Factor structure of the Differential Ability Scales–Second Edition: Exploratory and hierarchical factor analyses with the core subtests.

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (11) ◽  
pp. 1475-1488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary L. Canivez ◽  
Ryan J. McGill
Keyword(s):  
Factor Structure ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Differential Ability Scales ◽  
The Core ◽  
Differential Ability

Does the Factor Structure of IQ Differ Between the Differential Ability Scales (DAS‐II) Normative Sample and Autistic Children?

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 1184-1194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin C. Clements ◽  
Marley W. Watkins ◽  
Robert T. Schultz ◽  
Benjamin E. Yerys
Keyword(s):  
Factor Structure ◽  
Autistic Children ◽  
Differential Ability Scales ◽  
Normative Sample ◽  
Differential Ability

Higher-order factor structure of the Differential Ability Scales-II: Consistency across ages 4 to 17

2010 ◽  
Vol 47 (7) ◽  
pp. 676-697 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Z. Keith ◽  
Justin A. Low ◽  
Matthew R. Reynolds ◽  
Puja G. Patel ◽  
Kristen P. Ridley
Keyword(s):  
Factor Structure ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Differential Ability Scales ◽  
Order Factor ◽  
Differential Ability

Factor Structure of the Differential Ability Scales–Second Edition Core Subtests: Standardization Sample Confirmatory Factor Analyses

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (7) ◽  
pp. 791-815
Author(s):  
Gary L. Canivez ◽  
Ryan J. McGill ◽  
Stefan C. Dombrowski
Keyword(s):  
Factor Structure ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Variance Partitioning ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Differential Ability Scales ◽  
Common Variance ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Standardization Sample ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Differential Ability

The present study examined the factor structure of the Differential Ability Scales–Second Edition (DAS-II) core subtests from the standardization sample via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using methods (bifactor modeling and variance partitioning) and procedures (robust model estimation due to nonnormal subtest score distributions) recommended but not included in the DAS-II Introductory and Technical Handbook. CFAs were conducted with the three DAS-II standardization sample age groups (lower early years [age = 2:6–3:5 years], upper early years [age = 3:6–6:11 years], school age [7:0–17:11 years]) using standardization sample raw data provided by NCS Pearson, Inc. Although most DAS-II core subtests were properly associated with the theoretically proposed group factors, both the higher order and bifactor models indicated that the g factor accounted for large portions of total and common variance, whereas the group factors (Verbal, Nonverbal, Spatial) accounted for small portions of total and common variance. The DAS-II core battery provides strong measurement of general intelligence, and clinical interpretation should be primarily, if not exclusively, at that level.

European Differences in Self-Perceived Multiple Intelligences

1999 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 131-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Furnham ◽  
Tim Rakow ◽  
Ivan Sarmany-Schuller ◽  
Filip De Fruyt
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Multiple Intelligences ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Verbal Iq ◽  
Sex Effects ◽  
Iq Scores ◽  
Culture Differences ◽  
Three Factor

In this study, 140 Belgian, 227 British, and 177 Slovakian students estimated their own multiple IQ scores as well as that of their parents (mother and father) and siblings (first and second brother and sister). Various factor analyses yielded a clear three-factor structure replicating previous studies. A sex × culture ANOVA on self-ratings of three factors that underline the seven intelligences (verbal, numerical, cultural) showed culture and sex effects as well as interactions. As predicted, males rated their own overall IQ, though not that of their parents or siblings, higher than females did. Males also rated their numerical IQ, but not their verbal or cultural IQ, higher than females did. There were few culture differences but many interactions, nearly all caused by Slovakian females, who rated aspects of their own and their fathers' IQ higher than Slovakian males, while the pattern for the Belgians was precisely the opposite. Participants believed their verbal IQ was higher than their numerical IQ and their cultural IQ. Males believed their verbal and numerical IQ score to be fairly similar, though much higher than their cultural IQ, while females believed their verbal IQ the highest, followed by numerical and cultural IQ. Females also believed they were more intelligent than both parents. Overall results showed consistency in the sex differences in ratings across cultures but differences in level of estimated IQ possibly as a result of cultural demands for modesty.

