increase the cognitive complexity requirements for

selected tests and clusters to provide greater ecological validity and interpretive relevance

of the measures.


What is cognitive complexity?

CHC factor breadth

Degree of g-loading

Complicated(Does not

necessarily equal)

Factorial complexity


Cognitive complexity

• Increase the information processing demands of the tests within a specific narrow CHC domain.

• Not to be confused with factorial complexity• Design tests that place greater demands on:

• Cognitive information processing (cognitive load)• Greater allocation of key cognitive resources (working

memory or attentional control)• The involvement of more cognitive control or executive

functions

WJ IV cognitive complexity design approach based on work of Lohman & Larkin (2011)


Approach 1. Increasing the cognitive complexity of a test is often accomplished by making the test a mixed measure of more than one narrow CHC ability (factorially complex mixed CHC measures)

One design objective in the WJ IV was to increase the cognitive complexity requirements for

selected tests and clusters to provide greater ecological validity and interpretive relevance of

the measures.


Most contemporary CHC designed individual tests have focused on developing relatively pure measures of each cognitive ability (mental pulley)

Gf Gwm Ga Gv

Gc Gs Glr

Analogy: Think of general intelligence (g) as a system of relatively independent cognitive abilities (relatively construct “pure” pulleys)

working together to deal with a specific cognitive task load


In this approach a test is designed to be a mixed measure of two (or more) cognitive abilities (mental pulleys; Gf + Gv)

Gf + Gv

Gf + Gv Gwm Gs Ga Glr Gc

Approach 1 to developing cognitively complex tests: Construct factorially complex measures (a system of pulleys from 2 or

more domain functions working in combination).


Gf + Gv

Gf + Gwm + Gc + Gq Ga Glr Gv

Approach 1 example

Wechsler Arithmetic test


One design objective in the WJ IV was to increase the cognitive complexity requirements for selected tests and

clusters to provide greater ecological validity and interpretive relevance of the measures.

Approach 2. A second approach is to increase the complexity of information processing demands of the tests within a specific narrow CHC domain (Lohman & Larkin, 2011; McGrew, 2012). This second form of cognitive complexity, not to be confused with factorial complexity, places greater demands on cognitive information processing (cognitive load), requires greater allocation of key cognitive resources (working memory or attentional control), and invokes the involvement of more cognitive control or executive functions (Arend, Colom, Botella, Contreras, Rubio, & Santacreu, 2003; Jensen, 2011; Lohman & Larkin, 2011; Marshalek, Lohman, & Snow; 1983). This second approach to increasing test cognitive complexity was a primary design principle for the WJ IV.


Ga Gv Gwm Gs Gf Glr Gc

Approach 2 is to increase the complexity of information processing demands of the tests within a specific CHC cognitive functional domain. Tasks are still as relatively pure a measure of the CHC domain as possible but there is a deliberate increase in the number of “mini-pulleys” (cognitive information component complexity) that work together within the CHC domain. This was the primary approach used for certain WJ IV tests.


The WJ IV COG is not your father’s intelligence test!

The WJ IV COG GIA is a much more cognitively complex (and high g) measure of intelligence

How did we do this?

What evidence do we have to support this conclusion?© Institute for Applied Psychometrics;


• Which 7 tests should be combined for the GIA (g) cluster?

• Which 2 tests from each CHC factor domain should be combined for the 7 CHC factor clusters?

Two major COG

design questions


GIA -Standard

GIAOral Vocabulary

General Information

Number Series

Concept Formation

Verbal

Attention

Numbers Reversed

Story Recall

Visual-AudLearning

Visualization

Picture Recognition

Letter-Pat. Match.

Pair

Canc.

Phon.

