Objective: The aim of this study is to examine the factor structure and measurement invariance of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children Fourth Edition (WISC-IV), which is used for intellectual assessment in clinical and non-clinical samples, through using the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) method. Method: The sample of the study consisted of two groups, of which 415 were clinical (those having attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, specific learning disability, and intellectual disability) and 437 were developmentally normal children without any clinical diagnosis. In order to test first-order (the correlated four-factor model) and higher-order factor structure (model including general intelligence factor) of the WISC-IV, CFA was performed separately for each group. Furthermore, multiple group CFA was also performed to examine measurement invariance across groups. Results: Findings of CFA carried out separately for the groups revealed excellent model fit indices for both the correlated firstorder and second-order structure of the WISC-IV in both sample groups. However, as a result of multiple group CFA, model fit indices and factor loadings of the clinical sample were found to be better for the correlated four-factor first-order structure compared to the non-clinical sample. Conclusion: The findings suggest that the WISC-IV index and subtest scores measure the same cognitive structure for both groups.
1. Canivez G. Psychometric versus actuarial interpretation of intelligence and related aptitude batteries: In Saklofske DH, Schwean VL, Reynolds CR (editors). The Oxford handbook of child psychological assessment. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2013, 84-112.
2. Spruill J, Harrison PL. Assessment of mental retardation/ intellectual disability with the WISC-IV: In Prifitera A, Saklofske DH, Weiss LG (editors). WISC-IV clinical assessment and intervention. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 2008, 273- 298.
3. Çelik C. Evaluation of cognitive functions in specific learning disability and effectiveness of intervention methods. PhD Thesis, Ankara University Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara, 2019.
4. Hale J, Alfonso V, Berninger V, Bracken B, Christo C, Clark E, et al. Critical issues in response-to-intervention, comprehensive evaluation, and specific learning disabilities identification and intervention: An expert white paper consensus. Learn Disabil Q 2010; 33:223-236.
5. Ortiz SO. CHC Theory of intelligence. In Goldstein S, Princiotta D, Naglieri JA, editors. Handbook of intelligence. New York, NY: Springer, 2015, 209-227.
6. Braden JP, Kratochwill TR. Treatment utility of assessment: Myths and realities. School Psych Rev Taylor & Francis 1997; 26:475-485.
7. Schwean VL, McCrimmon A. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Using the WISC-IV to inform intervention planning: In Prifitera A, Saklofske DH, Weiss LG (editors). WISC-IV clinical assessment and intervention. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 2008, 193-215.
8. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education, Joint Committee on Standards for Educational, & Psychological Testing (US). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Amer Educational Research Assn, 1999.
9. Goodwin LD, Leech NL. The meaning of validity in the new standards for educational and psychological testing: Implications for measurement courses. Meas Eval Couns Dev 2003; 36:181- 191.
10. Linn RL. The standards for educational and psychological testing: Guidance in test development: In Lane S, Raymond MR, Haladyna TM (editors). Handbook of test development. New York, NY: Routledge, 2011, 41-52.
11. Savasir I, Sahin N. Wechsler Intelligence scale for children (WISC-R) manual. Ankara: Turkish Psychological Association Publications, 1995.
12. Uluc S, Oktem F, Erden G, Gencoz T, Sezgin N. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV: A new era for Turkey in evaluation of intelligence in the clinical context. Turkish Psychological Articles 2011; 14: 49-57. (Turkish)
13. Kane M. Content-related validity evidence in test development: In Haladyna TM, Downing SM (editors). Handbook of test development. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, 2006, 131-153.
14. Messick S. Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. Am Psychol 1995; 50:741- 749.
15. Keith TZ, Reynolds MR. Using confirmatory factor analysis to aid in understanding the constructs measured by intelligence tests: In Flanagan DP, McDonough EM (editors). Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues. The Guilford Press, 2018, 853-900.
16. Devena SE, Gay CE, Watkins MW. Confirmatory factor analysis of the WISC-IV in a hospital referral sample. J Psychoeduc Assess 2013; 31:591-599.
17. O’Brien K. Factor analysis: An overview in the field of measurement. Physiother Canada 2007; 59:142-155.
18. Anderson T, Wallace ED Jr. Confirmatory factor analysis of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised with normal and psychiatric adolescents. J Res Adolesc 1995; 5:319-332.
19. Kush JC, Watkins MW, Ward TJ, Ward SB, Canivez GL, Worrell FC. Construct validity of the WISC-III for White and Black students from the WISC-III standardization sample and for Black students referred for psychological evaluation. School Psych Rev 2001; 30:70-88.
