Monday, January 31, 2011

IQ test "practice effects"

A practice effect is a major psychometric issue in many Atkins cases, given that both the state and defense often test the defendant with the same IQ battery (most often a Wechsler), and often within a short test-retest interval. Click here to view all ICDP posts that mention practice effects.

Dr. Alan Kaufman has summarized the majority of the literature on practice effects on the Wechslers. He published an article in The Encyclopedia of Intelligence (1994; Edited by Robert Sternberg) that summarized the research prior to the third editions of the Wechsler scales. That article is available on-line (click here).

The most recent summary of the contemporary Wechsler practice effect research is in Lichtenberger and Kaufman (2009) Essentials of WAIS-IV Assessment (p. 306-309). The tables and text provide much about WAIS-IV and some about WAIS-III. The best source for WAIS-III is Kaufman and Lichtenberger, Assessing Adolescent and Adult Intelligence (either the 2002 second edition or the 2006 third edition), especially Tables 6.5 and 6.6 (2006 edition). Below are a few excerpts from the associated text from the 2006 edition

"Practice effects on Wechsler's scales tend to be profound, particularly on the Performance Scale" (p. 202)

"predictable retest gains in IQs" (p.202)

"On the WAIS-III, tests with largest gains are Picture Completion, Object Assembly, and Picture Arrangement"

"Tests with smallest gains are Matrix Reasoning (most novel Gf test), Vocabulary and Comprehension

Block Design improvement most likely due to speed variance--"on second exposure subjects may be able to respond more quickly, thereby gaining in their scores" (p. 204)

One year interval results in far less pronounced practice effects (p. 208).

"The impact of retesting on test performance, whether using the WAIS-III, WAIS-R, other Wechsler scales, or similar tests, needs to be internalized by researchers and clinicians alike. Researchers should be aware of the routine and expected gains of about 2 1/2 points in V-IQ for all ages between 16 and 89 years. They should also internalize the relatively large gain on P-IQ for ages 16-54 (about 8 to 8 1/2 points), andn the fact that this gain in P-IQ swindles in size to less than 6 points for ages 55-74 and less than 4 points for ages 75-889" (p. 209).

"Increases in Performance IQ will typically be about twice as large as increases in Verbal IQ for individuals ages 16 to 54" (p. 209)

Finally, the latest AAIDD manual provides professional guidance on the practice effect.

"The practice effect refers to gains in IQ scores on test of intelligence that result from a person being retested on the same instrument" (p. 38)

"..established clinical practice is to avoid administering the same intelligence test within the same year to the same individual because it will often lead to an overestimate of the examinee's true intelligence" (p. 38).

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

Generated by: Tag Generator

False confessions by individuals with ID/MR: Story of Floyd Brown

Brief video at CNN illustrating, via the case of Floyd Brown, the potential problem of false confessions by individuals with MR/ID. Click here to view.

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

Generated by: Tag Generator

Sunday, January 30, 2011

iPost: Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads

are here. The usual disclaimers apply. Rank Downloads Paper Title 1 238 Plan Now or Pay Later: The Role of Compliance in Criminal Cases Charlotte Simon, Ryan D. McConnell, Jay Martin, University of Houston - Law Center, Haynes and Boone...

Sent with MobileRSS HD

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

Saturday, January 29, 2011

iPost: California training to feature confession expert

Dr. Richard Leo, Associate Law Professor at USF and a leading scholar in the area of false confessions, will be the keynote speaker at next month's conference of the Forensic Mental Health Association of California. His presentation is titled False Confessions: Causes, Characteristics and Solutions.*

The conference, "Mental Health and the Law: An In-Depth Look at the Evidence," will be March 23-25 in Seaside (just outside of picturesque Monterey).

The FMHAC has scored some other big names, too, including Richard Rogers and Robert Hare. Topics of interest include the effect of high-profile crimes on SVP laws in California, competency restoration treatment in county jails, malingering assessment, and lots more.

*My review of Dr. Leo's book, Police Interrogation and American Justice, is HERE.

Sent with MobileRSS HD

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Blending neuropsychological and CHC psychometric IQ approaches to psych testing

Here is more on my take on how neuropsychological and CHC-based psychometric approaches to assessment can be understood and potentially blended. This is material from my keynote presentation at the Australian Neuropsychology Conference (click here for more information and a link to the PPT of the entire presentation).

