Is the Cattell–Horn–Carroll-based factor structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fifth Edition (WISC-V) construct invariant for a representative sample of African–American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students ages 6 to 16 years?
Open accessAbstract
Since the inception of testing, the examination of test bias has been discussed and debated in the literature. As new tests are developed or old tests are revised, part of the standardization process involves the examination of gender and ethnic item bias. The exploration of construct invariance across different ethnic and gender groups, however, is not part of the test construction or validation process. This study investigated factorial invariance of the Cattell–Horn–Carroll (CHC)-based factor structure of the most recent version of the Wechsler tests—the Wechsler Intelligence Scale For Children—Fifth Edition (WISC-V; Wechsler 2014a )—across a representative sample of African–American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students ages 6–16 years ( N = 2637). Specifically, confirmatory factor analysis was used to explore whether increasing sets of equality constraints fit the underlying theoretical structure of the WISC-V equally well. Results showed that all five CHC broad abilities, in addition to the general factor g , demonstrated structural invariance for all six ethnic/gender groups. Findings from this study suggest that, despite mean score differences, neuropsychologists can be confident that the WISC-V factor structure is equivalent for the different subgroups and scores are, thus, equally meaningful for African–American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students. These results are of value, given the frequent use of intelligence tests, especially of the WISC-V, when making important and, oftentimes, life-changing decisions regarding diagnosis and access or denial to special programs and classes.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This study used multi-group confirmatory factor analysis to test whether the CHC-based factor structure of the WISC-V is construct invariant across African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students ages 6–16. It found configural, metric, and intercept invariance for all five CHC broad abilities and g across the six ethnic/gender groups, despite mean score differences.
Key findings
- Configural, metric, and intercept invariance were established for all five CHC factors—Gc, Gf, Gsm, Gv, and Gs—and for the second-order g factor across all six ethnic/gender groups.
- Fit indexes supported invariance: configural CFI = 0.98, RMSEA = 0.032; metric CFI = 0.98, RMSEA = 0.032; first-order intercept CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.044 (ΔCFI = 0.02, ΔRMSEA = 0.012); second-order intercept CFI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.051 (ΔCFI = 0.01, ΔRMSEA = 0.007).
- The sample was N = 2637: 777 Caucasian males, 830 Caucasian females, 188 African-American males, 221 African-American females, 308 Hispanic males, and 313 Hispanic females.
- The paper reports mean score differences across groups but concludes that WISC-V scores are “equally meaningful” for African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students ages 6–16.
Methods
- Participants were children and adolescents ages 6–16 from the WISC-V norming sample, stratified to correspond with 2012 US Census proportions on age, gender, ethnicity, geographic region, and parent educational attainment as a proxy for socioeconomic status.
- The analysis used multi-group confirmatory factor analysis based on mean and covariance structure (MG-MACS) with increasingly restrictive equality constraints: configural, metric, and intercept invariance; residual invariance was not assessed.
- The model included 16 core and supplementary WISC-V subtests organized under five CHC broad abilities (Gc, Gf, Gsm, Gv, Gs) plus g; Glr was excluded because its three subtests are experimentally dependent, and Arithmetic was cross-loaded on Gc and Gsm in addition to Gf based on theory and modification indexes.
Limitations
- The paper states that parent educational attainment was not controlled because the aim was to evaluate ethnic bias as tests are actually used; future studies should replicate across different socioeconomic levels.
- The paper states that it assessed construct invariance only at the latent factor and g level, not differential item functioning at the subtest level, and did not validate the sixth CHC factor, Glr.
- The paper states that results are not generalizable to other ethnic or age groups and that the sample consisted primarily of normally developing children, with children most commonly referred for psychological testing underrepresented; the text also makes evident that African-American and Hispanic subgroup sample sizes were much smaller than the Caucasian subgroup.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
0 of 33 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Findingown data
Metric invariance for the second-order factor loadings was established.
“However, based on the good CFI and RMSEA values, metric invariance was established.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
All five CHC broad abilities, in addition to the general factor g, demonstrated structural invariance for all six ethnic/gender groups.
