CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 19Psychometric Methodologies and TestingCognitive Abilities and TestingPsychological Testing and Assessment

Revisiting the Factor Structure of the German WISC-V for Clinical Interpretability: An Exploratory and Confirmatory Approach on the 10 Primary Subtests

Open access
Pauls, Franz, Daseking, Monika·2021·Frontiers in Psychology
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.710929PMC PMC8476749
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

With the exception of a recently published study and the analyses provided in the test manual, structural validity is mostly uninvestigated for the German version of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fifth Edition (WISC-V). Therefore, the main aim of the present study was to examine the latent structure of the 10 WISC-V primary subtests on a bifurcated extended population-representative German standardization sample (N=1,646) by conducting both exploratory (EFA; n=823) and confirmatory (CFA; n=823) factor analyses on the original data. Since no more than one salient subtest loading could be found on the Fluid Reasoning (FR) factor in EFA, results indicated a four-factor rather than a five-factor model solution when the extraction of more than two suggested factors was forced. Likewise, a bifactor model with four group factors was found to be slightly superior in CFA. Variance estimation from both EFA and CFA revealed that the general factor dominantly accounted for most of the subtest variance and construct reliability estimates further supported interpretability of the Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (FSIQ). In both EFA and CFA, most group factors explained rather small proportions of common subtest variance and produced low construct replicability estimates, suggesting that the WISC-V primary indexes were of lower interpretive value and should be evaluated with caution. Clinical interpretation should thus be primarily based on the FSIQ and include a comprehensive analysis of the cognitive profile derived from the WISC-V primary indexes rather than analyses of each single primary index.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.710929

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Confirmatory factor analyses have already indicated that a hierarchical model solution satisfactorily represents the factorial structure of the German WISC-V.

    “Since confirmatory factor analyses have already indicated a hierarchical model solution to satisfactorily represent the factorial structure of the German WISC-V (for EFA and CFA analyses and for a visualization of the model on the 10 primary subtests (see Pauls and Daseking 2021; Wechsler 2017a)”

    From Measurement Invariance of the WISC-V across a Clinical Sample of Children and Adolescents with ADHD and a Matched Control Group (2024) · cites this paper as Pauls and Daseking 2021

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 60 · Cited by 19

Research works printed but not linked: 45

  1. Beaujean A. A. (2015). John Carroll’s views on intelligence: bi-factor vs. higher-order models. J. Intelligence 3, 121– 136. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence3040121 · DOI
  2. Beaujean A. A. (2016). Reproducing the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fifth Edition: J. Psychoeduc. Assess. 34, 404– 408. doi: 10.1177/0734282916642679 · DOI
  3. Brunner M. Nagy G. Wilhelm O. (2012). A tutorial on hierarchically structured constructs. J. Pers. 80, 796– 846. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00749.x, PMID: 22091867 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Canivez G. L. Grieder S. Buenger A. (2021). Construct validity of the German Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fifth Edition: exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the 15 primary and secondary subtests. Assessment 28, 327– 352. doi: 10.1177/1073191120936330, PMID: 32613844 · DOI
  5. Canivez G. L. Watkins M. W. (2010). Investigation of the factor structure of the Wechsler adult intelligence scale - fourth edition (WAIS-IV): exploratory and higher order factor analyses. Psychol. Assess. 22, 827– 836. doi: 10.1037/a0020429, PMID: 20822259 · DOI
  6. Canivez G. L. Watkins M. W. Good R. James K. James T. (2017). Construct validity of the Wechsler intelligence scale for children-fourth UK edition with a referred Irish sample: Wechsler and Cattell-horn-Carroll model comparisons with 15 subtests. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 87, 383– 407. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12155, PMID: 28374453 · DOI
  7. Canivez G. L. Watkins M. W. McGill R. J. (2018). Construct validity of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fifth UK Edition: exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the 16 primary and secondary subtests. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 89, 195– 224. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12230, PMID: 29869412 · DOI
  8. Chen F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. 14, 464– 504. doi: 10.1080/10705510701301834 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Crawford A. V. Green S. B. Levy R. Lo W.-J. Scott L. Svetina D.. (2010). Evaluation of parallel analysis methods for determining the number of factors. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 70, 885– 901. doi: 10.1177/0013164410379332 · DOI
  10. Decker S. L. Bridges R. M. Luedke J. C. Eason M. J. (2020). Dimensional evolution of cognitive measures: methodological confounds and theoretical concerns. J. Psychoeduc. Assess. 39, 3– 27. doi: 10.1177/0734282920940879 · DOI
  11. Dombrowski S. C. Canivez G. L. Watkins M. W. (2018). Factor structure of the 10 WISC-V primary subtests across four standardization age groups. Contemp. Sch. Psychol. 22, 90– 104. doi: 10.1007/s40688-017-0125-2 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Dunn T. J. Baguley T. Brunsden V. (2014). From alpha to omega: a practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. Br. J. Psychol. 105, 399– 412. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12046, PMID: 24844115 · DOI
  13. Evers A. Hagemeister C. Høstmaelingen A. Lindley P. Muñiz J. Sjöberg A. (2013). EFPA Review Model for the Description and Evaluation of Psychological and Educational Tests. Brussels, Belgium: European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations.
  14. Fenollar-Cortés J. Watkins M. W. (2018). Construct validity of the Spanish version of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fifth Edition (WISC-VSpain). Int. J. Sch. Educ. Psychol. 7, 150– 164. doi: 10.1080/21683603.2017.1414006 · DOI
  15. Frisby C. L. Beaujean A. A. (2015). Testing Spearman’s hypotheses using a bi-factor model with WAIS–IV/WMS–IV standardization data. Intelligence 51, 79– 97. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2015.04.007 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Golay P. Lecerf T. (2011). Orthogonal higher order structure and confirmatory factor analysis of the French Wechsler adult intelligence scale (WAIS–III). Psychol. Assess. 23, 143– 152. doi: 10.1037/a0021230, PMID: 21171782 · DOI
  17. Hu L. Bentler P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 6, 1– 55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Kaiser H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 39, 31– 36. doi: 10.1007/BF02291575 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Kaufman A. S. (1994). Intelligent Testing with the WISC-III. New York, NY: Wiley.
  20. Keith T. Z. (2015). Multiple Regression and beyond: An Introduction to Multiple Regression and Structure Equation Modeling. 2nd Edn. NY: Routledge.
  21. Keith T. Z. Fine J. G. Taub G. E. Reynolds M. R. Kanzler J. H. (2006). Higher order, multisample, confirmatory factor analysis of the Wechsler intelligence scale for children-fourth edition: what does it measure? Sch. Psychol. Rev. 35, 108– 127. doi: 10.1080/02796015.2006.12088005 · DOI
  22. Lecerf T. Canivez G. L. (2018). Complementary exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the French WISC-V: analyses based on the standardization sample. Psychol. Assess. 30, 793– 808. doi: 10.1037/pas0000526, PMID: 29283593 · DOI
  23. Little T. D. Lindenberger U. Nesselroade J. R. (1999). On selecting indicators formultivariate measurement and modeling with latent variables: when “good” indicators are bad and “bad” indicators are good. Psychol. Methods 4, 192– 211. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.4.2.192 · DOI
  24. MacCallum R. C. Browne M. W. Sugawara H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychol. Methods 1, 130– 149. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Mansolf M. Reise S. P. (2017). When and why the second-order and bifactor models are distinguishable. Intelligence 61, 120– 129. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2017.01.012 · DOI
  26. Markon K. E. (2019). Bifactor and hierarchical models: specification, inference, and interpretation. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 15, 51– 69. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095522, PMID: 30649927 · DOI
  27. McDonald R. P. (2010). Structural models and the art of approximation. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 5, 675– 686. doi: 10.1177/1745691610388766, PMID: 26161883 · DOI
  28. McGill R. J. Ward T. J. Canivez G. L. (2020). Use of translated and adapted versions of the WISC-V: caveat emptor. Sch. Psychol. Int. 41, 276– 294. doi: 10.1177/0143034320903790 · DOI
  29. McGrew J. (2009). CHC theory and the human cognitive abilities project: standing on the shoulders of the giants of psychometric intelligence research. Intelligence 37, 1– 10. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2008.08.004 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Murray A. L. Johnson W. (2013). The limitations of model fit in comparing bi-factor versus higher-order models of human cognitive ability structure. Intelligence 41, 407– 422. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2013.06.004 · DOI
  31. Nevitt J. Hancock G. R. (2001). Performance of bootstrapping approaches to model test statistics and parameter standard error estimation in structural equation modeling. Struct. Equ. Model. 8, 353– 377. doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0803_2 · DOI
  32. Pauls F. Daseking M. Petermann F. (2019). Measurement invariance across gender on the second-order five-factor model of the German Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fifth Edition. Assessment. doi: 10.1177/1073191119847762, PMID: 31067991 · DOI
  33. Schmid J. Leiman J. M. (1957). The development of hierarchical factor solutions. Psychometrika 22, 53– 61. doi: 10.1007/BF02289209 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Watkins M. W. (2017). The reliability of multidimensional neuropsychological measures: From alpha to omega. Clin. Neuropsychol. 31, 1113– 1126. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2017.1317364, PMID: 28429633 · DOI
  35. Watkins M. W. Beaujean A. A. (2014). Bifactor structure of the Wechsler preschool and primary scale of intelligence - fourth edition. Sch. Psychol. Q. 29, 52– 63. doi: 10.1037/spq0000038, PMID: 24188289 · DOI
  36. Watkins M. W. Dombrowski S. C. Canivez G. L. (2017). Reliability and factorial validity of the Canadian Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fifth Edition. Int. J. Sch. Educ. Psychol. 6, 252– 265. doi: 10.1080/21683603.2017.1342580 · DOI
  37. Wechsler D. (2009). Wechsler Memory Scale – Fourth Edition. Manual. San Antonio, TX: Pearson Assessment.
  38. Wechsler D. (2014a). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. 5th Edn. San Antonio, TX: NCS Pearson.
  39. Wechsler D. (2014b). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fifth Edition technical and interpretive manual. San Antonio, TX: NCS Pearson.
  40. Wechsler D. (2017a). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fifth Edition (WISC-V). Durchführungs- und Auswertungsmanual. Deutsche Fassung von F. Petermann Frankfurt a. M.: Pearson.
  41. Wechsler D. (2017b). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fifth Edition (WISC-V). Technisches Manual. Deutsche Fassung von F. Petermann. Frankfurt a. M.: Pearson.
  42. Weiss L. G. Keith T. Zhu J. Chen H. (2013). WISC-IV and clinical validation of the four- and five-factor interpretative approaches. J. Psychoeduc. Assess. 31, 114– 131. doi: 10.1177/0734282913478032 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Wood J. M. Tataryn D. J. Gorsuch R. L. (1996). Effects of under- and over-extraction on principal axis factor analysis with varimax rotation. Psychol. Methods 1, 354– 365. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.1.4.354 · DOI
  44. Yang Y. Green S. B. (2011). Coefficient alpha: a reliability coefficient for the 21st century? J. Psychoeduc. Assess. 29, 377– 392. doi: 10.1177/0734282911406668 · DOI
  45. Zinbarg R. E. Yovel I. Revelle W. McDonald R. P. (2006). Estimating generalizability to a latent variable common to all of a scale’s indicators: a comparison of estimators for ωh. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 30, 121– 144. doi: 10.1177/0146621605278814 · DOI · Paper page

Authors
Pauls, F., & Daseking, M.
Affiliations
Helmut Schmidt University (DE)
Corresponding author
Pauls, Franz
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2021-09-14
Volume
12
Pages
710929-710929
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2021.710929
PMC
PMC8476749
OpenAlex
W3201473498
Cited by
19
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3
FWCI
1.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
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, German version, factor structure, structural validity, bifactor model, group factors, fluid reasoning, full-scale intelligence quotient, clinical interpretation, construct reliability, cognitive profile, intelligence testing

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