Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-18T12:26:07.345Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Factor-Analytic Models of Intelligence

from Part I - Intelligence and Its Measurement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2019

By
Robert Walrath ,
John O. Willis ,
Ron Dumont  and
Alan S. Kaufman
Edited by
Robert J. Sternberg
Robert J. Sternberg
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

Psychometrics is the science of psychological measurement. For an intelligence test to be considered valid, it must be evaluated using the principles and methods of psychometrics. In this chapter we introduce basic psychometric techniques such as factor analysis and review the evolution of psychometric theories of intelligence, with emphasis on the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities.

Keywords

intelligencepsychometricsfactor analysisCattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence , pp. 75 - 98
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Benisz, M., Dumont, R., & Willis, J. O. (2015). From psychometric testing to clinical assessment: Personalities, ideas and events that shaped David Wechsler’s views of intelligence and its assessment. In Goldstein, S., Princiotta, D., & Naglieri, J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of intelligence: Evolutionary theory, historical perspective, and current concepts (pp. 163–179). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Bouchard, T., Jr. (2018). Hereditary ability: g is driven by experience-producing drives. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), The nature of human intelligence (pp. 15–29). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Binet, A., & Simon, T. (1916/1980). The development of intelligence in children (trans. E. S. Kite). Facsimile limited edition issued by Dunn, Lloyd M.. Nashville, TN: Williams Printing Co.Google Scholar
Caemmerer, J. J., Maddocks, D. L., Keith, T. Z., & Reynolds, M. R. (2018). Effects of cognitive abilities on child and youth academic achievement: Evidence from the WISC-V and WIAT-III. Intelligence, 68, 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2018.02.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canivez, G. L., & Watkins, M. W. (2016). Review of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fifth Edition: Critique, commentary, and independent analyses. In Kaufman, A. S., Raiford, S. E., & Coalson, D. L. (Eds.), Intelligent testing with the WISC-V (pp. 684–702). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1985). Exploratory factor analysis: A tutorial. In Detterman, D. K. (Ed.), Current topics in human intelligence (vol. 1, pp. 25–58). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1997/2012). The three-stratum theory of cognitive abilities. In Flanagan, D. P. & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (3rd ed., pp. 883–890). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1941). Some theoretical issues in adult intelligence testing. Psychological Bulletin, 38, 592.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1963). Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 54(1), 1–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0046743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattell, R. B., & Horn, J. L. (1978). A check on the theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence with description of new subtest designs. Journal of Educational Measurement, 15, 139–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1978.tb00065.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, J-Q., & Gardner, H. (2005). Assessment based on multiple-intelligence theories. In Flanagan, D. P., Genshaft, J. L., & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 77–102). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Chen, J-Q., & Gardner, H. (2019). Assessment from the perspective of multiple-intelligence theory. In Flanagan, D. P. & McDonough, E. M. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 164–173). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1959). The factorial structure of the WISC at ages 7–6, 10–6, and 13–6. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 23, 285–299. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0043898Google Scholar
Cormier, D. C., McGrew, K. S., Bulut, O., & Funamoto, A. (2017). Revisiting the relations between the WJ-IV measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and reading achievement during the school-age years. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 35(8), 731–754. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282916659208Google Scholar
Daniel, M. H. (1997). Intelligence testing: Status and trends. American Psychologist, 52(10), 1038–1045.Google Scholar
Das, J. P., Kirby, J. R., & Jarman, R. F. (1979). Simultaneous and successive cognitive processes. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Das, J. P., Naglieri, J. A., & Kirby, J. R. (1994). Assessment of cognitive processes: The PASS theory of intelligence. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Drozdick, L. W., Singer, J. K., Lichtenberger, E. O., Kaufman, J. C., Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2019). The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children – Second Edition and KABC‑II Normative Update. In Flanagan, D. P. & McDonough, E. M. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 333–359). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Elliott, C. D. (2007). Differential ability scales – Second edition. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.Google Scholar
Evans, J. J., Floyd, R. G., McGrew, K. S., & Leforgee, M. H. (2002). The relations between measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and reading achievement during childhood and adolescence. School Psychology Review, 31(2), 246–262. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.10083Google Scholar
Everybody Loves Raymond. Standard Deviation. Directed by J. Meyer. Written by P. Rosenthal & S. Skrovan. Where’s Lunch, Worldwide Pants, & HBO Independent Productions (October 4, 1996). www.imdb.com/title/tt0574226Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J., versus Kamin, L. J. (1981). The intelligence controversy. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
Farrall, M. L. (2012). Reading assessment: Linking language, literacy, and cognition. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Flanagan, D. P., & Dixon, S. G. (2014). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities. In Reynolds, C. R., Vannest, K. J., & Fletcher-Janzen, E. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of special education (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118660584.ese0431Google Scholar
Flanagan, D. P., & Kaufman, A. S. (2009). Essentials of WISC-IV assessment (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Flanagan, D. P., & McGrew, K. S. (1997). A cross-battery approach to assessing and interpreting cognitive abilities: Narrowing the gap between practice and cognitive science. In Flanagan, D. P., Genshaft, J. L., & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment (pp. 314–325). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Flanagan, D. P., McGrew, K. S., & Ortiz, S. O. (2000). The Wechsler Intelligence Scales and Gf-Gc theory: A contemporary approach to interpretation. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., & Alfonso, V. (2013). Essentials of cross-battery assessment (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., Alfonso, V., & Mascolo, J. T. (2002). The achievement test desk reference: Comprehensive assessment of learning disabilities. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Floyd, R. (2002). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Cross-Battery Approach: Recommendations for school psychologists. Communiqué, 30(5), 10–14.Google Scholar
Floyd, R. G., Evans, J. J., & McGrew, K. S. (2003). Relations between measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and mathematics achievement across the school-age years. Psychology in the Schools, 60(2), 155–171. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.10083Google Scholar
Flynn, J. R. (2007). What is intelligence? Beyond the Flynn effect. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. (1994). Multiple intelligences theory. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human intelligence (pp. 740–742). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. (2003). Multiple intelligences after twenty years. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, Chicago, April.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, L. S. (2008). Of what value is intelligence? In Prifitera, A., Saklofske, D., & Weiss, L. G. (Eds.), WISC-IV applications for clinical assessment and intervention (2nd ed., pp. 545–563). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. (1981). The mismeasure of man. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Hale, J. B., Fiorello, C. A., Dumont, R., Willis, J. O., Rackley, C., & Elliott, C. D. (2008). Differential Ability Scales – Second Edition (neuro)psychological predictors of math performance for typical children and children with math disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 45(9). https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20330Google Scholar
Hale, J. B., Fiorello, C. A., Kavanagh, J. A., Hoeppner, J. B., & Gaitherer, R. A. (2001). WISC-III predictors of academic achievement for children with learning disabilities: Are global and factor scores comparable? School Psychology Quarterly, 16(1), 31–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/scpq.16.1.31.19158Google Scholar
Herrnstein, R. J., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York: Simon & Schuster (Free Press Paperbacks).Google Scholar
Horn, J. L. (1965). Fluid and crystallized intelligence: A factor analytic study of the structure among primary mental abilities, PhD thesis, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L. (1985). Remodeling old models of intelligence. In Wolman, B. B. (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence: Theories, measurements, and applications (pp. 267–300). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L. (1988). Thinking about human abilities. In Nesselroade, J. R. & Cattell, R. B. (Eds.), Handbook of multivariate psychology (rev. ed., pp. 645–685). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L. (1994). The theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human intelligence (pp. 433–451). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L., & Blankson, A. N. (2012). Foundations for a better understanding of cognitive abilities. In Flanagan, D. P. & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (3rd ed., pp. 73–98). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L., & Cattell, R. B. (1966). Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallized general intelligences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 57, 253–270.Google Scholar
Huxley, T. 1870. Biogenesis and abiogenesis. Nature, 2, 400–406.Google Scholar
Jacoby, R., & Glauberman, N. (Eds.) (1995). The bell curve debate. New York: Times Books.Google Scholar
Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Bouchard, T., Jr. (2005). The structure of human intelligence: It is verbal, perceptual, and image rotation (VPR), not fluid and crystallized. Intelligence, 33, 393–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2004.12.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W., Bouchard, T., Jr., McGue, M., Segal, N. L.,Tellegen, A., Keyes, M., & Gottesman, I. I. (2007a). Genetic and environmental influences on the Verbal-Perceptual-Image Rotation (VPR) model of the structure of mental abilities in the Minnesota study of twins reared apart. Intelligence, 35, 542–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2006.10.003Google Scholar
Johnson, W., te Nijenhuis, J., & Bouchard, T., Jr. (2007b). Replication of the hierarchical visual-perceptual-image rotation model in de Wolff and Buiten’s (1963) battery of 46 tests of mental ability. Intelligence, 35, 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2006.05.002Google Scholar
Kaufman, A. S. (1979). Intelligent testing with the WISC-R. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Kaufman, A. S. (1994). Intelligent testing with the WISC-III. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Kaufman, A. S. (2009). IQ testing 101. New York: Springer Publishing.Google Scholar
Kaufman, A. S. (2018). Many pathways, one destination: IQ tests, intelligent testing, and the continual push for more equitable assessments. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), The nature of human intelligence (pp. 197–214). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (1983). The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2004). The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children – Second Edition. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Kaufman, A. S., Kaufman, N. L., Drozdick, L. W., & Morrison, J. (2018). Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children – Second Edition, normative update, manual supplement. Bloomington, MN: NCS Pearson.Google Scholar
Kaufman, A. S., Kaufman, N. L., & Goldsmith, B. Z. (1984). Kaufman Sequential or Simultaneous (K-SOS)? Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Kaufman, A. S., Raiford, S. E., & Coalson, D. L. (2016). Intelligent testing with the WISC-V. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Kaufman, A. S., Schneider, W. J., & Kaufman, J. C. (in press). Psychometric approaches to intelligence. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Human intelligence: An introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C. (2015). Why creativity isn’t in IQ tests, why it matters, and why it won’t change anytime soon … Probably. Journal of Intelligence, 3, 59–72. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence3030059Google Scholar
Keith, T. Z., & Reynolds, M. R. (2019). Using confirmatory factor analysis to aid in understanding the constructs measured by intelligence tests. In Flanagan, D. P. & McDonough, E. M. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 853–900). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Kilpatrick, D. A. (2015). Essentials of assessing, preventing, and overcoming reading difficulties. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Kipling, R. 1899. An interview with Mark Twain. In Sea to sea: Letters of travel. New York: Doubleday & McClure.Google Scholar
Lichtenberger, E. O., & Kaufman, A. S. (2013). Essentials of WAIS-IV assessment (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Luria, A. R. (1966). Human brain and psychological processes. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Luria, A. R. (1973). The working brain. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Luria, A. R. (1980). Higher cortical functions in man (2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Major, J. T., Johnson, W., & Deary, I. J. (2012). Comparing models of intelligence in Project TALENT: The VPR model fits better than the CHC and extended Gf–Gc models. Intelligence, 40, 543–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2012.07.006Google Scholar
McDermott, P. A., Fantuzzo, J. W., & Glutting, J. J. (1990). Just say no to subtest analysis: A critique on Wechsler theory and practice. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 290–302.Google Scholar
McGrew, K. S. (1997). Analysis of the major intelligence batteries according to a proposed comprehensive Gf-Gc framework. In Flanagan, D. P., Genshaft, J. L., & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 92–104). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
McGrew, K. S. (2005). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities. In Flanagan, D. P. & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests and issues (2nd ed., pp. 136–181). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
McGrew, K. S. (2018). WJ IV norm-based and supplemental clinical test groupings for “intelligent” intelligence testing with the WJ IV (MindHub Pub #3) [PowerPoint presentation]. www.iqscorner.com/2018/05/mindhub-pub-3-wj-iv-norm-based-and_16.htmlGoogle Scholar
McGrew, K. S., LaForte, E. M., & Schrank, F. A. (2014). Technical manual. Woodcock-Johnson IV. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.Google Scholar
McGrew, K. S., & Schneider, W. J. (2018). CHC theory revised: A visual-graphic summary of Schneider and McGrew’s 2019 CHC update chapter (MindHub Pub #4) [PowerPoint presentation]. www.iapsych.com/mindhubpub4.pdfGoogle Scholar
McGrew, K. S., & Woodcock, R. W. (2001). Technical manual. Woodcock-Johnson III. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar
McKusick, V. A. (1969). On lumpers and splitters, or the nosology of genetic disease. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 12(2), 298–312.Google Scholar
Naglieri, J. A., & Das, J. P. (2002). Practical implications of general intelligence and PASS cognitive processes. In Sternberg, R. J. & Grigorenko, E. L. (Eds.), The general factor of intelligence: How general is it? (pp. 855–884). New York: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Naglieri, J. A., Das, J. P., & Goldstein, S. (2012). Planning, attention, simultaneous, successive: A cognitive-processing-based theory of intelligence. In Flanagan, D. P. & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (3rd ed., pp. 178–194). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Naglieri, J. A., Das, J. P., & Goldstein, S. (2014). Cognitive Assessment System – Second Edition. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
Naglieri, J. A., & Johnson, D. (2000). Effectiveness of a cognitive strategy intervention to improve math calculation based on the PASS theory. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 591–597. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940003300607Google Scholar
Naglieri, J. A., & Otero, T. M. (2019a). Redefining intelligence with the planning, attention, simultaneous, and successive theory of neurocognitive processes. In Flanagan, D. P. & McDonough, E. M. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 195–218). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Naglieri, J. A., & Otero, T. M. (2019b). The Cognitive Assessment System – Second Edition. In Flanagan, D. P. & McDonough, E. M. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 452–485). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Niileksala, C. R., Reynolds, M. R., Keith, T. Z., & McGrew, K. S. (2016). A special validity study of the Woodcock-Johnson IV: Acting on evidence for specific abilities. In Flanagan, D. P. & Alfonso, V. C. (Eds.), WJ-V clinical use and interpretation: Scientist-practitioner perspectives. Boston: Elsevier Press.Google Scholar
Ortiz, S. O., & Flanagan, D. P. (2002a). Cross-Battery Assessment revisited: Some cautions concerning “Some Cautions” (Part I). Communiqué, 30(7), 32–34.Google Scholar
Ortiz, S. O., & Flanagan, D. P. (2002b). Cross-Battery Assessment revisited: Some cautions concerning “Some Cautions” (Part II). Communiqué, 30(8), 36–38.Google Scholar
Prokosch, M. D., Yeo, R. A., & Miller, G. F. (2005). Intelligence tests with higher g-loadings show higher correlations with body symmetry: Evidence for a general fitness factor mediated by developmental stability. Intelligence, 33, 203–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2004.07.007Google Scholar
Rapaport, D., Gill, M., & Schafer, R. (1945–1946). Diagnostic psychological testing (2 vols.). Chicago: Year Book Medical.Google Scholar
Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (2015). Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales, Second Edition. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Roid, G. H. (2003). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition: Technical manual.Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar
Roid, G. H., Miller, L. J., Pomplun, M., & Koch, C. (2013). Leiter International Performance Scale – Third Edition. Wood Dale, IL: Stoelting.Google Scholar
Ruzgis, P. (1994). Thurstone, L. L. (1887–1955). In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human intelligence (pp. 1081–1084). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Sacks, O. (1970). The man who mistook his wife for a hat and other clinical tales. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Sattler, J. M. (2008). Assessment of children: Cognitive foundations (5th ed.). San Diego, CA: Jerome M. Sattler.Google Scholar
Sattler, J. M. (2018). Assessment of children: Cognitive foundations (6th ed.). San Diego, CA: Jerome M. Sattler.Google Scholar
Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. S. (2019). The Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory of cognitive abilities. In Flanagan, D. P. & McDonough, E. M. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 73–163). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Schrank, F. A., Decker, S. L., & Garruto, J. M. (2016). Essentials of WJ IV cognitive abilities assessment. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Schrank, F. A., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2014). Woodcock-Johnson IV. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.Google Scholar
Silventoinen, K., Posthuma, D., van Beijsterveldt, T., Bartels, M., & Boomsma, D. I. (2006). Genetic contributions to the association between height and intelligence: Evidence from Dutch twin data from childhood to middle age. Genes, Brain and Behavior, 5(8), 585–595. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-183X.2006.00208.xGoogle Scholar
Spearman, C. (1904). “General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–293. www.jstor.org/stable/1412107Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man: Their nature and measurement. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Spencer, H. (1855). The principles of psychology. London: Longman, Brown, Green, & Longmans.Google Scholar
Springer, S. P., & Deutsch, G. (1993). Left brain, right brain (4th ed.). San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (2009). What intelligence tests miss: The psychology of rational thought. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1982). Reasoning, problem solving, and intelligence. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 225–307). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Intelligence is mental self-government. In Sternberg, R. J. & Detterman, D. K. (Eds.), What is intelligence?: Contemporary viewpoints on its nature and definition (pp. 141–148). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Successful intelligence. New York: Plume.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1999). The theory of successful intelligence. Review of General Psychology, 3, 292–316. http://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.3.4.292Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2002). Why smart people can be so stupid. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Construct validity of the theory of successful intelligence. In Sternberg, R. J., Lautrey, J., & Lubart, T. I. (Eds.), Models of intelligence: International perspectives (pp. 55–80). Washington: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2005). The triarchic theory of successful intelligence. In Flanagan, D. P. & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests and issues (2nd ed., pp. 103–119). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2019). The triarchic theory of successful intelligence. In Flanagan, D. P. & McDonough, E. M. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 174–194). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Detterman, D. K. (1986). What is intelligence?: Contemporary viewpoints on its nature and definition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Kaufman, J. C. (1998). Human abilities. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 1134–1139. www.scribd.com/doc/185741878/Sternberg-Kaufman-1998-AnnuRevPsych-Human-AbilitiesGoogle Scholar
Terman, L. M. (1916). The measurement of intelligence. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Thorndike, E. L. (1927). The measurement of intelligence. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. (1931). Multiple factor analysis. Psychological Review, 38(5), 406–427.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Vernon, P. E. (1950). The structure of human abilities. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Vernon, P. E. (1961). The structure of human abilities (2nd ed.). London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Wasserman, J. D. (2019). A history of intelligence assessment: The unfinished tapestry. In Flanagan, D. P. & McDonough, E. M. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests and issues (4th ed., pp. 3–55). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Watkins, M. W., Glutting, J. J., & Youngstrom, E. A. (2005). Issues in subtest profile analysis. In Flanagan, D. P. & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests and issues (2nd ed., pp. 251–268). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Watkins, M. W., Youngstrom, E. A., & Glutting, J. J. (2002). Some cautions regarding Cross-Battery Assessment. Communiqué, 30(6), 16–20.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1926). On the influence of education on intelligence as measured by the Binet-Simon tests. Journal of Educational Psychology, 17, 248–257.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1939). The measurement of adult intelligence. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1940). Non-intellective factors in general intelligence. Psychological Bulletin, 37, 444–445.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1943). Non-intellective factors in general intelligence. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38, 101–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0060613Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1949). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. New York: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1950). Cognitive, conative, and non-intellective intelligence. American Psychologist, 5, 78–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0063112Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1958). The measurement and appraisal of adult intelligence. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (2008). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – Fourth Edition. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (2012). Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence – Fourth Edition. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (2014). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fifth Edition. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.Google Scholar
Woodcock, R. W. (1993). An information processing view of Gf-Gc theory. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment Monograph Series, Advances in Psychoeducational Assessment: Woodcock-Johnson Psychoeducational Battery – Revised, 80–102.Google Scholar
Woodcock, R. W., & Johnson, M. B. (1977). Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery. Hingham, MA: DLM Teaching Resources.Google Scholar
Woodcock, R. W., & Johnson, M. B. (1989). Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery – Revised. Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.Google Scholar
Woodcock, R. W., & Mather, N. (1989). WJ-R tests of cognitive ability – standard and supplemental batteries: Examiner’s manual. Woodcock, R. W & Johnson, M. B., Woodcock-Johnson Psychoeducational Battery – Revised. Chicago: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, I. L., & Woo-Sam, J. M. (1973). Clinical interpretation of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. New York: Grune & Stratton.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×