“Results showed that all five CHC broad abilities, in addition to the general factor g, demonstrated structural invariance for all six ethnic/gender groups.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Configural, metric, and intercept invariance were established for every CHC factor and g across all three ethnic/gender group comparisons.
“In sum, configural, metric, and intercept invariance were established for every CHC factor and g across all three ethnic/gender group comparisons.”
- Also stated in: § Conclusion · plain
“Based on the very good CFI and RMSEA values and the nonsignificant or small changes observed in CFI and RMSEA values as more constraints were added, it was concluded that configural, metric, and intercept invariance were established for all six groups for each CHC factor and for g.”
- Also stated in: § Conclusions · hedged
“Overall, results of the current study provide evidence for the construct invariance of the most recent version of the Wechsler tests-the WISC-V (Wechsler 2014a)-across six different ethnic/gender groups.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Wechsler 2014a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Also stated in: § Conclusion · plain
- Findingown data
Mean scores between ethnic/gender groups differ, sometimes substantially, on the WISC-V CHC factors and g.
“Even though the mean scores between the groups differ, sometimes substantially, fit indexes suggest structural equivalence for all five broad CHC factors and for g.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Intercept invariance of both the first- and second-order factor loadings was established.
“Based on the CFI and RMSEA values, intercept invariance of both the first-and second-order factor loadings could be concluded.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Findingown data
Metric invariance for the first-order factors was established.
“Thus, metric invariance for the first-order factors was established.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premiseown data
The present results are consistent with Carroll's (1993) assertion that CHC theory is a universal theory of intelligence and applicable to different gender and ethnic groups.
“Furthermore, the present results are consistent with Carroll's (1993) assertion that CHC theory is a universal theory of intelligence and applicable to different gender and ethnic groups.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Carroll's (1993) source
- Interpretationown data
The study results satisfy APA standards 7.1 and 7.8 for the fair use of the WISC-V with these subgroups in terms of psychometric validity.
“This satisfies APA standards 7.1 and 7.8 for the fair use of the test with these subgroups in terms of its psychometric validity.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The factor structure of the WISC-V based on CHC theory is invariant across a representative sample of African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students ages 6 to 16.
“Overall, results show a consistent factor structure of the WISC-V across African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students from age 6 to 16.”
- Also stated in: § Conclusions · hedged
“Findings suggest that the factor structure of the WISC-V based on CHC theory was invariant across a representative sample of African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students ages 6-16.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § Conclusions · hedged
- Interpretationown data
Construct invariance of the broad ability factors and g across different ethnic/gender groups provides even more evidence for the generalizability of CHC theory to various subgroups.
“Given that construct invariance of the broad ability factors and g was established across different ethnic/gender groups provides even more evidence for the generalizability of CHC theory to various subgroups.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The equality of meaning of WISC-V scores extends to separate groups of males and females within each of the three ethnic groups.
“and (b) that equality extends to separate groups of males and females within each of these three ethnic groups.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The structural invariance found indicates that WISC-V scores are equally meaningful for students of African-American, Caucasian, and Hispanic origin.
“Importantly, the structural invariance found in this study indicates (a) that the scores are equally meaningful for students of African-American, Caucasian, and Hispanic origin”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Study design and conductreasoning
Children most commonly referred to psychological testing were underrepresented in this study.
“However, those children that are most commonly referred to psychological testing are the precise children and adolescents who were underrepresented in this study.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Mean score difference studies have demonstrated different mean scores in terms of magnitude on the WISC-V for different ethnic and gender groups.
“Mean score difference studies have demonstrated different mean scores in terms of magnitude on the WISC-V for different ethnic and gender groups (e.g., Kaufman et al. 2016;Wechsler 2014b;Weiss et al. 2015).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Kaufman et al. 2016 source
- cites Wechsler 2014b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Weiss et al. 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationown data
Based on the results, school psychologists and neuropsychologists can have increased confidence that WISC-V scores, when interpreted based on CHC theory, measure what they are supposed to measure for African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female children ages 6 to 16.
“Based on the results of this study, school psychologists and neuropsychologists can have increased confidence that the WISC-V test scores, when interpreted based on CHC theory, measure what they are supposed to measure for African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female children ages 6 to 16.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Study design and conductreasoning
Parent educational attainment was not controlled.
“Parent educational attainment was not controlled, as the aim of this study was to evaluate ethnic bias based on how cognitive tests are actually used in society.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Inferences drawn from WISC-V scores are similarly meaningful for African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students ages 6 to 16.
“Overall, results suggest that inferences drawn from the WISC-V scores are similarly meaningful for African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students ages 6 to 16.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The results are not generalizable to other ethnic or age groups.
“although construct invariance was validated for African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian males and female students ages 6-16, such results are not generalizable to other ethnic or age groups.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation
The simple comparison of mean scores is not a statistically sound way of determining a test's psychometric properties.
“Indeed, this approach to test bias is flawed; the simple comparison of mean scores is not a statistically sound way of determining a test's psychometric properties, as a number of researchers have highlighted (e.g., Reynolds and Lowe 2009;Reynolds and Keith 2013).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Reynolds and Lowe 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Reynolds and Keith 2013 source
- Interpretationown data
Findings provide evidence for continued use of the WISC-V for assessment of intellectual ability for African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian students, both male and female.
“Findings provide evidence for continued use of the WISC-V when it comes to the assessment of intellectual ability for African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian students, both male and female.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Results of the study provide further empirical evidence for the continued use of the WISC-V with African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female subgroups.
“Results of the study provide further empirical evidence for the continued use of the WISC-V with those subgroups.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- May combine two claims. 10
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 12
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationMean score discrepancies may occur for reasons mostly related to differences in socioeconomic status and home environment, and have little to do with the test's psychometric properties.
“Discrepancies in mean scores may occur for a variety of reasons, most of which relate to differences in socioeconomic status and home environment (e.g., Kaufman et al. 2016;Weiss et al. 2006Weiss et al. , 2015)), but have little to do with the test's psychometric properties”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Kaufman et al. 2016 source
- cites Weiss et al. 2006
- cites Weiss et al. 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationPrior studies that examined test bias across different population subgroups have generally found no gender or ethnic group bias.
“Despite much discussion and debate in the literature with regard to the fairness of test instruments, those studies that have looked at test bias across different population subgroups have generally found no gender or ethnic group bias (e.g., Edwards & Oakland, 2006;Keith 1999;Keith et al. 1999;Scheiber 2016a, b;Scheiber & Kaufman, 2015;Reynolds et al. 2015;Trundt 2013).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationAt the school-age level, females outperform males in processing speed.
“(3) females outperform males in processing speed (Keith et al. 2011).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Keith et al. 2011 source
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone givenThe study only focused on the five core CHC factors measured by the WISC-V, including Gc, Gs, Gf, Gsm, and Gf.
“this study only focused on the five core CHC factors measured by the WISC-V, including Gc, Gs, Gf, Gsm, and Gf; however, future researchers should also validate the sixth CHC factor measured by the WISC-V (Glr).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationGender differences on cognitive tests tend to be small, with the exception of processing speed, which shows a decided female advantage across the lifespan.
“Generally speaking, gender differences on cognitive tests tend to be small, with the exception of processing speed, which shows a decided female advantage across the lifespan (Kaufman et al. 2016;Keith et al. 2011;Lichtenberger and Kaufman 2013).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedMay combine two claims.
Study design and conductnone givenThe sample consisted primarily of normally developing children, with proportional representation of exceptional children.
“the sample consisted primarily of normally developing children, with proportional representation of exceptional children.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
PremisecitationCognitive tests are impacted by factors including income, home environment, quality of schooling, and cultural opportunities that are impossible to control for but have been found to influence cognitive test scores significantly.
“Cognitive tests are impacted by a number of different factors (including income, home environment, quality of schooling, cultural opportunities) that are impossible to control for but have been found to influence cognitive test scores significantly (Weiss et al. 2006(Weiss et al. , 2015)).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Weiss et al. 2006
- cites Weiss et al. 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationOn the WISC-V, researchers have observed no meaningful gender differences on the Full Scale IQ and only trivial gender differences on most indexes, except on the Processing Speed Index.
“On the WISC-V, researchers have observed no meaningful gender differences on the FSIQ and only trivial gender differences on most indexes, except on the Processing Speed Index.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedMay combine two claims.
PremisecitationOn the WISC-V, Caucasians averaged a Full Scale IQ standard score of 103.5, Hispanics 94.4, African-Americans 91.9, and Asians 108.6.
“For example, on the most recent version of the Wechsler tests-the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition (WISC-V; Wechsler, 2014a)-Caucasians averaged a standard score of 103.5, Hispanics averaged 94.4, and African-Americans averaged 91.9 on the Full Scale IQ (FSIQ).Asians outperformed all three groups averaging 108.6 (Weiss et al. 2015).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Weiss et al. 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
PremisecitationMean score discrepancies may occur for an array of reasons, most of which relate to home environment, and they tell little about test bias or test fairness.
“Despite the frequent emphasis in research on mean ethnic differences on global scores and mean gender differences on specific abilities, such discrepancies may occur for an array of reasons, most of which relate to home environment (Weiss et al. 2015), and they tell us little about test bias or test fairness.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Weiss et al. 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationAt the school-age level, males outperform females in visual processing.
“At the school-age level, the most consistent findings on specific abilities are as follows: (1) males outperform females in visual processing (Kaufman and Kaufman 2004;Keith et al. 2011;Jirout and Newcombe 2015;Palejwala and Fine 2014);”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductnone givenAll procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000.
“All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975Declaration of , as revised in 2000 (5) (5).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataThe WISC-V factor structure is equivalent for African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students, and scores are equally meaningful for these subgroups.
“Findings from this study suggest that, despite mean score differences, neuropsychologists can be confident that the WISC-V factor structure is equivalent for the different subgroups and scores are, thus, equally meaningful for African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian male and female students.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationMean gender differences on cognitive tests are generally trivial compared to ethnic group differences and often close to zero on global scales.
“Mean gender differences have also been found to vary across the lifespan but generally tend to be trivial compared to ethnic group differences and often are close to zero on global scales (e.g., Kaufman and Kaufman 2004;Kaufman et al. 2016;Keith et al. 2008;Reynolds et al. 2008).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductcitationInformed consent was obtained from all participants.
“Informed consent was obtained from all participants for being included in the study, as per WISC-V Technical and Interpretative Manual (Wechsler 2014b).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Wechsler 2014b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductnone givenThe sample was matched on 2012 US Census data in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, geographic region, and parental educational attainment.
“perhaps most importantly, the sample was matched on 2012 US Census data in terms of important background variables, including age, gender, ethnicity, geographic region, and parental educational attainment (as a proxy for socioeconomic status).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationAt the school-age level, very young females outperform very young males in crystallized ability.
“(2) very young females outperform very young males in crystallized ability (Kaufman and Kaufman 2004;Keith et al. 2011);”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Kaufman and Kaufman 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Keith et al. 2011 source
The paper relies on this without support.
This is the first study to have established factorial invariance across different ethnic/gender groups together and the first study to provide evidence for structural equivalence by gender or ethnicity of the WISC-V.
“This is the first study to have established factorial invariance across different ethnic/gender groups together and the first study to provide evidence for structural equivalence by gender or ethnicity of the WISC-V.”
“This is the first construct validity study of the WISC-V conducted with ethnic/gender groups together.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Coding is assigned two incompatible missing-data counts
MinorThe same missing-data description says Coding had between 8 and 13 missing data points and between 2 and 5 missing data points.
“Similarities, Symbol Search, Digit Span, Picture Span, and Coding had between 8 and 13 missing data points”
“Vocabulary, Block Design, Visual Puzzles, Matrix Reasoning, Figure Weights, and Coding all had between 2 and 5 missing data points.”
Configural chi-square is reported as its chi-square-to-df ratio
MinorThe Results give χ2(582) as 1.459, but Table 3 reports χ2 = 848.854 with 582 degrees of freedom. The prose value is approximately 848.854 divided by 582, not the chi-square statistic.
“The configural invariance analysis yielded a significant chi-square value (χ 2 (582) = 1.459, p < .001)”
“| Configural invariance | | 848.854 582 | | | <.001 | 0.98 0.00 | 0.032 | 0.027-0.037 |”
Cites
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266 · see citing works
Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5 · Cited by 16,280 · see citing works
The standards for educational and psychological testing.
Eignor, D. R. (2013) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/14047-013 · Cited by 6,975 · see citing works
Measurement Invariance, Factor Analysis and Factorial Invariance
Meredith, W. (1993) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02294825 · Cited by 4,536 · see citing works
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children
Miles-Mason, E. (2018) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781483392271.n537 · Cited by 4,133 · see citing works
Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor-Analytic Studies
Carroll, J. B. (1993) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511571312 · Cited by 4,121 · see citing works
Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. (1989) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.456 · Cited by 3,928 · see citing works
Human cognitive abilities a survey of factor-analytic studies
Carroll, J. B. (2004) · Cited by 3,396 · see citing works
Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing
(2007) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781412952644.n432 · Cited by 3,137 · see citing works
Applied Multivariate Research: Design and Interpretation
Meyers, L. S., Gamst, G. C., & GUARINO, A. J. (2017) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781071802687 · Cited by 2,883 · see citing works
Comparative Fit Indices in Structural Models
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 2,044 · see citing works
The Handbook of School Psychology
Reynolds, C. R., & Gutkin, T. B. (1982) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,864 · see citing works
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children
Park, S. E., & Demakis, G. J. (2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24612-3_1035 · Cited by 1,091 · see citing works
TEACHER’S CORNER: Testing Measurement Invariance of Second-Order Factor Models
Chen, F. F., Sousa, K. H., & West, S. G. (2005) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1203_7 · Cited by 1,032 · cited 1× · see citing works
“As Δχ2 can easily result in a significant degradation in model fit as it detects minor or inconsequential differences, more weight was placed on the CFI and RMSEA values to conclude model fit for the invariance analysis (Byrne, 1989; Chen et al. 2005; Reynolds and Keith 2013).”
MethodContingencies of Self-Worth in College Students: Theory and Measurement.
Crocker, J., Luhtanen, R. K., Cooper, M. L., & Bouvrette, A. (2003) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.894 · Cited by 1,018 · see citing works
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children--Fifth Edition
Wechsler, D. (2024) · PsycTESTS Dataset · doi:10.1037/t79359-000 · Cited by 541 · see citing works
The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence.
Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. S. (2012) · Cited by 513 · see citing works
Essentials of WISC-IV Assessment
Lichtenberger, E. O., & Kaufman, A. S. (2000) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 473 · see citing works
A note on multiple sample extensions of the RMSEA fit index
Steiger, J. H. (1998) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519809540115 · Cited by 365 · see citing works
van der Vegt, G. S., Emans, B. J. M., & de Vliert, E. V. (2001) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00085.x · Cited by 326 · see citing works
Building Blocks for Developing Spatial Skills: Evidence From a Large, Representative U.S. Sample
Jirout, J. J., & Newcombe, N. S. (2015) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797614563338 · Cited by 301 · see citing works
Keith, T. Z., Fine, J. G., Taub, G. E., Reynolds, M. R., & Kranzler, J. H. (2006) · Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research · Cited by 197 · see citing works
Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition
Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2014) · Encyclopedia of Special Education · doi:10.1002/9781118660584.ese1324 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Keith (2006) · doi:10.1080/02796015.2006.12088005 · Cited by 162 · see citing works
Keith, T. Z., Reynolds, M. R., Patel, P. G., & Ridley, K. P. (2008) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2007.11.001 · Cited by 156 · see citing works
Human cognitive abilities. A survey of factoranalytic studies
Elshout, J. J. (1995) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/0001-6918(95)90085-3 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Intelligent Testing with the WISC®‐V
(2016) · doi:10.1002/9781394259397 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Scheiber, C., Reynolds, M. R., Hajovsky, D. B., & Kaufman, A. S. (2015) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.21827 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Self-citationReynolds, M. R., Scheiber, C., Hajovsky, D. B., Schwartz, B. N., & Kaufman, A. S. (2015) · The Journal of Genetic Psychology · doi:10.1080/00221325.2015.1036833 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Self-citationKeith, T. Z. (1999) · School Psychology Quarterly · doi:10.1037/h0089008 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
abuses and misuses in testing black children
Williams, R. L. (1971) · The Counseling Psychologist · doi:10.1177/001100007100200314 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
WISC-IV Advanced Clinical Interpretation
(2006) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-088763-7.x5000-1 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
(2006) · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Reynolds, M. R., Keith, T. Z., Ridley, K. P., & Patel, P. (2007) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2007.06.003 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Gender differences in latent cognitive abilities in children aged 2 to 7
Palejwala, M. H., & Fine, J. G. (2014) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2014.11.004 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Essentials of Evidence-Based Academic Interventions
Wendling, B. J., & Mather, N. (2008) · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Keith, T. Z., Reynolds, M. R., Roberts, L. G., Winter, A. L., & Austin, C. A. (2011) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2011.06.008 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Factorial Invariance of Woodcock-Johnson III Scores for African Americans and Caucasian Americans
Edwards, O. W., & Oakland, T. D. (2006) · Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment · doi:10.1177/0734282906289595 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Keith, T. Z., Quirk, K. J., Schartzer, C., & Elliott, C. D. (1999) · Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment · doi:10.1177/073428299901700305 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Measurement and Statistical Issues in Child Assessment Research
Reynolds, M. R., & Keith, T. Z. (2013) · Oxford Handbooks Online · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199796304.013.0003 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Technical and Practical Issues in the Structure and Clinical Invariance of the Wechsler Scales
Weiss, L. G., Keith, T. Z., Zhu, J., & Chen, H. (2013) · Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment · doi:10.1177/0734282913478050 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
WISC-V Assessment and Interpretation
Weiss, L. G., Saklofske, D. H., Holdnack, J. A., & Prifitera, A. (2016) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2012-0-00415-2 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Scheiber, C. (2015) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000236 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Self-citationWhich of the three KABC-II global scores is the least biased?
Scheiber, C., & Kaufman, A. S. (2015) · Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology · doi:10.1007/s40817-015-0004-6 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Self-citationScheiber, C. (2016) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191115624545 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Self-citationTrundt, K. M. (2013) · Texas ScholarWorks (Texas Digital Library) · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Weiss, L. G., Prifitera, A., Holdnack, J. A., & Saklofske, D. H. (2006) · WISC-IV Advanced Clinical Interpretation · doi:10.1016/b978-012088763-7/50001-2
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., Alfonso, V. C., & Dynda, A. (2014). Cognitive assessment: progress in psychometric theories, the structure of cognitive tests, and approaches to test interpretation. In D. Saklofske, V. Schwean, & C. Reynolds (Eds.), Oxford handbook of psychological assessment of children and adolescents. New York: Oxford University Press.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Impasse on Gender Differences in Intelligence: a Meta-Analysis on WISC Batteries
Giofrè, D., Allen, K., Toffalini, E., & Caviola, S. (2022) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-022-09705-1 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Stephenson, K. G., Beck, J. S., South, M., Norris, M., & Butter, E. (2021) · Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology · doi:10.1080/15374416.2020.1846543 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Fenollar-Cortés, J., & Watkins, M. W. (2018) · International Journal of School & Educational Psychology · doi:10.1080/21683603.2017.1414006 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Is the WISC-V a Fair Test for Black Children: Factor Structure in an Urban Public School Sample
Graves, S. L., Smith, L. V., & Nichols, K. D. (2020) · Contemporary School Psychology · doi:10.1007/s40688-020-00306-9 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
The cross-cultural generalizability of cognitive ability measures: A systematic literature review.