Note: Images are embedded in this post. It should be possible to enlarge them by double clicking on each. If that does not work I would suggest you go to the link above and see the entire PPT show, which you can download for free.

​CHC-based neuropsychologists have integrated CHC theory into assessment practice based largely on theoretical, non-CHC empirical research, or logical analysis. Empirical CHC-based neuropsychological assessment research has been sparse. The CHC psychometric-neuropsychological assessment gap is understandable given the two respective assessment models and distinct historical backgrounds. Hoelzle (2008) noted that: (a) the psychometric concept of g has had minimal clinical utility in neuropsychological assessment and theory, (b) neuropsychological assessment has been primarily atheoretical while psychometric research has been searching for the “holy grail” theoretical structural model of intelligence since the days of Spearman, and (c) psychometric models have been primarily focused on internal structural validity while neuropsychological assessment has focused more on the practical questions regarding the ability to differentiate between neurological and normal conditions. McGrew (2010a) described these different approaches as a difference between vertical (factor analysis) trait-oriented psychometric models and more horizontal (multiple regression) functional/pragmatic external prediction neuropsychological models. These two approaches are demonstrated visually below in the two slides.

​As result of its pragmatic functional heritage, many neuropsychological assessment tests are mixed measures of multiple CHC domains. In the language of psychometric CHC Theory, many neuropsychological tests are factorially complex measures with considerable construct-irrelevant variance (when measurement of pure CHC constructs is the criterion). This contrasts with the strong emphasis in contemporary CHC intellectual assessment on developing tests that primarily measure one single CHC construct, purged as much as possible of non-relevant construct variance.

​In the absence of CHC-grounded neuropsyhological assessment research and a consensus neuropsychological assessment model, psychometric (e.g., Flanagan, Alfonso, Ortiz & Dynda, 2010; McGrew, 2010a) , neuropsychological (Strauss et al., 2006), and “blended” neuropsychological+psychometric oriented scholars (e.g., Hale & Fiorello, 2004; Miller, 2007, 2010) have, at times, presented significantly different interpretations of neuropsychological or intelligence tests. For example, more neuropsychologically oriented researchers have described the copy and recall components of Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure (ROCF) test (Meyers & Meyers, 1995, 1996) as measuring planning and organizational abilities, visual memory, visual perception, constructional abilities, motor or visual-motor ability, episodic memory, and incidental learning (Hale & Fiorello, 2004; Straus et al., 2006). Hints of CHC terminology are present in some of these terms but there is no direct mapping to CHC Theory.

Conversely, starting with the results of Hoezle’s (2008) CHC-organized mini-Carroll like meta-analysis of the results of secondary factor analysis of 77 datasets that included neuropsychological and other ability measures (this is one of the best and most comprehensive dissertations I have ever read), McGrew (2010a) suggested that the copy component of the ROCF was likely a mixed measure of Gv-SR (narrow CHC ability of spatial relations in the broad Gv or visual-spatial domain), Gp-P2 (narrow CHC ability of finger dexterity in the broad Gp or psychomotor domain), with possible visual memory (Gv-Mv) involvement. As for the ROCF recall component, McGrew (2010a) suggests that it likely measures a mixture of Gv-MV (narrow CHC visual memory in the broad Gv domain), Glr-M6 (narrow CHC free recall ability in the broad Glr or long-term storage and retrieval domain), with possible involvement of working memory (Gsm-MW). Miller (2010) provides the “blended” interpretation of the ROCF as primarily a measure of visual-perceptual organization, visual-spatial ability and visual-spatial memory (Gv) in particular. Obviously the three sets of ROCF interpretations mention a number of similar abilities, yet practitioners are likely left confused given the varying terminology and ability descriptions.

My CHC neuropsych summaries for the ROCF are presented below:

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

Monday, January 24, 2011

The KAIT Gf-Gc IQ test: An under-appreciated contribution to the evolution of CHC intelligence theory

I have been busy revising my 2005 book chapter on CHC Theory: Past Present and Future. It is now coauthored with Dr. Joel Schneider who took the lead and is now first author. Together Joel and I wrote WAY toooooooo much material, and we had to do some serious editing...dropping major sections that we thought were important. I have decided that some of those sections that I wrote would appear hear at IQs Corner, and possibly in future manuscripts yet to be determined.

