Cited by 293Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyPsychological Testing and Assessment

Reliability and validity of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test in studies of autism.

Ozonoff, Sally·1995·Neuropsychology

Abstract

Three studies were conducted with the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) with autistic individuals. In Study 1, it was found that the traditional WCST is a highly reliable test for use with both autistic children and children with learning disabilities over time. In Study 2, the equivalence of the s

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0894-4105.9.4.491

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Children with ASD may be less motivated by social than non-social rewards.

    “This finding is consistent with previous research examining the effect of reward type on task performance, which indicates that children with ASD may be less motivated by social than non-social rewards [480,565-568].”
  • The traditional WCST scoring system cannot distinguish among these cognitive processes.

    “None of these processes can be distinguished by the traditional task scoring system [24–26].”

    From The paradox of cognitive flexibility in autism (2009) · cites this paper as [25]

  • WCST failure can result from deficits in multiple cognitive processes, including learning from feedback, maintaining the goal, noticing a needed strategy change, inhibiting a previous response, switching responses, and sustaining responding.

    “Failure on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Task can be because of deficits in various cognitive processes including learning from feedback, keeping the goal of the task in mind, noticing that a change in strategy is necessary, inhibiting a previous motor response, switching to another response and sustaining responding over time.”

    From The paradox of cognitive flexibility in autism (2009) · cites this paper as [25]

  • Failure on the WCST may be due to social-motivational factors.

    “For example, failure on the WCST might be because of social-motivational factors [25,26]”

    From The paradox of cognitive flexibility in autism (2009) · cites this paper as [25]

  • Individuals with ASD perform better on a given task when presented by computer rather than live administration by an experimenter, whereas typically-developing comparison groups perform similarly across modalities.

    “multiple studies have reported that individuals with ASD perform better on a given task when presented by computer rather than live administration by an experimenter, whereas typically-developing comparison groups perform similarly across modalities”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 7 · Cited by 293

Authors
Ozonoff, S.
Affiliations
University of Utah (US)
Corresponding author
Ozonoff, Sally
Venue
Neuropsychology
Published
1995-10
Volume
9
Issue
4
Pages
491-500
ISSN
  • 0894-4105 (ISSN-L)
  • 1931-1559
OpenAlex
W2062665923
Cited by
293
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 25
FWCI
1.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Neuropsychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, autism spectrum disorder, test reliability, test validity, neuropsychological assessment, children with autism, learning disabilities, test equivalence

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