Cognitive profile analysis in school psychology: history, issues, and continued concerns
Abstract
Intelligence testing remains a fixture in school psychology training and practice. Despite their popularity, the use of IQ tests is not without controversy and researchers have long debated how these measures should be interpreted with children and adolescents. A controversial aspect of this debate relates to the utility of cognitive profile analysis, a class of interpretive methods that encourage practitioners to make diagnostic decisions and/or treatment recommendations based on the strengths and weaknesses observed in ability score profiles. Whereas numerous empirical studies and reviews have challenged long-standing assumptions about the utility of these methods, much of this literature is nearly two decades old and new profile analysis methods (e.g., XBA, PSW) have been proffered. To help update the field's understanding of these issues, the present review traces the historical development of cognitive profile analysis and (re)introduces readers to a body of research evidence suggesting new and continued concerns with the use of these methods in school psychology practice. It is believed that this review will serve as a useful resource to practitioners and trainers for understanding and promoting a countering view on these matters.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There are longstanding conceptual and psychometric limitations and concerns relating to cognitive profile analyses, such as scatter, strengths and weaknesses, and discrepancy scores in school psychology that also are relevant and important for clinical neuropsychology.
“There are longstanding conceptual and psychometric limitations and concerns relating to cognitive profile analyses, such as scatter, strengths and weaknesses, and discrepancy scores in school psychology (McGill et al., 2018) that also are relevant and important for clinical neuropsychology.”
From Cognitive weaknesses or impairments on the NIH toolbox cognition battery in children and adolescents: base rates in a normative sample and proposed methods for classification (2025) · cites this paper as McGill et al., 2018
Cites
The Rediscovery of Bifactor Measurement Models
Reise, S. P. (2012) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1080/00273171.2012.715555 · Cited by 2,112 · see citing works
Evaluating Bifactor Models: Calculating and Interpreting Statistical Indices
Rodriguez, A., Reise, S. P., & Haviland, M. G. (2016) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/met0000045 · Cited by 1,599 · see citing works
Scoring and Modeling Psychological Measures in the Presence of Multidimensionality
Reise, S. P., Bonifay, W. E., & Haviland, M. G. (2013) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2012.725437 · Cited by 1,069 · see citing works
Bifactor Modeling and the Estimation of Model-Based Reliability in the WAIS-IV
Gignac, G. E., & Watkins, M. W. (2013) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1080/00273171.2013.804398 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Diagnosing Learning Disabilities and Writing Remedial Prescriptions
Bannatyne, A. (1968) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/002221946800100403 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Canivez, G. L., Watkins, M. W., & Dombrowski, S. C. (2016) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000238 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Self-citationGresham, F. M., & Witt, J. C. (1997) · School Psychology Quarterly · doi:10.1037/h0088961 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Canivez, G. L., Watkins, M. W., & Dombrowski, S. C. (2017) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000358 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Self-citationDombrowski, S. C., Canivez, G. L., Watkins, M. W., & Alexander Beaujean, A. (2015) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2015.10.009 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Self-citationReynolds, M. R., & Keith, T. Z. (2017) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2017.02.005 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Schmidt, F. L. (2017) · Archives of Scientific Psychology · doi:10.1037/arc0000033 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Kranzler, J. H., Benson, N., & Floyd, R. G. (2015) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000119 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Watkins, M. W., Canivez, G. L., Dombrowski, S. C., McGill, R. J., Pritchard, A. E., Holingue, C. B., & Jacobson, L. A. (2022) · Applied Neuropsychology: Child · doi:10.1080/21622965.2021.1875827 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
“Historically, subtest scores were used for these comparisons but “contemporary approaches have minimized emphasis of comparisons between subtests” (Farmer & Kim, 2020, p. 2) due to “lack of evidence supporting subtest analysis” (McGill et al., 2018, p. 110).”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationStephenson, 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
Becker, A. B. C., Maurer, J., Daseking, M., & Pauls, F. (2024) · Journal of Intelligence · doi:10.3390/jintelligence12010006 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
McGill, R. J., Dombrowski, S. C., & Canivez, G. L. (2025) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.23457 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“That is not, assuming the name associated with a score presumes that score only captures only that psychological dimension or that dimension can be located by a test (i.e., uni-dimensional [McGill et al. 2018]).”
Self-citationCook, N. E., Iverson, G. L., & Karr, J. E. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1473095
- Authors
- McGill, R. J., Dombrowski, S. C., & Canivez, G. L.
- Affiliations
- William & Mary (US)
- Rider University (US)
- Eastern Illinois University (US)
- Corresponding author
- McGill, Ryan J.
- Venue
- Journal of School Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-12
- Volume
- 71
- Pages
- 108-121
- ISSN
- 0022-4405 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2901268327
- Cited by
- 91
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 5
- FWCI
- 1.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of School Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- The Keep (Eastern Illinois University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational and Psychological Assessments
- Keywords
- intelligence testing, school psychology practice, diagnostic decision-making
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Child, Cognition, Humans, Intelligence Tests, Psychology, Educational, Schools, History, 20th Century, History, 21st Century
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.
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
