Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children Fourth Edition (WISC-IV)

The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) was originally developed by David Wechsler. The original WISC test was released in 1949 as an adaptation of different subsets found in the Weschler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale ( Dombrowski et al., 2015). The most recent version of the test is the fifth edition (WISC-V). However, this paper will focus on the fourth edition (WISC-IV) as there has been enough time for it to be studied, making it easier to find existing literature on it. On the other hand, when the test is administered individually, Pearson (n.d.) documents a website that sells the basic WISC-IV assessment kit for $1350. Included in the kit are the administration and scoring manuals, integrated technical and interpretive manual, stimulus book, record forms, response booklets, symbol search scoring key, coding scoring key with coding recall, cancellation scoring template, and block design cubes (Pearson, n.d.). The test can also be administered online and scored with a dedicated program. 

Besides, WISC is an intelligence test for children between 6 – 16 years old. The test was developed to determine a child’s full-scale IQ through five index scores: Visual-Spatial Index, Verbal Comprehension Index, Fluid Reasoning, Processing Speed, and Working Memory index (Watkins & Smith, 2013). Though originally designed to test a child’s intelligence, WISC has also found application in diagnosing children with mental conditions, such as learning disabilities like dyslexia (Rahimipour et al., 2018). Additionally, Gomez et al. (2016) conducted a study on the structure of WISC tests as a diagnostic tool for children with ADHD. Thus if the child is over 16 years old, the alternative form of WISC, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), should be used. If the child is younger than 6, however, then the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI) is the most appropriate alternative form. 

Test Description 

Basic Description 

WISC assesses the children’s IQ along with five primary index scores; Visual Spatial Index, Verbal Comprehension Index, Fluid Reasoning, Processing Speed, and Working Memory index (Watkins & Smith, 2013). Though the primary purpose of the test is to assess a child’s full-scale IQ, there are some overlaps. For instance, six-years and 0 -7 months old children can complete both the WPPSI and WISC. Additionally, 16-year-old children are also eligible to complete either WISC-IV or WISC-V. The assessor, therefore, can derive a deeper understanding of the child’s mental faculties (abilities or deficits) using different floor and ceiling effects. For instance, to gain deeper insight into a 16-year old’s mental faculties, especially if they have an intellectual disability, an assessor could administer the WISC-IV because it tests the floor of their knowledge. 

Test Content 

Of the five primary indexes from the previous parahraph, the Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI) draws concepts from similarities and vocabulary subtests. In other words, the Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI) primarily asks a child how words are similar or dissimilar and checks the child’s vocabulary by defining given words (Gomez et al., 2016). Secondary subtests include general information as well as comprehension of social norms and common concepts. 

On the other hand, the visual-spatial index (VSI), as a measure of the child’s spatial reasoning, derives a child’s full-scale IQ (FSIQ) from block design and visual puzzles subtests (Canivez et al., 2017). The block design subtest gives the child a model then asks them to build the pattern using red and white blocks. This test is timed. The visual puzzles, on the other hand, uses the stimulus book to instruct the child to construct a puzzle from three pieces. 

The fluidity of reasoning (FRI) assesses the child’s quantitative and inductive reasoning. FRI scores are derived using matrix reasoning, where the children are shown a set of pictures with a missing square then instructed to select the most fitting from several potions (Scheiber, 2016). Figure weights are nother primary subtest. 

The working memory index (WMI), on the other hand, assesses the child’s working memory using where the assessor speaks out a sequence of numbers then asks the child to repeat them in different orders, such as in reverse or verbatim. Picture span is also used where after being shown pictures from the stimulus book, the child is asked to point out all the pictures they saw and, if possible, in what order. 

Finally, the processing speed index is a measure of the child’s information processing capabilities and speeds through either coding, symbol search, or cancellation. For instance, when using the symbol search, the child is given two sets of symbols, with one set being the target symbol. They are then instructed to determine if the target symbols appear in the other set. 

Purpose of Test 

Designed for children between the ages of 6 – 16, WISC is primarily used as an intelligence test. For instance, Gomez et al. (2016) has shown the possibility of the test to be used as a diagnostic assessment for ADHD and other learning disabilities. These diagnostic procedures mainly rely on WISC’s subtests that examine a child’s pattern matching abilities. School psychologists can also use the test to determine why there are discrepancies between a child’s performance at school and their intelligence (Nakano & Watkins, 2013). Therefore, when used for secondary purposes, WISC shows the potential to identify a child’s problems with learning and its cognitive underpinnings. 

Test Structure 

WISC is designed to be administered in up to an hour, after which the results generate the child’s FSIQ. WISC is administered such that all the five primary indexes are compulsory parts of the assessments. For every primary index, the scores are derived from the administration of two subtests. Therefore, ten subtests complete the primary subtests. To derive the full-scale IQ (FSIQ), seven of the ten primary subtests must be used. These include two from the VCI, one VSI, two FRI, and one WMI and PSI, respectively. From this, it is clear that verbal comprehension and fluid reasoning play a greater role in determining the FSIQ. 