Processing

Nonword

Repetition

Primary WJ III and WJ IV COG tests and Clusters

Tests in WJ IV COG clusters

Tests in WJ III COG Clusters

WJ IV GIA

WJ III GIA-Standard

* Visual Matching is renamed Number-Pattern Matching in WJ IV

Comparison of composition of primary WJ III and WJ IV COG CHC and GIA clusters

(WJ III Spatial Relations is half of

WJ IV Visualization)

(WJ IV Oral Vocab. was part of WJ III Verbal

Comp.)

Auditory Attention

Decision

Speed

Analysis-Synthesis

Retrieval

Fluency

Spatial

Relations

Verbal Comp.

Memory for Words

Sound

Blending

Visual

Matching *

Gc Gwm GsGaGlr GvGf

g


WISC-IV WAIS-IV WPPSI-III KABC-II SB-5 DAS-IIFS IQ FS IQ FS IQ FCI FS IQ GCA

(n=174) (n=177) (n=99) (n=50) (n = 50) (n = 49)WJ IV g-measures

General Intellectual Ability (GIA) 0.86 0.84 0.72 0.77 0.80 0.83

Brief Intellectual Ability (BIA) 0.83 0.74 0.76 0.79

Gf-Gc Composite 0.83 0.78 0.71 0.82

Select concurrent validity evidence: Correlations of WJ IV primary COG g-scores with external measures

Conclusion: The WJ IV GIA, BIA and Gf-Gc composite clusters demonstrate strong validity evidence as measures of general intelligence when the criterion are the global composite/total scores from other major IQ batteries in the field

WJ III GIA other IQ score correlations were from .67 to .76

Common factor loadings


ORLVOC 0.73 0.54PHNPRO 0.71 0.51OBJNUM 0.69 0.48ORLCMP 0.67 0.45SNDAWR 0.66 0.43UNDDIR 0.64 0.41VRBATN 0.63 0.40CONFRM 0.63 0.40PICVOC 0.63 0.39MEMWRD 0.61 0.37NUMSER 0.61 0.37ANLSYN 0.59 0.35NUMREV 0.59 0.35VISUAL 0.58 0.34SEGMNT 0.58 0.34SENREP 0.58 0.34GENINF 0.57 0.32STYREC 0.56 0.32NWDREP 0.55 0.31RETFLU 0.54 0.30LETPAT 0.53 0.28SNDBLN 0.51 0.26NUMPAT 0.50 0.25VAL 0.49 0.24RPCNAM 0.48 0.23PAIRCN 0.47 0.22PICREC 0.44 0.20

Single common factor (g-factor)

extracted from 27 WJ IV / WISC-IV

tests (n=173)


Common factor loadings


ORLVOC 0.73 0.54

VISUAL 0.58 0.34

PHNPRO 0.71 0.51SNDBLN 0.51 0.26

STYREC 0.56 0.32VAL 0.49 0.24

VRBATN 0.63 0.40NUMREV 0.59 0.35

CONFRM 0.63 0.40NUMSER 0.61 0.37

LETPAT 0.53 0.28NUMPAT 0.50 0.25

DK ?

DK ?

+25% -- A factor of 2.0 more



-03%

+03%

5 of the 7 corresponding WJ IV GIA CHC tests

collectively share 41% more variance with

psychometric g (than the WJ III GIA tests)


• Which 7 tests should be combined for the GIA (g) cluster?

• Which 2 tests from each CHC factor domain should be combined for the 7 CHC factor clusters?

Two major COG

design questions

© Institute for

Applied

Psychometrics;


The Cognitive tests were evaluated on the basis of four (of five total) quantifiable COG design criteria

Data augmented by Siskel and Ebert informal rating system

Average CHC factor loadings

Average achievement correlation across domains

Average degree of g-loadings

Average degree of relative cognitive complexity

(Average across ages 6-90+)© Institute for Applied Psychometrics; Kevin McGrew 1-18-15

Comprehension – Knowledge(Gc)

Language Dev.(LD)

General Information(K0)

Lexical Knowledge(VL)