Wilson, C. J., Bowden, S., Byrne, L., Joshua, N., Marx, W., & Weiss, L. G. (2023) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2023.101751 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Dombrowski, S. C., Watkins, M. W., McGill, R. J., Canivez, G. L., Holingue, C., Pritchard, A. E., & Jacobson, L. A. (2021) · Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment · doi:10.1177/0734282920954583 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Becker, A. B. C., Maurer, J., Daseking, M., & Pauls, F. (2024) · Journal of Intelligence · doi:10.3390/jintelligence12010006 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Intelligence across humans and machines: a joint perspective
da Silveira, T. B. N., & Lopes, H. S. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1209761 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Assessing educational difficulties of students from refugee backgrounds: a case study approach
Khawaja, N. G., & Howard, G. (2020) · Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools · doi:10.1017/jgc.2020.2 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Delisle, M., & Lajoie, D. (2021) · Canadian Public Administration · doi:10.1111/capa.12440 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Stephenson, K. G., Levine, A. S., Russell, N. C. C., Horack, J. M., & Butter, E. M. (2023) · Autism Research · doi:10.1002/aur.3034 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Hajovsky, D. B., & Chesnut, S. R. (2022) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2022.05.001 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Rodríguez-Cancino, M. A., & Concha‐Salgado, A. (2023) · Journal of Intelligence · doi:10.3390/jintelligence11090180 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Trundt, K. M., Keith, T. Z., Caemmerer, J. M., et al. (2017) · Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment · doi:10.1177/0734282917698303 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Rodríguez-Cancino, M. A., Vizcarra, M. B., & Concha‐Salgado, A. (2021) · Revista Iberoamericana de Diagnóstico y Evaluación - e Avaliação Psicológica · doi:10.21865/ridep60.3.10 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Fuerst, J. G. R., Сергеевич, Ш. В., & Kirkegaard, E. O. W. (2022) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/ge4zu · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Factor structure of the new Scandinavian WISC‐V version: Support for a five‐factor model
Egeland, J., Andreassen, T. H., & Lund, O. (2021) · Scandinavian Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/sjop.12780 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Referral Outcomes From a Neurocognitive Screening Program for Pediatric Sickle Cell Disease
Karst, J. S., Miller, M., Heffelfinger, A., Newby, R., & Scott, J. (2022) · Clinical Practice in Pediatric Psychology · doi:10.1037/cpp0000431 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
An Exploration of Gender Invariance of the WISC-V Among Black Children in an Urban School District
Smith, L. V., & Graves, S. L. (2020) · Contemporary School Psychology · doi:10.1007/s40688-020-00307-8 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“For example, Scheiber (2016) created gender-race dyads to determine measurement invariance for the WISC-V.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialВасильевна, А. А., & Soliannikova, N. S. (2018) · Вестник Южно-Уральского государственного университета. Серия: Психология · doi:10.14529/psy180103 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Drozdick, L. W., & Puig, J. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108235433.012 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Egeland, J., Lund, O., & Andreassen, T. H. (2022) · Tidsskrift for Norsk psykologforening · doi:10.52734/e4t74rz6 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Bryan, V. M., & Mayer, J. D. (2020) · University of New Hampshire Scholars Repository (University of New Hampshire at Manchester)
Effect of Visuospatial Ability on E-learning for Pupils of Physics Option in Scientific Common Trunk
Marnoufi, K., Ghazlane, I., Soubhi, F. Z., et al. (2022) · International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications · doi:10.14569/ijacsa.2022.0131121
Factorial Invariance of the ASIS Across Years
Sezerel, B. B., Arslan, D., & Sak, U. (2024) · Measurement Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives · doi:10.1080/15366367.2024.2307297
- Authors
- Scheiber, C.
- Affiliations
- Denver Health Medical Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Scheiber, Caroline
- ORCID
- Scheiber, Caroline
- Venue
- Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology
- Published
- 2016-11
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 79-88
- ISSN
- 2199-2673 (ISSN-L)
- 2199-2681
- OpenAlex
- W2510393085
- Semantic Scholar
- db49dcd52735675133c2054f2c9c507e9af1baa3
- Cited by
- 25
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 1.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Keywords
- WISC-V, measurement invariance, Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory, test bias, ethnic differences, gender differences, African American students, Hispanic students, Caucasian students, intelligence testing, children and adolescents
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-29.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-29.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
