| dc.description.abstract | Performance on the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition (SB:FE) was examined
in a Canadian clinic sample (N=1220), age 2 through 23 years, with a range of demographic
characteristics and ability levels. Data were anaiyzed for the samples 2-6-14, 7-11-11, and 12-23-
11. SB:FE subtest, Reasoniig Area, and Composite Standard Age Scores (SAS’s) decreased
significantly (p < .05) with increasing age. Within each age group, the intercorrelations among
subtests, the four Reasoning Area, and the Composite SAS’s supported the four cognitive ability
areas posited by Thorndike et al. (1986b). Performance of subjects on the SB:FE full battery and
SB:FE Genera! Purpose Abbreviated Battery (GPAB) were compared. Significant differences (p <
.05), attributabie to the large sample sizes, were found between means and variances in
Reasoning Area and Composite SAS’s. Uncorrected correlation coefficients among the two
measures were significant (p < .01) and close to unity for the Verbal, Quantitative, Short Term
Memory, and Composite SAS’s. The correlations between Abstract/Visual SAS’s, while
significant, were somewhat lower. Also, similar and significant (p < .05) correlations were
observed among the two versions of the SB:FE and the Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised
(WRAT-R). Next, internally valid, reiable, and replicable groups displaying differences in profile
elevation and/or shape were obtained through application of hierarchical agglomerative and
iterative partitioning clustering procedures to SB:FE GPAB data. For the age sample 2-4-11,a
two cluster solution, with high average and average groups was optimal. For the samples 5-6-11,
7-11-11, and 12-23 11, a three cluster solution comprising high, average, and low scoring groups
was optimal. Mean WRAT-R subtest scores of the groups in all ages samples were significantly
different (p < .01). However, when cluster solutions were compared with clinically derived a priori
learning disability models, clusters were more similar with respect to Composite SAS's or profile
elevation, than educational diagnosis. In general, results suggest the SB:FE is rnost appropriately
used as an index of global ability. Caution is needed interpreting Reasoning Area SAS's,
although the GPAB may provide a reasonable representation of the full battery | en_US |