ORLVOC* GENINFPICVOC

* Test in GIA

Author/expertCHC narrow factor

classifications

(Gc cluster)(Voc. Cluster-

LD/VL)


Induction(I)

General SequentialReasoning (RG)

QuantitativeReasoning (RQ)

ANLSYNCONFRMNUMSER* (Gf cluster)(Gf-Extcluster)

(Quantitative Reasoning Cluster-RQ)

* Test in GIA

Fluid Reasoning(Gf)

Author/expertCHC narrow

factor classifications


Cognitive Processing Speed(Gs)

Attentional Control (AC)

PerceptualSpeed (P)

PAIRCNNUMPATLETPAT*

* Test in GIA


(Gs cluster)

(Perceptual Speed cluster-P)




Short-Term WorkingMemory (Gwm)

Work. MemoryCapacity (WM)

Memory Span(MS)

Attentional Control(AC)

MEMWRD

SENREP

(Auditory MemorySpan Cluster-MS)

OBJNUMVRBATN* NUMREV

* Test in GIA

(Gwm cluster)

(Gwm-Ext cluster)




LearningEfficiency

RetrievalFluency

Long-Term Retrieval(Glr)

* Test in GIA

VALSTREC* (Glr cluster)

AssociativeMemory (MA)

MeaningfulMemory (MM)

Speed of LexicalAccess (LA)

RETFLURPCNAM (Speed of Lexical

Access cluster-LA)




AuditoryProcessing (Ga)

PhoneticCoding (PC)

NWDREPPHNPRO*

* Test in GIA


Memory for Sound Patterns (UM)

SEGMNT SNDBLN

(Ga cluster)

(Phonetic Coding cluster-PC)



Memory Span (MS)


Nonword Repetition

(PC/UM-MS)

Phonological Processing

(PC/Glr-LA)

Sound Awareness

(PC)

Sound Blending

(PC)

Segmentation

(PC)

Auditory Processing (Ga)

Short Term

Wrk Mem (Gwm)

Most complex

Least complex

COG

OL

An auditory processing battery ?


Visual Processing(Gv)

Visual Memory(MV)

Visualization(Vz)

* Test in GIA

PICRECVISUAL* (Gv cluster)







3. “Dare to compare”--“regress for success:” Intracognitivevariations and PSW Gf-Gc composite hybrid comparison procedures




All WJ IV Comparison and variation procedures are grounded in a

common statistical model

Note: All score distributions represent real scores for all 9-13 year old norming subjects from

WJ IV co-normed sample. Actual

prediction models vary by age or grade (developmentally shifting prediction models).

Note: The SD of predicted and difference score distributions

are not 15. They would only be 15 if GIA/Brd. Rdg. correlation

was perfect (1.0).

Illustration of procedures used to develop ALL WJ IV variation/comparison difference (standard score) norms (GIA-Broad Reading ACH example)

-E

(minus)

B Actual Broad Reading scores

in WJ IV norm data

40 80 120 160100 14060

-1 to +1 SD

SD = 15

AGeneral Intellectual

Ability (GIA) scores in WJ IV norm data (predictor score)

40

80

12

01

60

10

01

40

60

-1 t

o +

1

SDSD

= 1

5

=(equals)

FDistribution of Actual-Predicted GIA/Broad Reading Difference

Scores in WJ IV norm data

(SD of difference

score distribution allows for

specification & evaluation of significant S/W with SD

and PRmetrics)

-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40

-1 to +1SD

SD = 10.8

D Predicted (criterion)

Broad Reading scores in WJ IV norm data

40 80 120 160100 14060

-1 to +1 SD

SD = 11.6

Comparison Options

• GIA/Achievement

• Scholastic Aptitude/Achievement

• Gf-Gc/Achievement/other cog.-ling. abilities

• Broad Oral Language/Achievement

• Academic Knowledge/Achievement

Five ability/achievement difference score procedures to help compare ability to current levels of achievement

[Procedures account for regression-to-the mean (and how it varies by age)]

(Third method PSW SLD models)

Variation Options

• Intra-cognitive based on COG Tests 1—7

• Intra-achievement • Based on ACH Tests 1—6

• Based on Academic Skills, Academic Fluency, and Academic Applications clusters

• Intra-oral language based on OL Tests 1—4

Four variation procedures to help document an individual’s pattern of strengths and weaknesses.

Based on “core” tests in each battery

The WJ IV Gf-Gc comparison procedure has clear implications for operationalizing this model

Common elements of third-method pattern of strength and weakness (PSW) approach to SLD identification (Flanagan et al.)


Math (Gq)

Reading (Grw)

Writing

(Grw)

Other CHC cog abilities

Oral Lang.

abilities

Possible strength

and weakness

target domains

Conceptual summary of new WJ IV Gf-Gc strength and weakness comparison procedure and options

These are perceptual/processing andcognitive efficiency CHC abilities asper Schneider and McGrew (2012)

Gf-GcComposite(predictor)

Cattell’s “provincial powers”(king and queen of intelligence)


GlrGsmGfGs Gt

General SpeedMemory

Domain-Independent General Capacities

Acquired Knowledge

Gkn

GqGrw

Gc GpGh

Sensory

Sensory-Motor Domain-Specific Abilities

Motor

Parameters of Cognitive Efficiency

GaGo

Gv

Gk

Gps

Conceptual Grouping

Functional Grouping

Proposed changes in functional and conceptual organization of broad CHC ability domains (Schneider & McGrew, 2012)

These are perceptual/processing andcognitive efficiency CHC abilities asper Schneider and McGrew (2012)Cattell’s “provincial powers”

(king and queen of intelligence)

(Possible criterion or predicted target scores)

Gf-Gc “hybrid” procedure

Predicted Target Cluster

Score

Regression-based prediction models that account for

regression-to-the-mean

Gf-Gc Composite(Predictor score)

GcGf

WJ IV Gf-Gc cognitive Ability cluster

Grw Gq

Brief Achievement

Academic Skills

Academic Fluency

Academic Applications

Broad Achievement

Reading

Brd. Rdg.

Rdg. Flu.

Bas. Rdg. Sk.

Rdg. Cmp.(& Ext)

Rdg. Rate

Wr. Lng.

Brd. Wr. Lg.

Bas. Wr. Sk.

Wr. Exp.

Phn.-Grp.Kn.

Math.

Brd. Math

Math Cal.Sk.

Math Pr. Slv.

CHC achievement abilities and WJ IV clusters

Phon. Cod. Sp. Lx. Acc.

ST Wk. Mem.(&Ext)

Cog .Pr.Spd. LT Retrieval Visual Proc.Aud. Proc.

Perc. Spd.

Cognitive Efficiency (& Ext)

Aud. Mm. Sp.

Other CHC broad/narrow cognitive and orallanguage abilities and WJ IV clusters

Gwm Gs Ga Glr Gv

Number Facility

(equals)

SD and PR for calculateddifference score

Difference Score

(Compare to distribution of difference scores in WJ IV norm sample to determine significant

strength or weakness)

Actual Target Cluster Score(minus)

Back to comparison menu

Gf (Other): Average of other (non-Gf) 6 core tests

GcGf

NumberSeries

Gwm Gs Ga Glr

OralVocabulary

VerbalAttention

Letter-Pat.Matching

Phono.Processing

StoryRecall

Visual-ization

PredictedNum. Series

NumberSeries

-(minus)

=(equals)

DifferenceScore

SD and PR for calculated difference scores

(Compare difference score to distribution of difference

scores in WJ IV norm sample to determine significant strength or weakness)

ConceptFormation

Analysis-Synthesis

FluidReasoning

FluidReason-Ext

Quant.Reasoning

NumberMatrices

Other Gf tests Other Gf clustersThe same Gf (Other) score is used to evaluate obtained-predicted difference scores for any other optional Gf test or cluster that is available after testing.

