Friday, July 16, 2010

Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) based intelligence testing in Atkins cases

I've written frequently about the importance of psychologists involved in Atkins cases to get more up-to-date re: contemporary psychometric intelligence theory, especial the consensus Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of intelligence (click here for all prior posts, this one included, so tagged at the ICDP blog).  The gap between contemporary intelligence theory and testing practice in legal settings is troubling and needs to be narrowed.

Today I'm excited to announce the availability of a "taking stock" intelligence test/theory article that supports my frequent and persistent message...and it is NOT by me...but by other highly respected intelligence test research scholars.

I'm excited to announce that the special issue of Psychology in the Schools, Current Research in Cattell-Horn-Carroll-Based Assessment (guest editors where Jocelyn Newton and myself), is now published.  Yippeee.  To be honest, Dr. Newton deserves the major credit....she did all the heavy lifting and I road her coat tails.  Also thanks to Dr. David McIntosh for suggesting and overseeing the special issue

A review of the TOC can be found by clicking here

The article that I highly recommend as must reading is listed below (along with a link to a copy).

Keith, T. & Reynolds, M. (2010).  Cattell-Horn-Carroll abilities and cognitive tests:  What we've learned from 20 years of research.  Psychology in the Schools, 47(4), 2010, 635-650 (also available via click here)
This article reviews factor-analytic research on individually administered intelligence tests from a Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) perspective. Although most new and revised tests of intelligence are based, at least in part, on CHC theory, earlier versions generally were not. Our review suggests that whether or not they were based on CHC theory, the factors derived from both new and previous versions of most tests are well explained by the theory. Especially useful for understanding the theory and tests are cross-battery analyses using multiple measures from multiple instruments. There are issues that need further explanation, of course, about CHC theory and tests derived from that theory. We address a few of these issues including those related to comprehension-knowledge (Gc) and memory factors, as well as issues related to factor retention in factor analysis.
Although the WAIS-IV is not specifically treated in the article, the authors do address the changing (and more CHC-like foundation) of the Wechsler batteries via research on the WISC-III/IV (which the WAIS-IV has been following in terms of structural organization since the WAIS-III/IV).  The inescapable conclusion is that psychologists involved in Atkins cases need to "get current" on CHC theory and CHC-based test interpretation.  It is nice to no longer be the sole voice yelling into the halls of justice.

The article makes reference to a master table of CHC abilities and definitions included in the introduction to this special issue I co-authored with Dr. Newton.  It available here.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,