An overview and review of the differential ability scales: Initial and current research findings

1991 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie Oliver Platt ◽  
Randy W. Kamphaus ◽  
Joan Keltgen ◽  
Fran Gilliland
Keyword(s):  
Differential Ability Scales ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Differential Ability

THE LEVENSON LOCUS OF CONTROL SCALES: CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSES AND EVALUATION

1997 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul K. Presson ◽  
Steven C. Clark ◽  
Victor A. Benassi
Keyword(s):  
Locus Of Control ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Depressive Symptomatology ◽  
Predictive Ability ◽  
Factor Models ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Three Factor

Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to test the factor structure of several versions of Levenson's (1973) locus of control scales. Two- and three-factor models based on all 24 of Levenson's items and on 20 of her items were tested. The 3-factor models provided a good fit. Models proposed by R. M. Shewchuk, G. A. Foelker Jr., and G. Niederehe (1990) and R. M. Shewchuk, G. A Foelker Jr., C. J. Camp, and F. Blanchard-Fields (1992) also provided a good fit of the data. In concurrent and prospective tests of the predictive ability of the various models, the 24 and 20 item versions of Levenson's models accounted for a significant amount of variance In depressive symptomatology. The three-factor models revealed that only scores on the chance scale reliably predicted time 2 depressive symptomatology. Neither of the models proposed by Shewchuk and colleagues accounted for a significant amount of variance.

scholarly journals Exploring the dimensionality of the TRIM-18 in the Spanish context

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Fernández-Capo ◽  
Silvia Recoder ◽  
Juana Gómez-Benito ◽  
María Gámiz ◽  
Pilar Gual ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Spanish Population ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Reliability Method ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Potential Use ◽  
Three Factor

<p>Introduction: The Transgression-Related Interpersonal Motivation (TRIM-18) Inventory is an instrument that assesses episodic forgiveness. This scale is composed of three subscales: <em>avoidance</em>, <em>revenge</em> and <em>benevolence</em>. The present study examined the dimensionality of the Spanish version of the TRIM-18 (TRIM-18-S) and provided evidence of validity and reliability. Method: A total of 943 participants completed the TRIM-18-S.  A subset of 277 participants completed additional measures of empathy, anger, and information regarding the relation with the offender. Results: The TRIM-18-S showed good psychometric properties, and confirmatory factor analyses revealed a three-factor structure. Conclusions: The scale presents adequate psychometric properties for its potential use in a Spanish population.</p><p> </p>

K–ABC Simultaneous Processing, Das Nonverbal Reasoning, and Horn's Expanded Fluid-Crystallized Theory

1999 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 563-574 ◽  
Author(s):  
David V. Daleo ◽  
Brian R. Lopez ◽  
Jason C. Cole ◽  
Alan S. Kaufman ◽  
Nadeen L. Kaufman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Fluid Intelligence ◽  
Principal Factor ◽  
Considerable Extent ◽  
Differential Ability Scales ◽  
Assessment Battery ◽  
Clear Cut ◽  
Simultaneous Processing ◽  
Differential Ability ◽  
Nonverbal Reasoning

Horn's distinction between fluid intelligence (Gf) and visualization (Gv) was investigated with two Nonverbal Reasoning subtests from the Differential Ability Scales and three Simultaneous Processing subtests from the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. The sample comprised a predominantly Euro-American group of 57 normal boys and girls between the ages of 6 and 12 years. Principal factor analysis yielded clear-cut Gf and Gv dimensions. The Gf factor was composed both of Differential Ability Scales and Kaufman–ABC subtests, suggesting that the construct of simultaneous processing is not merely a measure of Gv, as some researchers have hypothesized, but also measures Horn's Gf fluid intelligence to a considerable extent.

Differential Ability Scales (DAS and DAS-II)

2018 ◽  
pp. 1145-1148
Author(s):  
Rebecca M. Cain ◽  
Kelly Coulehan ◽  
Ida Sue Baron
Keyword(s):  
Differential Ability Scales ◽  
Differential Ability
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document