Procedure is repeated for each CHC domain—each CHC core test removed and relevant “other” average computed, etc.

Similar procedures available for OL and ACH based on each batteries core tests and optional tests and clusters.

OralVocabulary

VerbalAttention

Letter-Pat.Matching

Phono.Processing

StoryRecall

Visual-ization

Core cognitive tests for intra-cognitive variation procedure

Explanation of WJ-IV intra-variation procedure: Cognitive example


Gv

General Intellectual Ability (GIA) cluster (Predictor score)

General Intellectual Ability (GIA) /Achievement comparison procedure

Gwm Gs Ga Glr GvGcGf

CHC Cognitive Abilities and WJ IV COG and OL Clusters

Regression-based prediction models that account for regression-to-the-mean (and how it varies by age)

Predicted Target

Cluster Score

Actual Target Cluster Score(minus) (equals)

Difference Score

SD and PR for calculated difference score

(Compare to distribution of difference scores in WJ IV

norm sample to determine significant strength or

weakness)

Oral Language

Grw Gq

Brief Achievement

Academic Skills

Academic Fluency


Broad Achievement

Reading

Brd. Rdg.

Rdg. Flu.

Bas. Rdg. Sk.

Rdg. Cmp.(& Ext)

Rdg. Rate

Wr. Lng.

Brd. Wr. Lg.

Bas. Wr. Sk.

Wr. Exp.

Phn.-Grp.Kn.

Math.

Brd. Math

Math Cal.Sk.

Math Pr. Slv.

(Possible criterion or predicted target scores)Broad Oral Language

Oral Expression

Listening Comprehension

CHC Achievement Abilities and WJ IV

clusters

Academic Knowledge

CHC Cognitive Abilities and WJ IV COG and OL Clusters


Oral Language/Achievement comparison procedure

SD and PR for calculated

difference scores

(Compare to distribution of difference scores in WJ IV

norm sample to determine significant strength or

weakness)

Broad Oral Language *

(Predictor score)

Sp. Lx. Acc.Phon. Cod.


Regression-based prediction models

that account for regression-to-the-mean (and how it

varies by age)Predicted

Target Cluster Score


Difference Score

Academic Skills

Academic Fluency


Brd. Rdg.

Rdg. Flu.

Bas. Rdg. Sk.

Rdg. Cmp.(& Ext)

Rdg. Rate

Wr. Lng.

Brd. Wr. Lg.

Bas. Wr. Sk.

Wr. Exp.

Phn.-Grp.Kn.

Brd. Math

Math Cal.Sk.

Math Pr. Slv.

Reading Math.

Grw Gq

CHC Achievement Abilities and WJ IV ACH clusters

(Possible criterion or predicted

target scores)

Academic Knowledge(* English or Spanish)


Grw Gq

Brief Achievement

Academic Skills

Academic Fluency


Broad Achievement

Reading

Brd. Rdg.

Rdg. Flu.

Bas. Rdg. Sk.

Rdg. Cmp.(& Ext)

Rdg. Rate

Wr. Lng.

Brd. Wr. Lg.

Bas. Wr. Sk.

Wr. Exp.

Math.

Brd. Math

Math Cal.Sk.

Math Pr. Slv.

CHC achievement abilities and WJ IV clusters

Academic Knowledge(Predictor

score)

Academic Knowledge/Achievement comparison procedure

Predicted Target Cluster

Score


SD and PR for calculated difference score

Difference Score


(Compare to distribution of difference scores in WJ IV norm sample to determine significant

strength or weakness)


CHC cognitive abilities and WJ IV cognitive and oral language clusters

Sp. Lx. Acc.Phon. Cod.