Test Administration 

Taking from 1 to 1.5 hours, WISC is administered individually. The test, according to Gomez et al. (2016), need not be completed by reading or writing. The output is a full-scale IQ score that is representative of the child’s cognitive abilities. It should be noted that the administration of the test that ignores the child’s reading and writing abilities increases the test’s versatility, especially among children with reading disabilities like dyslexia. This quality also enables it to be administered to disabled children such as the blind as well as quadriplegics. 

Test Scoring 

After being administered by a trained examiner, the child’s FSIQ is determined by summing the individual scores for the different indexes. As noted earlier, verbal communication and fluid reasoning weigh heavily on the final score. Therefore, any score beyond 130 is considered gifted, 120 – 129 is a very high FSIQ score, 110 – 119 is scored as bright normal, and anything lower than 90 is between average and below average (Gowda, 2015). However, if a child scores below 70, the score signals a serious borderline mental functionality. Additionally, scores below 69 are considered to be signs of mental retardation (Gowda, 2015). Therefore, WISC gives the full spectrum of a child’s mental faculties. 

Technical Evaluation 

The WISC-IV standardization sample is representative of the US population of children between six and sixteen years old. According to William et al. (2003a), stratified random sampling was used to select the standardization sample using variables like age, sex, race, geographical location, and parent education level. This sample consisted of 2200 children divided into 11 groups, each containing 200 children. The procedure of testing the reliability of the assessment was done by determining the internal consistency reliability using the split-half method (William et al., 2003a). The reliability coefficients, according to William et al. (2003a), varied between 0.88 and 0.97 and were established to be nearly identical to the scales obtained with WISC-III. This shows that WISC-IV was reliable. For further information and a deep dive into the psychometric properties of WISC-IV, including more details on the standardization sample, the interested reader is referred to the technical report # 2 by William et al. (2003a). On the other hand, William et al. (2003b) established the clinical validity of WISC-IV to be consisted not only with expectations but also previous research and predictions from its theoretical foundations. However, an FSIQ score can sometimes result in the misinterpretation of a child’s cognitive abilities. This, according to Williams et al. (2003b), is common when testing children with learning disabilities or those who have been referred to clinically. Therefore, when testing and interpreting the results for these children, clinicians should consider other test data before making any conclusions or recommendations. 

Practical Evaluation 

As noted earlier, the administration of WISC-IV need not be administered by reading or writing. Therefore, the quality of writing in test materials, especially the appropriateness of reading level is not a factor (contributing or impeding) to the administration, evaluation, and scoring of the test results. That being said, literature exists that establishes that external factors could influence individual performance in intelligence tests. For instance, as early as the 1950s with the research by Johnson (1953) to research by Makharia et al. (2016) and Kamphaus (2019), non-intellective factors, like the environment or the mode of test administration has been shown to significantly impact a student’s performance on an intelligence assessment. Therefore, material quality, such as material type, durability, physical shape and appearance, and texture, among others, could potentially influence a child’s performance. 

A good example is when WISC-IV is used to diagnose a child for ADHD. In such a case, the quality of test materials could have a bearing on the diagnosis, especially when they are distracting enough. On the other hand, if used to assess a child’s intelligence, then the quality might positively or negatively impact the child’s performance. Besides, Pearson (n.d.) sells a basic testing kit that contains a lot of resources and material. This necessitates that the examiner is deeply familiar with the testing process, rules, scoring, and interpretation of the results. In other words, practical, valid, and reliable administration of WISC requires administration by a trained examiner. 

Summary Evaluation & Critique 

There is a general misconception as well as deep-seated criticism against intelligence tests that treat intelligence as one substantive number. This overall measure of intelligence, such as the full-scale IQ score output by the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children is often misinterpreted as a measure of a child’s potential of achievement abilities (Toffalini et al., 2017). There is a need, however, for a reinterpretation of FSIQ scores that consider different aspects of intelligence. For instance, the intellectual profiles of children diagnosed with specific learning disorders (SLDs) are significantly different from those of other children. Cornoldi et al. (2014) have shown that despite above average to excellent and gifted levels of intellectual abilities and skills, children with SLDs exhibit specific weaknesses that bring down their FSIQ scores, resulting in a misinterpretation. Using WISC-IV indexes as a reference, these children have been known to perform lowly in cognitive proficiency indexes, made up of the processing speed and working memory indices of WISC-IV (Toffalini et al., 2017). On the other hand, their General Ability Index (GAI), made up of perceptual reasoning and verbal comprehension indices are preserved (Raiford et al., 2005; Cornoldi et al., 2014). It should be noted, however, that the critique here is not about the validity and reliability of WISC-IV FSIQ scored. 