20. Lee LMP, Lam YR. Confirmatory factor analyses of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised and the Hong KongWechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. Educ Psychol Meas 1988; 48:895-903.
21. Naglieri JA. Factor structure of the WISC-R for children identified as learning disabled. Psychol Rep 1981; 49:891-895.
22. Ramanaiah NV, O’Donnell JP, Ribich F. Multiple‐group factor analysis of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. J Clin Psychol Wiley Online Library 1976; 32:829-831.
23. Silverstein AB. Alternative multiple‐group solutions for the WISC and the WISC‐R. J Clin Psychol 1982; 38:166-168.
24. Tingstrom DH, Pfeiffer SI. WISC‐R factor structure in a referred pediatric population. J Clin Psychol 1988; 44:799-802.
25. Bodin D, Pardini DA, Burns TG, Stevens AB. Higher order factor structure of the WISC-IV in a clinical neuropsychological sample. Child Neuropsychol 2009; 15:417-424.
26. Chen H, Keith TZ, Weiss L, Zhu J, Li Y. Testing for multigroup invariance of second-order WISC-IV structure across China, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan. Pers Individ Dif 2010; 49:677- 682.
27. MacLean H, McKenzie K, Kidd G, Murray AL, Schwannauer M. Measurement invariance in the assessment of people with an intellectual disability. Res Dev Disabil 2011; 32:1081-1085.
28. Richerson LP, Watkins MW, Beaujean AA. Longitudinal invariance of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children– Fourth Edition in a referral sample. J Psychoeduc Assess 2014; 32:597-609.
29. Watkins MW. Structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children--Fourth Edition among a national sample of referred students. Psychol Assess 2010; 22:782-787.
30. Watkins MW, Wilson SM, Kotz KM, Carbone MC, Babula T. Factor structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children– Fourth Edition among referred students. Educ Psychol Meas 2006; 66:975-983.
31. Weiss LG, Keith TZ, Zhu J, Chen H. WISC-IV and clinical validation of the four-and five-factor interpretative approaches. J Psychoeduc Assess 2013; 31:114-131.
32. Wechsler D. Wechsler intelligence scale for children–Fifth Edition (WISC-V). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation, 2014.
33. Kush JC, Canivez GL. Construct validity of the WISC–IV Italian edition: A bifactor examination of the standardization sample: Chi niente sa, di niente dubita. Int J Sch Educ Psychol 2019;1-15.
34. Oktem F, Erden G, Gencoz T, Sezgin N, Uluc S. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV (WÇZÖ-IV) application and scoring manual Turkish version. Ankara: Turkish Psychologists Association Publications-Pearson Assessments, 2016.
35. Sotelo‐Dynega M, Dixon SG. Cognitive assessment practices: A survey of school psychologists. Psychol Sch Wiley Online Library 2014; 51:1031-1045.
36. Nakano S, Watkins MW. Factor structure of the wechsler intelligence scales for children–fourth edition among referred native american students. Psychol Sch 2013; 50:957-968.
37. Styck KM, Watkins MW. Structural validity of the WISC-IV for students with learning disabilities. J Learn Disabil 2016; 49:216- 224.
38. Watkins MW, Canivez GL, James T, James K, Good R. Construct validity of the WISC–IVUK with a large referred Irish sample. Int J Sch Educ Psychol 2013; 1:102-111.
39. Wechsler D. Wechsler intelligence scale for children–Fourth Edition (WISC-IV). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation, 2003.
40. Chen H-Y, Keith TZ, Yung-Hwa C, Ben-Sheng C. What does the WISC-IV measure? Validation of the scoring and CHC-based interpretative approaches. Jiaoyu Kexue Yanjiu Qikan 2009; 54:85-108.
41. Keith TZ, Fine JG, Taub GE, Reynolds MR, Kranzler JH. Higher order, multisample, confirmatory factor analysis of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fourth Edition: What does it measure. School Psych Rev 2006; 35:108-127.
42. Chen H, Zhu J. Measurement invariance of WISC-IV across normative and clinical samples. Pers Individ Dif 2012; 52:161- 166.
43. Lecerf T, Rossier J, Favez N, Reverte I, Coleaux L. The four-vs. alternative six-factor structure of the French WISC-IV. Swiss J Psychol 2010; 69:221-232.
44. Golay P, Reverte I, Rossier J, Favez N, Lecerf T. Further insights on the French WISC-IV factor structure through Bayesian structural equation modeling. Psychol Assess 2013; 25:496-508.
45. Reverte I, Golay P, Favez N, Rossier J, Lecerf T. Structural validity of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-IV) in a French-speaking Swiss sample. Learn Individ Differ 2014; 29:114-119.