Part of the chapter is a visual-graphic presentation, with narrative text, of the CHC Timeline project I've been working on for a few years. If you visit the timeline link you will also gain access, via links, to the original chapter, which will provide you more context.

Cut from the submitted draft were comments about the under-appreciated role of KAIT IQ test in the evolution of Gf-Gc/CHC assessment instruments. You can see this event in the timeline at the link above. Below is the text written to explain the small, yet important, contribution of the KAIT to the evolution of CHC theory. Although I wrote most of this section, there are a few well crafted sentences below that were written by Joel.

The contribution of the KAIT Gf-Gc test to the evolution of CHC theory and assessment

An under-appreciated contribution to the evolution of Gf-Gc intellectual assessment was the publication of the Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT) (Kaufman & Kaufman, 1993), based on Cattell’s (1941, 1943) original gf-gc Theory instead of the Horn–Cattell (1966) Extended Gf-Gc Theory. The Kaufmans used the older theory not out of ignorance but for pragmatic reasons (and some admirably subtle theoretical justifications as well). However, the distinction between the older, broader, and deliberately multidimensional gf and the newer, narrower, and more unidimensional Gf (as reflected Extended Gf-Gc theory) was probably lost on most potential users of the test.

By self-admission, Kaufman (2009) noted that the KAIT “sadly, has been all but ignored in the United States” (p. 1). The failure of the KAIT to attract assessment professionals was most likely due to the dominance of the venerable adult Wechsler batteries and bad timing. The trend in test development was moving toward giving users the option to measure narrower abilities with more factor-pure subtests and the KAIT was out of step with this trend. Flanagan and McGrew’s (1998) joint KAIT/WJ-R CFA presented an eight-factor Extended Gf-Gc model (Gf, Gc, Grw, Glr, Gsm, Ga, Gv, Gs) and suggested that the KAIT Gf composite, by the standards of the Extended Gf-Gc Theory, was a mix of Gf, Gsm, Gv, and Glr. The decision to measure the older, broader gf was not wrong (indeed, other tests have composite scores with comparable ability mixtures such as the WJ-III Thinking Abilities composite, CAS Full Scale IQ, KABC-II Mental Processing Composite, DAS-II Special Nonverbal Composite, or the now-discarded PIQ from the Wechsler series). The problem was that only the Gf and Gc constructs were represented by at least two KAIT tests and thus there was no option to form reasonably unidimensional composite scores.

​The small KAIT blip on the Gf-Gc assessment radar screen was important for a number of reasons. First, Alan Kaufman’s opinion carries weight in this field. When he recognized the importance of Gf-Gc theory (first in the publication of the original K-BIT, which is now in its second edition), other test developers noticed. Post-KAIT publication Kaufman and colleagues began an active program of Gf-Gc research and publication (see Kaufman, 2009) that foreshadowed Kaufman’s embracing of CHC theory as the consensus model of intelligence for use in the development of intelligence batteries (Kaufman, 2009). Second, it was during their WJ-R/KAIT CFA study that Flanagan and McGrew (1998) recognized that all Gf-Gc assessment research up to that point in time had myopically focused exclusively on the broad Gf-Gc domains, ignoring the importance of understanding individual tests as per the narrow (stratum I) abilities they measured.

I would not be surprised if the KAIT, or parts of the battery, reappear in some form of cognitive assessment instrument(s) in the future.

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

iPost: Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads

are here. The usual disclaimers apply. Rank Downloads Paper Title 1 350 Post Padilla: Padilla's Puzzles for Review in State and Federal Courts Gray Proctor, Nancy J. King, Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, Vanderbilt University - Law School, Date posted...

Sent with MobileRSS HD

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

Saturday, January 22, 2011

NYTimes: States Face Shortage of Key Lethal Injection Drug

From The New York Times:

States Face Shortage of Key Lethal Injection Drug

An Illinois manufacturer's decision to stop making the anesthetic sodium thiopental will delay some executions and force states to adopt new drug combinations.

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

Friday, January 21, 2011

iPost: Insanity, Law, and Science

From Crime and Consequences blog

The NYT's Room for Debate feature has five short statements on this topic:

In the three decades since the Hinckley case, brain research and brain scans have made many advances in diagnosing and categorizing mental illness. Yet this seems to have little bearing on how society deals with insanity and culpability in the legal arena.

What has been learned in the decades since the Hinckley case? Should a better medical understanding of mental illness alter our legal definitions of insanity? Or is the insanity defense rooted in principles or traditions that actually don't have much to do with medicine?
The participants are Alan Dershowitz, James Whitman, William Carpenter, David Bruck, and yours truly.

Sent with MobileRSS HD

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

Sunday, January 16, 2011

iPost: Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads

are here. The usual disclaimers apply. Rank Downloads Paper Title 1 324 Post Padilla: Padilla's Puzzles for Review in State and Federal Courts Gray Proctor, Nancy J. King, Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, Vanderbilt University - Law School, Date posted...

Sent with MobileRSS HD

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

Saturday, January 15, 2011

iPost: APLS workshops at 2011 annual conference

 APLS workshops at 2011 annual conference

AP-LS Workshops

March 2, 2011
The *4th International Congress on Psychology and Law*, which includes
AP-LS, the European Association of Psychology and Law
, and the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry,
Psychology and Law
is pleased to announce the following preconference workshops being
held on March 2, 2011 at the Miami Regency Hyatt
. Please note that the Early Registration (reduced rate) deadline is
*January 31, 2011*. You can register for the workshops on the AP-LS
website ( ). The American Psychology-Law Society is
approved by the American Psychological Association to sponsor
continuing education for psychologists. AP-LS maintains responsibility
for this program and its contents.

Full-Day Workshops (8:00 am - 5:00 pm) *7 CE Credits*
*Workshop A: Assessment, Treatment, & Risk Management of Sexual
*Presenter: Robin J. Wilson, Ph.D., ABPP*
This workshop is designed for students and working professionals
interested in issues related to sexual offending and contemporary
Western society. Workshop topics will be generally at an intermediate
level, but the curriculum will appeal to both new and seasoned
*Learning Objectives:* (1) Identify how sexual offending has affected
contemporary Western societies; (2) List some of the key
characteristics of victim and offender populations; (3) Outline some
of the difficulties inherent in assessing sexual offenders; (4) List
and explain the principles of effective correctional interventions;
(5) Critically appraise the efficacy of sexual offender risk
management protocols.

*Workshop B: Assessing High Risk Youth: Conceptual and Methodological
*Presenter: Lorraine Johnstone, D.Clinical Psychology*
This workshop, derived from diverse literatures including delinquency
research (e.g. the Cambridge, Dunedin and Pittsburgh Youth Studies),
developmental psychology, developmental psychopathology, violence risk
assessment, forensic research, and mental health research, will
promote reflective practice and encourage a critical analysis of the
literature for the purposes of identifying how progress might be
achieved in assessing violence risk in youth.
*Learning Objectives:* (1) Discuss complex case presentations that
typically characterize children and young people who perpetrate
violence; (2) Summarize the main protocols for assessing risk of
violence and sexually harmful behavior; (3) List conceptual and
developmental challenges associated with this practice; (4) Explain
methodological limitations that characterize the literature and
assessment approaches; (5) Describe how to produce defensible
decisions that are appropriately developmentally and methodologically
* *
*Workshop C: Treating offenders with mental illness: Toward an
evidenced-based intervention*
*Presenters: Robert Morgan, Ph.D., Daryl Kroner, Ph.D.*
The workshop reviews the empirical literature regarding: (a)
prevalence of mental illness in criminal justice settings; (b)
presenting mental health needs; (c) service utilization; and (d)
impact of incarceration on offenders with mental illness (OMI). This
workshop will then review the empirical literature regarding what
works when intervening with offenders as well as persons with mental
illness. The remainder of this workshop will focus specifically on
mental health interventions developed for OMI, with emphasis on
empirically supported interventions. We will conclude this workshop by
presenting a treatment model and assessment plan for intervening with
*Learning Objectives:* (1) Recognize prevalence of mental illness
among offenders in the criminal justice system; (2) Identify effective
correctional interventions for offenders; (3) Identify effective
mental health interventions for persons with mental illness; (4)
Identify a theoretical model to guide clinical interventions with OMI;
(5) Identify the role and mechanism of assessment in the treatment
process of OMI.
* *
*Workshop D: Introducing the Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathic
Personality (CAPP)*
*Presenters: David Cooke, Ph.D., Stephen Hart, Ph.D.*
The CAPP provides a dynamic and comprehensive assessment of the
symptoms of psychopathic personality disorder (PPD), which can be used
to assess the severity of symptoms over time. The CAPP covers the full
domain of PPD symptomatology, and this is potentially useful in
correctional, forensic, civil, community, and family settings.
*Learning Objectives: *(1) Explain the need for a clinically based
comprehensive model of psychopathy; (2) Examine the process used to
develop this model; (3) Describe the model in detail; ( 4) Demonstrate
the approach used to evaluate a case in terms of the model; (5)
Discuss the importance of this model of psychopathy in individual case

