Key result
The Information and Vocabulary subtests of the WAIS demonstrated a median criterion-related validity coefficient of 0.38, which was not appreciably lower than Verbal (0.41) and Full Scale IQs (0.38).
Why the study?
Do the Information and Vocabulary subtests of the WAIS function as measures of intelligence in their own right compared to Verbal and Full Scale IQs?
Meta-Analysis
Do the Information and Vocabulary subtests of the WAIS function as measures of intelligence in their own right compared to Verbal and Full Scale IQs?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.38% vs 0.41%
The addition of more WAIS subtests to a battery that already includes Information or Vocabulary lacks incremental predictive validity.
Authors
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports abbreviated WAIS use in time-limited settings; leaves open whether full batteries improve clinical outcomes.
Alan Feingold (1982) reported a meta-analysis. Information and Vocabulary subtests of the WAIS vs. Verbal and Full Scale IQs was evaluated on Criterion-related validity coefficients. The Information and Vocabulary subtests of the WAIS demonstrated a median criterion-related validity coefficient of 0.38, which was not appreciably lower than Verbal (0.41) and Full Scale IQs (0.38).
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: