作者: Michael P. Maloney , Donald Nelson , Sheryl Duvall , Allan Kirkendall
DOI: 10.2466/PR0.1978.43.3F.1289
关键词: Population 、 Psychometrics 、 Standardized test 、 Psychology 、 Psychiatry 、 Test (assessment) 、 Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale 、 Intelligence quotient 、 Verbal reasoning 、 Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
摘要: With the continued expansion of mental health services to a broader segment population, need for brief, valid screening devices is underscored. One area where such particularly important involves assessment intelligence, since level intelligence can be critical in treatment, placement, and training decisions. Much data suggest Quick Test both reliable measure adult psychiatric settings (Seitz & Braucht, 1971; Maloney, Steger, Ward, 1973). While much are also available on Peabody Picture Vocabulary (PPVT) with children (see e.g., Dunn, 1965), less samples. The purpose present study was compare two brief picture vocabulary measures (Quick Peabody) Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), which generally considered standard scale United States. Subjects were 40 inpatients (24 male, 16 female) an acute hospital serving large metropolitan area. Mean age male subjects 32.25 yr. (SD = 13.92) female 33.75 13.92). A variety diagnoses represented, including chronic ~chizophrenis, manic-depressive illness, neurotic disorders. An attempt made assess all patients admitted four general wards over 3-mo. period. Those who too disorganized complete standardized tests, refused or whose primary language other than English excluded. Each subject administered full WAIS, Forms B Peabody, 1, 2, 3 Test. Both verbal requiring examinee match words appropriate pictures. three forms each require one card pictures matches 50 different while consists booklet series 150 plates, plate containing contain lists words; must word correct associated plate. Total testing time approximately 2 hr., usually completed session. Order test presentation alternated. For example, first received first, second, WAIS third; second third, etc. Means deviations presented Table 1. No significant differences noted between mean IQs instruments (F .51, df 39/11). It should noted, however, that means slightly higher those tests. On 8 obtained 1Qs 110 higher. Nine