46. Fenollar-Cortés J, López-Pinar C, Watkins MW. Structural validity of the Spanish Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children– fourth edition in a large sample of Spanish children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Int J Sch Educ Psychol 2019; 7:2-14.
47. Gomez R, Vance A, Watson SD. Structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - fourth edition in a group of children with ADHD. Front Psychol 2016; 7:737.
48. Styck KM, Watkins MW. Structural validity of the WISC-IV for students with ADHD. J Atten Disord 2017; 21:921-928.
49. Thaler NS, Barchard KA, Parke E, Jones WP, Etcoff LM, Allen DN. Factor Structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children: Fourth Edition in Children with ADHD. J Atten Disord 2015; 19:1013-1021.
50. Yang P, Cheng CP, Chang CL, Liu TL, Hsu HY, Yen CF. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children 4th edition-Chinese version index scores in Taiwanese children with attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2013; 67:83- 91.
51. Canivez GL, Watkins MW, Good R, James K, James T. Construct validity of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Fourth UK Edition with a referred Irish sample: Wechsler and CattellHorn-Carroll model comparisons with 15 subtests. Br J Educ Psychol 2017; 87:383-407.
52. Giofrè D, Cornoldi C. The structure of intelligence in children with specific learning disabilities is different as compared to typically development children. Intelligence 2015; 52:36-43.
53. Canivez GL. Construct validity of the WISC-IV with a referred sample: direct versus indirect hierarchical structures. Sch Psychol Q 2014; 29:38-51.
54. Millsap RE, Kwok OM. Evaluating the impact of partial factorial invariance on selection in two populations. Psychol Methods 2004; 9:93-115.
55. Vandenberg RJ, Lance CE. A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organ Res 2000; 3:4-70.
56. Chen FF, Sousa KH, West SG. Teacher’s corner: Testing measurement invariance of second-order factor models. Struct Equ Model 2005; 12:471-492.
57. Steinmetz H, Schmidt P, Tina-Booh A, Wieczorek S, Schwartz SH. Testing measurement invariance using multigroup CFA: Differences between educational groups in human values measurement. Qual Quant 2009; 43:599-616.
58. Ogata K. WISC-IV factor structures of Japanese children with borderline, or deficient intellectual abilities: testing measurement invariance compared to simulated norm. Psychology 2019; 10:767-776.
59. Gomez R, Vance A, Watson S. Bifactor model of WISC-IV: Applicability and measurement invariance in low and normal IQ groups. Psychol Assess 2017; 29:902-912.
60. Chen H, Zhu J. Factor invariance between genders of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fourth edition. Pers Individ Dif 2008; 45:260-266.
61. Celik C, Yigit I, Erden G. Confirmatory factor analysis of the revised form of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children: A sample of children with normal mental development. Turkish Psychological Articles 2015; 18:21-29. (Turkish)
62. Celik C, Yigit I, Erden G, Vural MA. The evaluation of the factor structure of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised Form in children with intellectual disability. Turk J Child Adolesc Ment Health 2016; 23:17-28. (Turkish)
63. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model a Multidiscip J 1999; 6:1-55.
64. Kelloway EK. Using LISREL for structural equation modeling: A researcher’s guide. California: Sage, 1998.
65. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: The Guilford Press, 2015.
66. Schwarz G. Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann Stat 1978; 6:461-464.
67. Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Second ed., New York, NY: The Guilford Press, 2015.
68. Chen FF. Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Struct Equ Model J 2007; 14:464-504.
69. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct Equ Model J 2002; 9:233-255.
70. Williams PE, Weiss LG, Rolfhus EL. WISC-IV technical report# 2: Psychometric properties. https://images.pearsonclinical.com/ images/pdf/wisciv/WISCIVTechReport2.pdf.
71. Kush JC, Canivez GL. The higher order structure of the WISC–IV Italian adaptation using hierarchical exploratory factor analytic procedures. Int J Sch Educ Psychol 2019; 7:15-28.
72. McGill RJ, Canivez GL. Confirmatory factor analyses of the WISC-IV Spanish core and supplemental subtests: Validation evidence of the Wechsler and CHC models. Int J Sch Educ Psychol 2018; 6:239-251.
73. Flanagan DP, Kaufman S. Essentials of assessment with WISC-IV. New York, NY: Wiley, 2004.
74. Delis DC, Jacobson M, Bondi MW, Hamilton JM, Salmon DP. The myth of testing construct validity using factor analysis or correlations with normal or mixed clinical populations: lessons from memory assessment. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2003; 9:936- 946.