WAIS-IV and WISC-IV Structural Validity: Alternate Methods, Alternate Results. Commentary on Weiss et al. (2013a) and Weiss et al. (2013b)
Abstract
Weiss, Keith, Zhu, and Chen (2013a) and Weiss, Keith, Zhu, and Chen (2013b), this issue, report examinations of the factor structure of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV) and Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fourth Edition (WISC-IV), respectively; comparing Wechsler Hierarchical Model (W-HM) and Cattell–Horn–Carroll Hierarchical Model (CHC-HM), subtest cross-loadings, and factorial invariance between clinical and normative groups from the respective standardizations. Both studies suffer from a number of theoretical, methodological, and practical problems that significantly limit conclusions and recommendations for practitioner interpretations of these instruments. Additional analyses and research are required to better inform practitioners for WAIS-IV and WISC-IV use.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
Sensitivity of Goodness of Fit Indexes to Lack of Measurement Invariance
Chen, F. F. (2007) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705510701301834 · Cited by 12,217 · see citing works
Reporting Structural Equation Modeling and Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results: A Review
Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., & King, J. (2006) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.3200/joer.99.6.323-338 · Cited by 6,937 · cited 1× · see citing works
“A discussion of each of these issues is considered basic, required information in manuscripts that report CFA as the primary statistical technique (Schreiber et al., 2006).”
BackgroundHuman Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor-Analytic Studies
Carroll, J. B. (1993) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511571312 · Cited by 4,121 · see citing works
Watkins, M. W. (2010) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/a0020043 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Golay, P., Reverte, I., Rossier, J., Favez, N., & Lecerf, T. (2013) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/a0030676 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Watkins, M. W., Wilson, S. M., Kotz, K. M., Carbone, M. C., & Babula, T. (2006) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164406288168 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Karr, J. E., Areshenkoff, C. N., Rast, P., Hofer, S. M., Iverson, G. L., & Garcia-Barrera, M. A. (2018) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000160 · Cited by 637 · 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-citationCanivez, G. L. (2014) · School Psychology Quarterly · doi:10.1037/spq0000032 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Self-citationFactor Structure of the 10 WISC-V Primary Subtests Across Four Standardization Age Groups
Dombrowski, S. C., Canivez, G. L., & Watkins, M. W. (2018) · Contemporary School Psychology · doi:10.1007/s40688-017-0125-2 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Self-citationCanivez, G. L., McGill, R. J., Dombrowski, S. C., Watkins, M. W., Pritchard, A. E., & Jacobson, L. A. (2020) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191118811609 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Self-citationStructural Validity of the WISC-IV for Students With Learning Disabilities
Styck, K. M., & Watkins, M. W. (2016) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/0022219414539565 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Kranzler, J. H., Benson, N., & Floyd, R. G. (2015) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000119 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Canivez, G. L., Dombrowski, S. C., & Watkins, M. W. (2018) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.22138 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Self-citationMcGill, R. J., Dombrowski, S. C., & Canivez, G. L. (2025) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.23457 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“Accordingly, Canivez and Kush (2013) suggested that these model re ‐ specifications appeared to be “ an attempt to improve the fit of the model to the data (and not the theory) ” (p. 163).”
InfluentialSelf-citationCognitive Aging Revisited: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the WAIS-5
Winter, E. L., Dale, B. A., Maharjan, S., Lando, C. R., Larsen, C. M., Courville, T., & Kaufman, A. S. (2025) · Journal of Intelligence · doi:10.3390/jintelligence13070085 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Canivez, G. L., & Kush, J. C.
- Affiliations
- Eastern Illinois University (US)
- Duquesne University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-04
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 157-169
- ISSN
- 0734-2829 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-5144
- OpenAlex
- W2130329291
- Cited by
- 69
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 11.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment (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
- WAIS-IV, WISC-IV, factor structure, structural validity, measurement invariance, intelligence test interpretation
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