Half-Day Workshops (E: 8:00 am – 12:00pm / F: 1:00 pm – 5:00 pm)
*3.5 CE Credits*
*Workshop E: The Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments*
*Presenters: Naomi Goldstein, Ph.D., Heather Zelle, Ph.D., Alan
Goldstein, Ph.D.*
The content of this workshop involves a description of the revisions
to the Instruments for Assessing Understanding and Appreciation of
Miranda Rights (Grisso, 1998) when creating the Miranda Rights
Comprehension Instruments (MRCI; Goldstein, Zelle, & Grisso, 2011).
The original Instruments for Assessing Understanding and Appreciation
of Miranda Rights have been widely recognized as the recommended
instruments for assessing capacities of defendants to have waived
their rights during custodial interrogation proceedings Nonetheless,
the instruments required updating this workshop will review the
development process of and key changes in the creation of the revised
instruments. It also will review research with the MRCI that is
relevant to the use of the instruments in forensic practice.
*Learning Objectives:* (1) Recognize changes from Grisso's original
Instruments for Assessing Understanding and Appreciation of Miranda
Rights; (2) Identify key similarities and differences in
administration and scoring procedures between the original and revised
instruments; (3) Describe the process of interpreting examinees'
responses and scores for presentation in forensic evaluation reports;
(4) Summarize the instruments' development process and psychometric
properties to aid in admissibility hearings; (5) Address key questions
about the instruments during court testimony.
* *
*Workshop F: Causal Inference Using Propensity Scores*
*Presenter: Thomas Loughran, Ph.D*
Researchers are often interested in assessing effects from events
which cannot be experimentally manipulated (e.g., arrest or
institutional placement) but are handicapped by selection biases. This
workshop introduces propensity scores, a powerful method to derive
causal effects from observational data.
*Learning Objectives:* (1) Explain the logic of propensity score
matching; (2) Estimate treatment effects from non-experimental data;
(3) Easily estimate these models using Stata; (4) Explain the
methodology and results to nontechnical audiences; (5) Discuss the
limitations of propensity scores.

For more information, please contact Karen Galin
, Ph.D. (, Pre-Conference Workshop Chair

If you do not want to receive any more emails from the American
Psychology-Law Society,

Powered by PHPlist, --

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Blogmaster brief vacation

On the road for brief R&R - blogging lite

I will be away on a brief family R&R mini-vacation from Wed thru Sunday. Will have my iPad with me, so I might do some lite blogging....or maybe not. Shall return next Monday

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

iPost: Law and the Brain Conference: New York City, March 15-16, 2011

I'm pleased to be one of the keynote speakers at an upcoming neurolaw conference in Manhattan (March 15-16, 2011). There's an early-bird registration deadline on January 14. To find out all the details, follow this link. From the website: Advances...

Sent with MobileRSS HD

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

Atkins MR/ID Court Decision: Florida's not-so-bright "bright-line" standard in action in Franqui v Florida (2011)

Another Florida Atkins MR/ID decision (Franqui v Florida, 2011) that reinforces the state of Florida's Cherry Court based "bright-line" (or what I think is a "not-so bright-approach") standard for evaluating IQ test scores. Again, one of the most accepted psychometric concepts in the arena of intelligence testing (SEM) is disregarded by Florida.

Also of interest is the apparent use of expert testimony only via written statements--no actual oral testimony. Haven't seen that one before, although I've not read all Atkins decisions.

This decision will be added to the ICDP Court Decisions blogroll.

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

Monday, January 10, 2011

iPost: Law and the Brain - New York, NY

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

iPost: Colorado Governor Grants Unconditional Pardon Based on Innocence to Inmate Who Was Executed

On January 7, Colorado Governor Bill Ritter granted a full and unconditional posthumous pardon to Joe Arridy, who had been convicted and executed as an accomplice to a murder that occurred in 1936. The pardon came 72 years after Arridy's execution and is the first such pardon in Colorado history.  A press release from the governor's office stated, "[A]n overwhelming body of evidence indicates the 23-year-old Arridy was innocent, including false and coerced confessions, the likelihood that Arridy was not in Pueblo at the time of the killing, and an admission of guilt by someone else."  The governor also pointed to Arridy's intellectual disabilities.  He had an IQ of 46 and functioned like a toddler.  The governor said, "Granting a posthumous pardon is an extraordinary remedy.  But the tragic conviction of Mr. Arridy and his subsequent execution on Jan. 6, 1939, merit such relief based on the great likelihood that Mr. Arridy was, in fact, innocent of the crime for which he was executed, and his severe mental disability at the time of his trial and execution. Pardoning Mr. Arridy cannot undo this tragic event in Colorado history. It is in the interests of justice and simple decency, however, to restore his good name."

The governor's press release gives significant credit to Mr. Arridy's attorney, David Martinez: "The request for Arridy's pardon was brought to Gov. Ritter by local attorney David A. Martinez, who has spent years researching the case."

("72 Years after Execution, a Posthumous Pardon,", January 8, 2011).  Read Gov. Ritter's statement of pardon.  See Innocence, Clemency, and Intellectual Disabilitiy.

Sent with MobileRSS HD

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

Saturday, January 8, 2011

WJ III IQ and ACH tests and descriptions

For those unfamiliar with the WJ III battery, below are some tables that list the tests and major composite scores and definitions of abilities measured. I borrowed this from are recent book chapter publication.

Double clicking on the images should make them larger and more readable. To make sure they are viewable, you might want to check out the jpg images directly from my web page here and here.

Conflict of interest disclosure - I am a coauthor of the WJ III.

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

Atkins MR/ID death penalty decision: Lewis v Ohio (2010)

Lewis v Ohio (2010) is being added to the Court Decisions blogroll. The opinion concluded that, "the court finds that Defendant has proven, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he is intellectually disabled or mentally retarded. Thus, a sentence of death may not be imposed on Defendant pursuant to the Eighth Amendment"

Of notable interest was the courts acceptance of a Flynn effect adjustment to IQ scores.

Thanks again to Kevin Foley for sending me a copy of this decision.

Potential conflict of interest: I have professional relations with two of the defense experts--Dr. Stephen Greenspan (listed as an expert at the ICDP blog) and Dr. Woods (we both serve on an AAIDD Atkins committee, together with Dr. Greenspan).

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

SAGE Open - now accepting manuscripts

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

Begin forwarded message:

From: SAGE News <>
Date: January 5, 2011 4:08:15 AM CST
Subject: SAGE Open - now accepting manuscripts
Reply-To: mailbox19827x124683 <>

Trouble viewing? Try the web version.
Mobile user? Try the mobile version.

SAGE Open is now accepting manuscripts - prepare yours today!
Get email alerts

Dear Kevin McGrew,

SAGE Open is our new open access publication. It publishes peer-reviewed, original research and review articles in an interactive, open-access format. Articles may span the full spectrum of the social and behavioral sciences and the humanities. Find out more, including manuscript submission guidelines, at

Why publish in SAGE Open?

  • Quick review and decision times for authors
  • Speedy, continuous-publication online format
  • Global distribution of your research via SAGE Journals Online, including enhanced online features such as public usage metrics, comments features, subject categories, and article ranking and recommendations
  • Professional copyediting and typesetting of your article
  • $195 introductory author acceptance fee (discounted from the regular price of $695)

Consider publishing in SAGE Open if you want...

  • Quality reviews and efficient production, ensuring the quickest publication time
  • Free, broad, and global distribution on a powerful, highly discoverable publishing platform
  • Branding and marketing by a world-leading social science publisher, including promotion of your article via publicity and social media channels
  • Open access publication due to university or government mandates
Manuscript submissions are handled online through SAGE track, SAGE's web-based peer review and submission system, powered by ScholarOne Manuscripts™. Submit your manuscripts today at


Bob Howard
Director, Social Science Journals

Please direct any inquiries to





Monday, January 3, 2011

iPost: Hughes on Mitigating Death

Emily Hughes (Washington University School of Law in St. Louis) has posted Mitigating Death (Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 18, p. 337, 2009) on SSRN. Here is the abstract: Capital mitigation specialists are critical members of the...

Sent with MobileRSS HD

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

Sunday, January 2, 2011

The continued evolution of the CHC theory of IQ: Increasing mentions in the professional literature

In my 2005 CHC Theory: Past, Present and Future chapter in Flanagan and Harrison's Contemporary Intellectual Assessment (click here to find a PDF copy of that chapter; click here for an on-line pre-pub version with additional information), I indicate that the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory tipping point occurred approximately 2000/2001. I first suggested a "synthesized Carroll and Horn-Cattell framework" in 1997, and the three names were linked in Flanagan, McGrew & Ortiz (2000). As explained in the 2005 chapter, the first formal published definition of CHC theory occurred in the WJ III technical manual (McGrew & Woodcock, 2001).

As I reported in a recent post, a Google Ngram semantic analysis indicated that CHC theory is now the consensus theory of intelligence, with the Ngram graph suggesting this point occurred between 2001-2002. I've reproduced that figure below. [Clicking on images below should result in reader seeing larger more readable version being presented]

To investigate the increasing impact of CHC theory, I recently completed two different searches. I took the search terms "CHC" and "Cattell-Horn-Carroll" and submitted them both to PsycINFO and the journal Intelligence issue archive. I simply asked to find any publications (journal articles, books, dissertations) where these two search terms occurred ANYWHERE in the source (title, text, references, etc). I then tallied the frequency of publications in two year chunks of time. The results are below. The goal was to ascertain if there were any relative changes in mention of this theory overt time.

The conclusions appear clear and consistent with the Google Ngram analyses noted above. The use of the two terms started to emerge in 2001-2002 and have steadily increased in the intelligence literature at large (PsycINFO) and in the premiere journal on human intelligence--Intelligence. Clearly the language of intelligence and intelligence test theory has been impacted by the CHC tipping point (circa 2000-2001).

In a subsequent post I will provide a link the references that serve as the bases of the above figure.

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

KABC-II IQ subtest names and descriptions

For those unfamiliar with the content of the KABC-III IQ test battery, I extracted the table below from a journal article. It lists the individual tests with brief descriptions. Clicking on image should take you to a larger more readable version.

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

Hot and cold CHC intelligence abilities--Gf,Gc,Gv hot--Ga,Glr cold

Interesting article in the journal Intelligence reviewing the state-of-the-art of factor analysis practices for identifying the g (general intelligence) factors. Abstract is below. Of interest is the use of the CHC framework to classify the type of broad CHC factor indicators found in the research synthesis.

Not unexpectedly, Gf, Gc, and Gv were found most often in IQ factor analysis research, followed by Gq, Gs and Gsm. Abilities that appear underrepresented in IQ factor analysis g research are the domains of Glr and Ga.

However, a couple of major caveats. The literature review was primarily adult samples. There has been considerable factor analysis activity with tests in childhood and adolescent samples that might increase the proportion of Glr and Ga indicators. Also, the authors did not include journals favored by those doing research in school psychology, special education, and speech and language---fields of study that most likely have published more studies in the under-represented CHC domains.

Never-the-less......the general trends are not surprising.

Clicking on images should take you toe larger versions.

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad

iPost: Top-Ten Recent SSRN Downloads

are here. The usual disclaimers apply. Rank Downloads Paper Title 1 367 The Facade of FCPA Enforcement Mike Koehler, Butler University College of Business, Date posted to database: November 9, 2010 2 316 Good Faith, New Law, and the Scope...

Sent with MobileRSS HD

Sent from Kevin McGrew's iPad
Kevin McGrew, PhD
Educational Psychologist

MDS analysis of WISC-IV

It is no secret that I'm a big fan of multidimensional scaling (MDS--especially Guttman's Radex) model as a supplement to factor analysis of cognitive tests. While going thru some of my e-files I found a recent 3D MDS analysis of the WISC-IV. Below is the abstract and final 3D model. Clicking on images should take you to a larger version of the image.

For those interested, the content/stimulus dimension of my proposed cognitive ability assessment design and interpretation matrix is due to my application of MDS to data from the WJ III and the various Wechsler batteries. The complete "beyond CHC theory" presentation can be found at a prior post.

- iPost using BlogPress from my Kevin McGrew's iPad