Regression-based prediction models that account for regression-to-the-mean


OM

PC US UM U8 URU1U9

UP UL

Vz SR MV CS SS CF IM PI LE IL PN

Sen

sory

-Mo

tor

Do

mai

n-

Spec

ific

Ab

iliti

es

Sensory

The CHC Periodic Table of Human

Abilities

Adapted from Schneider & McGrew (2012) and McGrew, LaForte and Schrank (2014)

I RG RQ

WM MS AC

R3 PT MT

P N R9

R1 R2 R4 R7 IT

MA MM M6 FI FA FE SP F0 NA FW LA FF FX

Ideas Words Figures

Do

mai

n-I

nd

epen

den

t C

apac

itie

sGlr-Learning efficiency

Glr-Retrieval fluency

Broad ability

Narrow ability

© Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP)Dr. Kevin McGrew 3-28-14

KM A3

LD VL K0 LS CM MY

KL K1 A5 MK KF LP BC

V RD RC RS WA SG EU WS

Acq

uir

ed K

no

wle

dge

Syst

ems

K2

PI P2 P3 P4 P6 P7 A1

U1U9

UP UL

Motor

For fun: Available atwww.iqscorner.com

•Relative degree of cognitive complexity:High Medium (M/M) Low

•CHC broad factor loading

•Test name abbreviation

•CHC narrow ability code(s)

Te

Go

All information based on analysis of WJ IV norm

data from ages 6 thru 19

•BIS (modified) content/stimuluscharacteristic

NumSeries

(RQ)

.91 .62 H .80

•g-loading

•Reliability

#

.62 .73 .63•Median correlations with R, M, W


.78

.75

.71

.60

.71

.66

.76

OralCmp

(LS)PicVoc

(VL)

.82 .69 M .76 .81 .65 M .82

RpdPcNm

(NA)RetFlu

(FI)

.80 .57 M .42 .85 .51 L .24

SndAwr

(PC)Segment.

(PC)SndBlnd

(PC)

.71 .67 H .52 .93 .60 M.74 .88 .53 L .62

SenRep

(MS/LS)

.83 .60 M .48UndDir

(WM)

.86 .66 M .64

CO

G C

HC

clu

ster

g-l

oa

din

gs

NumSeries

(RQ)

ConFrm

(I)

AnlSyn

(RG)

.91 .62 H .80 .92 .62 M .62.90 .65 M .66

OralVoc

(LD/VL)GenInfo

(K0)

.89 .74 H .86 .84 .59 M .78

StryRec

(MM)VisAudLrg

(MA)

.93 .58 M .54 .96 .52 L .48

LetPtMat

(P)NumPtMat

(P)PairCan

(P/AC)

.90 .55 M .77 .89 .49 L .60.84 .53 M .80

Visual.

(Vz)PicRec

(MV)

.83 .60 M .70 .71 .47 L .50

PhnProc

(PC/LA)NonWrRep

PC,UM/MS

.83 .75 H .59 .90 .58 M .18

VerbAttn

(WM/AC)ObNmSq

(WM)NumRev

(WM)MemWrd

(MS)

.86 .65 H .76 .86 .61 M .36.89 .71 M .74 .82 .63 M .58

.15

.18

.50

.29 .26

.18 .30

.29Gq

.32 GrwCOGACH

OL

.62 .73 .63 .43 .48 .35 .29 .46 .33

.42 .42 .50 .32 .41 33 .39 .45 .41 .29 .27 .31

.31 .37 .42 .29 .30 .29

.51 .55 .48 .51 .55 .58 .34 .45 .34

.57 .56 .52 .47 .44 .40

.36 .46 .37 .25 .23 .27

.53 .50 .53 .34 .25 .41

.43 .35 .41 .44 .42 .38

.37 .37 .35 .33 .24 .25

.51 .42 47 .47 .42 .41

.53 .49 .55 .43 .38 .42 .29 .27 .27

#

#


Select WJ IV COG technical information

COG/OL Mdn.Clusters r r2General Intellectual Ability 0.76 0.58Brief Intellectual Ability 0.73 0.53Gf-Gc Composite 0.68 0.46

Comprehension-Knowledge (Gc) 0.58 0.34Comprehension-Knowledge-Ext (Gc3) 0.58 0.34Fluid Reasoning (Gf) 0.64 0.41Fluid Reasoning-Ext (Gf3) 0.59 0.35Short-Term Working Memory (Gwm) 0.53 0.28Short-Term Working Memory-Ext (Gwm3) 0.52 0.27Cognitive Processing Speed (Gs) 0.49 0.24Auditory Processing (Ga) 0.51 0.26Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) 0.43 0.18Visual Processing (Gv) 0.38 0.14Quantitative Reasoning (Gf-RQ) 0.59 0.35Auditory Memory Span (Gsm-MS) 0.47 0.22Number Facility (Gs-N) 0.62 0.38Perceptual Speed (Gs-P) 0.58 0.34Cognitive Efficiency (Gsm+Gs) 0.55 0.30Cognitive Efficiency-Ext (Gsm+Gs) 0.66 0.44

Oral Language 0.55 0.30Broad Oral Language 0.57 0.32Oral Expression 0.54 0.29Listening Comprehension 0.55 0.30Phonetic Coding (Ga-PC) 0.44 0.19Speed of Lexical Access (Glr-LA) 0.37 0.14Vocabulary (Gc-LD/VL) 0.60 0.36

WJ IV COG and OL cluster

correlations with WJ IV

ACH clusters: Correlations

across 15 ACH clusters (ages 6-90+)

Select validity evidence: Correlations of WJ IV GIA, Gf-Gc composite, and BIA clusters with

Wechsler FS and GAI IQ scores

General Intellectual Ability (GIA)

Brief Intellectual Ability

Gf-Gc composite

WISC-IV WAIS-IV

.86 .81

.83 .80

.83 .83

Correlations are from WJ IV and WISC-IV (n = 174) and WAIS-IV (n = 177) concurrent validity studies (McGrew, LaForte, & Schrank, 2014). Wechsler FS/GAI correlations are .95 (WISC-IV) and .94 (WAIS-IV) in these samples.

FS GAI FS GAI

.84 .78

.74 .68

.78 .76


Select validity evidence: Correlations of WJ IV BIA and Gf-Gc composite clusters with GIA

Brief Intellectual Ability (BIA)

Gf-Gc composite

General Intellectual Ability (GIA)

.93

.87

Average correlations calculated across norm sample ages 6 through 90+

WISC-IV WISC-IV WISC-IV WISC-IVVCI PRI WMI PSI

WJ IV Measures (Gc) (Gf/Gv) (Gwm) (Gs)

CHC Factor ClustersComprehension-Knowledge (Gc) 0.79Fluid Reasoning (Gf) 0.70Short-Term Working Memory (Gwm) 0.72Processing Speed (Gs) 0.55Auditory Processing (Ga)Long-Term Retrieval (Glr)Visual Processing (Gv) 0.55

Narrow Ability & Clinical ClustersQuantitative Reasoning (RQ) 0.65Auditory Memory Span (MS) 0.52Number Facility (N) 0.57Perceptual Speed (P) 0.56

Note: Bold font values represent correlations between best comparable CHC broad composites.Red bold font are interesting correlations given the Wechsler composites composition.WISC-IV/WAIS-IV PRI and WMI composites are not comparable--different mixtures of CHC abilities. (see next slide)

WJ IV COG /WISC-IV CHC composite select score correlations ( n = 174)

Block Design-Gv-VzPic Cocnepts – Gf-IMatrix Reasoning – Gf-I

Digit Span – Gwm-MS/MWLetter-Num Seq – Gwm-MW

WAIS-IV WAIS-IV WAIS-IV WAIS-IVVCI PRI WMI PSI

WJ IV Measures (Gc) (Gv/Gf) (Gwm/Gq) (Gs)

CHC Factor ClustersComprehension-Knowledge (Gc) 0.74Fluid Reasoning (Gf) 0.57Short-Term Working Memory (Gwm) 0.67Processing Speed (Gs) 0.44Auditory Processing (Ga)Long-Term Retrieval (Glr)Visual Processing (Gv) 0.57

Narrow Ability & Clinical ClustersQuantitative Reasoning (RQ) 0.54 0.53Auditory Memory Span (MS)Number Facility (N) 0.65 0.52Perceptual Speed (P) 0.61

Note: Bold font values represent correlations between best comparable CHC broad composites.Red bold font are interesting correlations given the Wechsler composites composition.WISC-IV/WAIS-IV PRI and WMI composites are not comparable--different mixtures of CHC abilities. Noted Wechsler correlations with tests classifications based on Flanagan et al., 2013.

WJ IV COG / WAIS-IV CHC composite select score correlations ( n = 177)

Block Design-Gv-VzVisual Puzzles – Gv-VzMatrix Reasoning – Gf-I

Digit Span – Gwm-MS/MWArithmetic – Gwm-WM/Gf-RQ (Gq?)

KABC-II KABC-II KABC-II KABC-II KABC-IIKnow./ Plan./ Sim./ Seq./ Lrng./

WJ IV Measures GcIndex

GfIndex

Gv Index

GsmIndex

GlrIndex

CHC Factor ClustersComprehension-Knowledge (Gc) 0.82Fluid Reasoning (Gf) 0.46Short-Term Working Memory (Gwm)

0.42

Processing Speed (Gs)Auditory Processing (Ga)Long-Term Retrieval (Glr) 0.64Visual Processing (Gv) 0.37

Note: Bold font values represent correlations between best comparable CHC broad composites.Low to moderate corresponding Gf, Gv and Gwm correlations most likely reflect narrow ability content differences in composites (classifications based on Reynolds et al., 2007 and Flanagan et al., 2013).

WJ IV COG / KABC-II composite select score correlations (n = 50)

Pattern Reasoning - Gf-I/Gv-Vz Story Completion – Gf-RG

Number Recall – Gsm-MSWord Recall – Gsm-MS/WM?

Rover – Gv-SSTriangles – Gv-Vz

SB-5 SB-5 SB-5 SB-5 SB-5Fluid Quant. Vis.-Spatial Working

Know. Reas. Reas. Proc. MemoryWJ IV Measures (Gc) (Gf) (Gf-RQ) (Gv) (Gwm)

CHC Factor ClustersComprehension-Knowledge (Gc) 0.68 0.75 0.72 0.72Fluid Reasoning (Gf) 0.67 0.56 0.66 0.66Short-Term Working Memory (Gwm) 0.62 0.69Cognitive Processing Speed (Gs)Auditory Processing (Ga) 0.68 0.73 0.72Long-Term Retrieval (Glr)Visual Processing (Gv) 0.40

Note: Bold font values represent correlations between best comparable CHC broad composites.Red bold font are interesting correlations given the SB-5 composites composition.The convergent/divergent validity of the SB-5 CHC composite scores has been seriously questioned (Canivez, 2008; DiStefano & Dombrowski, 2006; Keith & Reynolds, 2010) as well as very high composite score intercorrelations in the SB-5 technical manual (.65 to .75)

WJ IV COG / SB-5 CHC composite select score correlations (n = 50)

Dr. Kevin McGrew internet resources

(@iqmobile)

http://www.iqscorner.com/

http://www.iqscorner.com/

http://www.iapsych.com/IAPWEB/iapweb.html

http://www.iapsych.com/IAPWEB/iapweb.html

the wj iv and beyond chc theory: kevin mcgrew's nasp mini-skills workshop

Education

gfgcgwmglrgvgagsgc institute

tests of cognitive ability

measuresthe wj

human abilities

chc model

miniskills workshop

chc theory nasp

cog clusters