Instead, it is about how these scores are interpreted, especially their meaning if the child has an unknown or undiagnosed mental disability, like SLD. The consequence is that the specific needs of these children fail to be met. The recommendation, therefore, is for the uses of the tests. It is recommended that when using WISC-IV, examiners, or clinicians should use the assessment results to corroborate a priori hypothesis, especially with consideration to the child’s background information. That being said, the technical evaluation should be done using a different standardization sample that is representative of children between 6 and 16 in the world. As the purpose and application of WISC expand beyond a simple intelligence measuring tool, it is recommended that further studies and updates to the test be used to establish the test’s clinical utility. The outcome will be a highly versatile intelligence and clinical tool that can be reliably used in a variety of settings and populations. 

Conclusion 

When selecting assessment strategies to use, counselors must evaluate the instruments using several factors and from different perspectives. This paper has evaluated the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children Fourth Edition (WISC-IV) from different perspectives. It started with a general description of the assessment followed by a deep dive into the details of the test, including its purpose, content, structure, administration, and scoring. The evaluation was then done using technical and practical perspectives. The technical evaluation, for instance, looked into the standardization sample, reliability, and validity of the tests. Finally, based on the strengths and weaknesses of the test, recommendations were made, especially with regards to the clinical procedures and interpretation of WISC-IV FSIQ. 

References 

Canivez, G. L., Watkins, M. W., & Dombrowski, S. C. (2017). Structural validity of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth Edition: Confirmatory factor analyses with the 16 primary and secondary subtests.  Psychological Assessment ,  29 (4), 458. 

Cornoldi, C., Giofre, D., Orsini, A., & Pezzuti, L. (2014). Differences in the intellectual profile of children with intellectual vs. learning disability.  Research in Developmental Disabilities ,  35 (9), 2224-2230. 

Dombrowski, S. C., Canivez, G. L., Watkins, M. W., & Beaujean, A. A. (2015). Exploratory bifactor analysis of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fifth Edition with the 16 primary and secondary subtests.  Intelligence ,  53 , 194-201. 

Gowda, N. S. (2015).  Learning and the learner: Insights into the processes of learning and teaching . PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.. 

Gomez, R., Vance, A., & Watson, S. D. (2016). Structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fourth Edition in a group of children with ADHD.  Frontiers in Psychology ,  7 , 737. 

Johnson Jr, G. B. (1953). Factors to be considered in the interpretation of intelligence-test scores.  The Elementary School Journal ,  54 (3), 145-150. 

Kamphaus, R. W. (2019).  Clinical assessment of child and adolescent intelligence . Springer. 

Makharia, A., Nagarajan, A., Mishra, A., Peddisetty, S., Chahal, D., & Singh, Y. (2016). Effect of environmental factors on intelligence quotient of children.  Industrial psychiatry journal ,  25 (2), 189. 

Nakano, S., & Watkins, M. W. (2013). Factor structure of the wechsler intelligence scales for children–fourth edition among referred native american students.  Psychology in the Schools ,  50 (10), 957-968. 

Pearson, S.  Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children | Fourth Edition . Pearsonassessments.com. Retrieved 10 August 2020, from https://www.pearsonassessments.com/store/usassessments/en/Store/Professional-Assessments/Cognition-%26-Neuro/Wechsler-Intelligence-Scale-for-Children-%7C-Fourth-Edition/p/100000310.html?tab=pricing-ordering. 

RAHIMIPOUR, T., GHAZANFARI, F., & GHADAMPOUR, E. (2018). The effectiveness of working memory strategies training on improvement of reading performance in dyslexic students. 

Raiford, S. E., Weiss, L. G., Rolfhus, E., & Coalson, D. (2005). WISC-IV technical report# 4: General ability index. 

Scheiber, C. (2016). Is the Cattell–Horn–Carroll-Based Factor Structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fifth Edition (WISC-V) Construct Invariant for a Representative Sample of African–American, Hispanic, and Caucasian Male and Female Students Ages 6 to 16 Years?.  Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology ,  2 (3-4), 79-88. 

Toffalini, E., Giofrè, D., & Cornoldi, C. (2017). Strengths and weaknesses in the intellectual profile of different subtypes of specific learning disorder: a study on 1,049 diagnosed children.  Clinical Psychological Science ,  5 (2), 402-409. 

Watkins, M. W., & Smith, L. G. (2013). Long-term stability of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fourth Edition.  Psychological Assessment ,  25 (2), 477. 

Williams, P. E., Weiss, L. G., & Rolfhus, E. L. (2003a). WISC-IV technical report# 2: Psychometric properties.  The Psychological Corporation’s WISC-IV Technical Manual ,  2 . 

Williams, P. E., Weiss, L. G., & Rolfhus, E. L. (2003b). Clinical validity (WISC-IV Technical Report No. 3).  San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp .