The Experts below are selected from a list of 216 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Peter N. Prewett - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Concurrent Validity of the Matrix Analogies Test-Short Form with the Stanford-Binet: Fourth Edition and KTEA-BF (Academic Achievement).
Psychology in the Schools, 2006Co-Authors: Peter N. Prewett, Melissa R. FarhneyAbstract:This study examined the relationship between the Matrix Analogies Test-Short Form (MAT-SF) and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition and academic achievement as measured by the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement-Brief Form (KTEA-BF). The subjects were 71 referred students who were attending a large urban school district. The results supported the concurrent and criterion-related validity of the MAT-SF. This brief nonverbal Intelligence test correlated significantly with the Stanford-Binet Areas and Test Composite (r = .73) and with the Math, Reading, and Spelling scores of the Brief Form of the KTEA (rs = .44, .44, and .38, respectively).
-
A Comparison of Referred Students' Performance on the WISC-III and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition:
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 1994Co-Authors: Peter N. Prewett, Mark A. MatavichAbstract:The WISC-III and the S-B:IV were administered in counterbalanced order to 73 low socioeconomic status inner city referred students. The WISC-III Full Scale IQ averaged 9.4 points lower than the S-B:IV Test Composite, and the WISC-III Verbal IQ averaged 13.1 points lower than the Stanford-Binet Verbal Reasoning Area score. The nonverbal Scales (Performance IQ and Abstract/Visual Reasoning Areas) differed by an average of 8.1 points. The .81 correlation between the two tests indicated, however, that performance on one test cannot be predicted reliably by the performance on the other. The results suggest that the two tests do not always give similar diagnostic impressions. Additional research is needed to determine the generalizability of the findings.
-
Short Forms of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition:
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 1992Co-Authors: Peter N. PrewettAbstract:Short forms of the Stanford-Binet were evaluated with a sample of 150 low-achieving students. The pattern of short-form validity coefficients was similar for students with different Entry Levels, for males and females, and Whites and Blacks. A four-sub-test short form (Vocabulary-Quantitative-Pattern Analyses-Memory for Sentences) and the six-subtest short form recommended by the Stanford-Binet's authors (the four-subtest short form plus Bead Memory and Compehension) obtained the highest (and similar) validity coefficients. The four-subtest short form was recommended over the six because it requires less time to adminster. The two-subtest short forms were not recommended.
-
Mean-Score Differences between the WISC-R and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale Fourth Edition
Assessment for Effective Intervention, 1992Co-Authors: Peter N. Prewett, Mark A. MatavichAbstract:The mean score differences between the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition and the WISC-R changed across the ability continuum for 126 referred students. The Stanford-Binet Test Composite was significantly higher than the WISC-R Full Scale score at the lower end of the ability continuum, but was significantly lower than the WISC-R Full Scale score at the higher end. The two tests yielded similar scores for students with WISC-R Full Scale scores ranging from 70 to 89. The WISC-R scores correlated significantly with the Stanford-Binet scores.
Linda Gilmore - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
To WPPSI or to Binet, that is the question : a comparison of the WPPSI-III and SB5 with typically-developing preschoolers
2020Co-Authors: Melinda Garred, Linda GilmoreAbstract:This study compared two popular measures of cognitive ability for preschool children. The Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence – Third Edition (WPPSI-III) and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale – Fifth Edition (SB5) were administered in a counterbalanced order to 36 typically developing 4-year-old children. There were significant correlations among all WPPSI-III and SB5 composite scores but a small number of children had notable differences between their scores on the two measures. Children tended to prefer the SB5 over the WPPSI-III. Implications for practitioners who assess preschool-aged children are discussed.
-
Assessing Cognitive Development in Early Childhood: A Comparison of the Bayley-III and the Stanford-Binet, Fifth Edition
Australian Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 2010Co-Authors: Dorian Kamppi, Linda GilmoreAbstract:The Bayley Scales of Infant Development, Third Edition (Bayley-III) and Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Fifth Edition (SB5) were administered in a sample of 26 typically developing children (12 males and 14 females) aged 24-42 months. Children completed the assessments in two separate sessions, counterbalanced for order of administration. Scores on the two instruments were not significantly related, with the exception of the SB5 Knowledge score, which was moderately correlated with the Language score on the Bayley-III (r = .41, p = .04). Despite no other significant correlations, for 22 of the 26 children, scores were very consistent across the two instruments. Implications for test selection are discussed.
-
To WPPSI or to Binet, That Is the Question: A Comparison of the WPPSI-III and SB5 with Typically Developing Preschoolers
Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 2009Co-Authors: Melinda Garred, Linda GilmoreAbstract:This study compared two popular measures of cognitive ability for preschool children. The Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence - Third Edition (WPPSI-III) and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale - Fifth Edition (SB5) were administered in a counterbalanced order to 36 typically developing 4-year-old children. There were significant correlations among all WPPSI-III and SB5 composite scores but a number of children had notable differences between their scores on the two measures. Children tended to prefer the SB5 over the WPPSI-III. The implications for practitioners who assess preschool-aged children are discussed.
-
Deletion of 8p: A report of a child with normal Intelligence
2001Co-Authors: Linda Gilmore, Monica Cuskelly, Anne Jobling, Sali SmithAbstract:The case is presented of a female infant with a distal deletion of 8p (8p23.1 --> pter) whose development was monitored over a 5-year period from 12 months of age. Although previous literature has suggested that Sp deletion is associated with mild to moderate intellectual disability, the child reported here has normal Intelligence. Despite initial delays in gross motor and language skills, cognitive development (assessed with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development) and intellectual ability (measured on the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale) were within average range. It is argued that the small number of previous case reports may have created a misleading impression of intellectual development in individuals with distal deletions of 8p.
Jean Spruill - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Composite SAS of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Fourth Edition: Is it determined by only one are SAS?
Psychological Assessment, 1996Co-Authors: Jean SpruillAbstract:This study presents results of an investigation into the validity of the Composite Standard Age Score (SAS) of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Fourth Edition, (R. L. Thorndike, E. P. Hagen & J. M. Sattler, 1986) as a measure of intellectual ability for individuals with mental retardation. On the basis of the results obtained with the sample of participants in this study, the Composite SAS does not appear to accurately reflect the overall intellectual abilities of many individuals with mental retardation. Specifically, when there is a discrepancy among the SASs of the four Areas (Verbal Reasoning [VR], Abstract/Visual Reasoning [Ab/VR], Quantitative Reasoning [QR], and Short-Term Memory [STM]),the Composite SAS is closest to the lowest Area SAS instead of an aggregate of the four Area SASs. Archival data demonstrated that this finding is a consistent pattern in the Binet scores for individuals with mental retardation but not for individuals of other intellectual levels. The reasons and the implications for this finding are discussed.
-
A comparison of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Revised with the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (4th Edition) for mentally retarded adults.
Psychological Assessment, 1991Co-Authors: Jean SpruillAbstract:Comparisons were made between scores on the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: 4th Edition (Binet IV) and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R) for 2 groups of mentally retarded adults. The implications of the findings were discussed, and caution was urged in using the Binet IV to evaluate mentally retarded adults
Claire Lavin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition: A Preliminary Study of Validity:
Psychological Reports, 1996Co-Authors: Claire LavinAbstract:The concurrent validity of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Third Edition (WISC–III) and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition was investigated using a sample of 40 nonreferred children. There were significant correlations between the WISC-III Full Scale IQ, Verbal IQ, Performance IQ, and Composite (.817, .789, .609) and Area Scores (.357 to .763) of the Stanford-Binet–IV. There were no significant differences between the mean WISC–III and Stanford-Binet–IV scores. Despite differences in content, format, and administration, both tests yielded comparable results.
-
Clinical applications of the Stanford‐Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth edition to reading instruction of children with learning disabilities
Psychology in the Schools, 1995Co-Authors: Claire LavinAbstract:When children are referred to psychologists for evaluation, the most useful resulting information for the classroom teacher is not a label but suggestions regarding instruction. In its present format, the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition (SB:FE; Thorndike, Hagen, & Sattler, 1986) lends itself to the selection of instructional strategies in reading for children with learning problems. The data on cognitive skills obtained from the SB:FE provide important insights into cognitive strengths and weaknesses that may be related to academic functioning. Although there is no one-to-one correspondence between scores on a particular subtest and performance in a particular academic area, clinical interpretation of SB:FE test data can help psychologists answer the question, “How do I teach him to read?”
J. Stoeckel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Reliability, criterion-related validity and qualitative comments of the Fourth Edition of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale with a young adult population with intellectual disability.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 1999Co-Authors: C. M. Dacey, W. M. Nelson, J. StoeckelAbstract:The test-retest reliability and concurrent, criterion-related validity of the Fourth Edition of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (SB-IV) were examined in a young adult population with intellectual disability. Forty adults with mild to moderate intellectual disability (mean age = 20.8 years; SD = 1.8 years) were administered the SB-IV and retested approximately 5 weeks later (mean = 33.4 days, SD = 1.2). The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale: Interview Edition (VABS) was completed by a reliable informant within one week of the SB-IV testing. The test-retest reliability coefficients for the four SB-IV area and composite scores were all significant (P < 0.00). Individual subtest correlations tended to be lower but consistent across the two administrations. Moderate correlations were observed between the VABS composite and SB-IV composite scores. The present results provide support for the temporal reliability of the SB-IV and its concurrent, criterion-related validity in an exceptional sample.
-
Reliability, criterion‐related validity and qualitative comments of the Fourth Edition of the Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scale with a young adult population with intellectual disability
Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 1999Co-Authors: C. M. Dacey, W. M. Nelson, J. StoeckelAbstract:The test–retest reliability and concurrent, criterion-related validity of the Fourth Edition of the Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scale (SB-IV) were examined in a young adult population with intellectual disability. Forty adults with mild to moderate intellectual disability (mean age = 20.8 years; SD = 1.8 years) were administered the SB-IV and retested approximately 5 weeks later (mean = 33.4 days, SD = 1.2). The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale: Interview Edition (VABS) was completed by a reliable informant within one week of the SB-IV testing. The test–retest reliability coefficients for the four SB-IV area and composite scores were all significant (P 0.001). Individual subtest correlations tended to be lower but consistent across the two administrations. Moderate correlations were observed between the VABS composite and SB-IV composite scores. The present results provide support for the temporal reliability of the SB-IV and its concurrent, criterion-related validity in an exceptional sample.