Deconstructing CHC

References

• Beaujean, A. A., & Benson, N. F. (2019). The one and the many: Enduring legacies of Spearman and Thurstone on intelligence test score interpretation. Applied Measurement in Education, 32(3), 198–216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaujean, A. A., Benson, N. F., McGill, R. J., & Dombrowski, S. C. (2018). A misuse of IQ scores: Using the dual discrepancy/consistency model for identifying specific learning disabilities. Journal of Intelligence, 6(3), 1–25. doi:10.3390/jintelligence6030036
   Google Scholar
• Benson, N. F., Beaujean, A. A., McGill, R. J., & Dombrowski, S. C. (2018). Revisiting Carroll’s survey of factor-analytic studies: Implications for the clinical assessment of intelligence. Psychological Assessment, 30, 1028–1038. Advanced Online Publication. doi:10.1037/pas0000556
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binet, A., & Simon, T. (1914). Mentally defective children (W. B. Drummond, Trans.). New York, NY: Longmans, Green & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Borsuk, E. R., Watkins, M. W., & Canivez, G. L. (2006). Long-term stability of membership in a Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Third Edition (WISC-III) subtest core profile taxonomy. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 24(1), 52–68. doi:10.1177/0734282905285225
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brand, C. (1993, October 22). The importance of the g factor [Review]. Times Higher Education Supplement, p. 22.
   Google Scholar
• Canivez, G. L. (2008). Orthogonal higher-order factor structure of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales for children and adolescents. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 533–541. doi:10.1037/a0012884
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canivez, G. L., & Watkins, M. W. (2001). Long term stability of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Third Edition among students with disabilities. School Psychology Review, 30(2), 438–453.
   Google Scholar
• Canivez, G. L., & Youngstrom, E. A. (2019). Challenges to Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory: Empirical, clinical, and policy implications. Applied Measurement in Education, 32(3), 233–249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1968). Reviews. Guilford, J. P. The Nature of Human Intelligence. American Educational Research Journal, 5(2), 249–256.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1972). Stalking the wayward factors: A review of The Analysis of Intelligence by J. P. Guilford and Ralph Hoepfner. Contemporary Psychology: A Journal of Reviews, 17(6), 321–324. doi:10.1037/0010964
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1974). Psychometric tests as cognitive tasks: A new “structure of intellect” (Technical Report No. 4). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1976). Psychometric tests as cognitive tasks: A new “structure of intellect”. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 27–56). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1980). Remarks on Sternberg’s “Factor theories of intelligence are all right almost”. Educational Researcher, 9(8), 14–18. doi:10.3102/0013189X009008014
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1981). Ability and task difficulty in cognitive psychology. Educational Researcher, 10(1), 11–21. doi:10.3102/0013189X010001011
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1983). Studying individual differences in cognitive abilities: Through and beyond factor analysis. In R. F. Dillon & R. R. Schmeck (Eds.), Individual differences in cognition (pp. 1–33). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1995a). Book review: Assessment of cognitive processes: The PASS theory of intelligence. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 13, 397–409. doi:10.1177/073428299501300407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1995b). Reflections on Stephen Jay Gould’s The Mismeasure of Man (1981): A retrospective review. Intelligence, 21(2), 121–134. doi:10.1016/0160-2896(95)90022-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1996). A three-stratum theory of intelligence: Spearman’s contribution. In I. Dennis & P. Tapsfield (Eds.), Human abilities: Their nature and measurement (pp. 1–17). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1997). Psychometrics, intelligence, and public perception. Intelligence, 24(1), 25–52. doi:10.1016/S0160-2896(97)90012-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (1998). Human cognitive abilities: A critique. In J. J. McArdle & R. W. Woodcock (Eds.), Human cognitive abilities in theory and practice (pp. 5–23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (2000). Commentary on profile analysis. School Psychology Quarterly, 15(4), 449–456. doi:10.1037/h0088800
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (2002). The five-factor personality model: How complete and satisfactory is it? In H. I. Braun, D. N. Jackson, & D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement (pp. 97–126). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. B. (2003). The higher-stratum structure of cognitive abilities: Current evidence supports g and about ten broad factors. In H. Nyborg (Ed.), The scientific study of general intelligence: Tribute to Arthur R. Jensen (pp. 5–21). New York, NY: Pergamon.
   Google Scholar
• Cattell, R. B. (1940). A culture-free intelligence test. I. Journal of Educational Psychology, 31(3), 161–179. doi:10.1037/h0059043
   Google Scholar
• Cattell, R. B. (1943a). The description of personality: Basic traits resolved into clusters. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38(4), 476–506. doi:10.1037/h0054116
   Google Scholar
• Cattell, R. B. (1943b). The measurement of adult intelligence. Psychological Bulletin, 40(3), 153–193. doi:10.1037/h0059973
   Google Scholar
• Cattell, R. B. (1952). The three basic factor-analytic research designs—Their interrelations and derivatives. Psychological Bulletin, 49(5), 499–520.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cattell, R. B. (1971). Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Cattell, R. B. (1987). Intelligence:Its structure, growth and action. New York, NY: North-Holland.
   Google Scholar
• Cattell, R. B. (1998). Where is intelligence? Some answers from the triadic theory. In J. J. McArdle & R. W. Woodcock (Eds.), Human cognitive abilities in theory and practice (pp. 29–38; see also Discussions in pp. 297–321). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Cattell, R. B., & Butcher, H. J. (1968). The prediction of achievement and creativity. Oxford, England: Bobbs-Merrill.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 309–319. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1959). The factorial structure of the WISC at ages 7-6, 10-6, and 13-6. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 23(4), 285–299. doi:10.1037/h0043898
   Google Scholar
• Cronbach, L. J., & Snow, R. E. (1977). Aptitudes and instructional methods: A handbook for research on interactions. New York, NY: Irvington.
   Google Scholar
• Cucina, J. M., & Howardson, G. N. (2016). Woodcock-Johnson-III, Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT), Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (KABC), and Differential Ability Scales (DAS) support Carroll but not Cattell-Horn. Psychological Assessment, 29(8), 1001–1015. doi:10.1037/pas0000389
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deary, I. J. (2012). 125 years of intelligence in The American Journal of Psychology. The American Journal of Psychology, 125(2), 145–154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dombrowski, S. C., McGill, R. J., & Canivez, G. L. (2017). Exploratory and hierarchical factor analysis of the WJ-IV Cognitive at school age. Psychological Assessment, 29(4), 394–407. doi:10.1037/pas0000350
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dombrowski, S. C., McGill, R. J., & Canivez, G. L. (2018). An alternative conceptualization of the theoretical structure of the Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Cognitive Abilities at school age: A confirmatory factor analytic investigation. Archives of Scientific Psychology, 6(1), 1–13. doi:10.1037/arc0000039
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, R. (1984). The principle of parsimony and some applications in psychology. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 5(2), 119–130.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, J. J., Floyd, R. G., McGrew, K. S., & Leforgee, M. H. (2002). The relations between measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities and reading achievement during childhood and adolescence. School Psychology Review, 31(2), 246–262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eysenck, H. J. (1993). Comment on Goldberg. American Psychologist, 48, 1299–1300. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.48.12.1299.b
   Google Scholar
• Flanagan, D. P., Alfonso, V. C., Costa, M., Palma, K., & Leahy, M. A. (2018). Use of ability tests in the identification of specific learning disabilities within the context of an operational definition. In D. P. Flanagan & E. M. McDonough (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 608–642). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., & Alfonso, V. C. (2013). Essentials of Cross-Battery Assessment (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Barnes, M., Stuebing, K. K., Francis, D. J., Olson, R. K., … Shaywitz, B. A. (2002). Classification of learning disabilities: An evidence-based evaluation. In R. Bradley, L. Danielson, & D. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research to practice (pp. 467–519). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., & Stuebing, K. K. (2005). Psychometric approaches to the identification of LD: IQ and achievement scores are not sufficient. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 98–108. doi:10.1177/00222194050380020101
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Gottfredson, L. J. (1997). Mainstream science on intelligence: An editorial with 52 signatories, history, and bibliography. Intelligence, 24, 13–23. doi:10.1016/S0160-2896(97)90011-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guilford, J. P. (1988). Some changes in the structure-of-intellect model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48(1), 1–4. doi:10.1177/001316448804800102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustafsson, J. E. (1984). A unifying model for the structure of intellectual abilities. Intelligence, 8, 179–203. doi:10.1016/0160-2896(84)90008-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hempel, C. G. (1965). Aspects of scientific explanation. New York, NY: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Holdnack, J. A., Zhou, X., Larrabee, G. J., Millis, S. R., & Salthouse, T. A. (2011). Confirmatory factor analysis of the WAIS-IV/WMS-IV. Assessment, 18(2), 178–191. doi:10.1177/1073191110393106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holzinger, K. J. (1945). Spearman as I knew him. Psychometrika, 10(4), 231–235.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horn, J. L. (1967). On subjectivity in factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 27(4), 811–820. doi:10.1177/001316446702700404
   Google Scholar
• Horn, J. L. (1970). Reviews: J. P. Guilford. The nature of human intelligence by J. P. Guilford. Psychometrika, 35(2), 273–282. doi:10.1007/BF02291268
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horn, J. L., & Blankson, A. N. (2005). Foundations for better understanding of cognitive abilities. In D. P. Flanagan & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (2nd ed., pp. 41–68). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Horn, J. L., & Knapp, J. R. (1973). On the subjective character of the empirical base of Guilford’s structure-of-intellect model. Psychological Bulletin, 80(1), 33–43. doi:10.1037/h0034681
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horn, J. L., & Knapp, J. R. (1974). Thirty wrongs do not make a right: Reply to Guilford. Psychological Bulletin, 81(8), 502–504. doi:10.1037/h0036784
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horn, J. L., & McArdle, J. J. (2007). Understanding human intelligence since Spearman. In R. Cudeck & R. C. MacCallum (Eds.), Factor analysis at 100: Historical developments and future directions (pp. 205–247). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Horn, J. L., Wanberg, K. W., & Appel, M. (1973). On the internal structure of the MMPI. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 8(2), 131–171. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr0802_1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horst, P. (1955). L. L. Thurstone and the science of human behavior. Science, New Series, 122(3183), 1259–1260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoskyn, M., & Swanson, H. L. (2000). Cognitive processing of low achievers and children with reading disabilities. A selective meta-analytic review of the published literature. School Psychology Review, 29, 102–119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• In Appreciation: John B. Carroll. (2003, November). APS observer. Retrieved from https://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/in-appreciation-john-b-carroll
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, A. R. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York, NY: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CT: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Keith, T. Z., & Kranzler, J. H. (1999). The absence of structural fidelity precludes construct validity: Rejoinder to Naglieri on what the Cognitive Assessment System does and does not measure. School Psychology Review, 28(2), 303–321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelley, T. L. (1928). Crossroads in the mind of man: A study of differentiable mental abilities. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kranzler, J. H., Floyd, R. G., Benson, N., Zaboski, B., & Thibodaux, L. (2016). Classification agreement analysis of Cross-Battery Assessment in the identification of specific learning disorders in children and youth. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology, 4(3), 124–136. doi:10.1080/21683603.2016.1155515
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lovie, S., & Lovie, P. (2011). The psychologist as philosopher. Psychologist, 24(12), 942–943.
   Google Scholar
• McArdle, J. J., & Hofer, S. M. (2014). Fighting for intelligence: A brief overview of the academic work of John L. Horn. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 49(1), 1–16. doi:10.1080/00273171.2013.841089
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McClain, M.-C., & Pfeiffer, S. (2012). Identification of gifted students in the United States today: A look at state definitions, policies, and practices. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 28, 59–88. doi:10.1080/15377903.2012.643757
   Google Scholar
• McGill, R. J. (2017). Re-(examining) relations between CHC broad and narrow cognitive abilities and reading achievement. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 7(1), 265–282. doi:10.5539/jedp.v7n1p265
   Google Scholar
• McGill, R. J., & Dombrowski, S. C. (2019). Critically reflecting on the origins, evolution, and impact of the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model. Applied Measurement in Education, 32(3), 217–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGrew, K. S. (1997). Analysis of the major intelligence test batteries according to a proposed comprehensive Gf-Gc framework. In D. P. Flanagan, J. L. Genshaft, & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 151–179). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• McGrew, K. S., & Flanagan, D. P. (1998). The intelligence test desk reference (ITDR): Gf-Gc cross-battery assessment. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• McGrew, K. S., LaForte, E. M., & Schrank, F. A. (2014). Technical manual. Woodcock-Johnson IV. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• McGrew, K. S., & Wendling, B. J. (2010). Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive-achievement relations: What we have learned from the past 20 years of research. Psychology in the Schools, 47(7), 651–675.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meehl, P. E. (1990). Appraising and amending theories: The strategy of Lakatosian defense and two principles that warrant it. Psychological Inquiry, 1(2), 108–141, 173–180. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0102_1
   Google Scholar
• Meeker, M. N., Meeker, R. J., & Roid, G. H. (1985). Structure of Intellect Learning Abilities Test (SOI-LA) manual. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
   Google Scholar
• Miciak, J., Taylor, W. P., Stuebing, K. K., & Fletcher, J. M. (2018). Simulation of LD identification accuracy using a pattern of processing strengths and weaknesses method with multiple measures. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 36(1), 21–33. doi:10.1177/0734282916683287
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miciak, J., Williams, J. L., Taylor, P., Cirino, P. T., Fletcher, J. M., & Vaughn, S. (2015). Do processing patterns of strengths and weaknesses predict differential treatment response? Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(6), 898–909. doi:10.1037/edu0000096
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T. J., Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., … Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51(2), 77–101. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.77
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Popper, K. (1965). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
   Google Scholar
• Quine, W. V. O. (1977). Natural kinds. In S. P. Schwartz (Ed.), Naming, necessity and natural kinds (pp. 155–175). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reeve, C. L., & Charles, J. E. (2008). Survey of opinions on the primacy of g and social consequences of ability testing: A comparison of expert and non-expert views. Intelligence, 36(6), 681–688. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2008.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, N. M., Abbott, R. D., Berninger, V. M., Buss, J., & Mukhopadhyay, S. (1997). Developmental changes in mathematically precocious young children: Longitudinal and gender effects. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41(4), 145–158. doi:10.1177/001698629704100404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roid, G. H. (2003). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (5th ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Roth, B., Becker, N., Romeyke, S., Schäfer, S., & Spinath, F. M. (2015). Intelligence and school grades: A meta-analysis. Intelligence, 53, 118–137. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2015.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scerri, E. (2007). The periodic table: Its story and its significance. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schalock, R. L., Borthwick-Duffy, S. A., Bradley, V. J., Buntinx, W. H. E., Coulter, D. L., Craig, E. M., … Yeager, M. H.;(2010). Intellectual disability: Definition, classification, and systems of supports (11th ed.). Washington, DC: AAIDD.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work: Occupational attainment and job performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 162–173. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.162
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. S. (2012). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence. In D. P. Flanagan & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (3rd ed., pp. 99–144). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. S. (2018). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities. In D. P. Flanagan & E. M. McDonough (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 73–163). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Schrank, F. A., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2014). Woodcock-Johnson IV tests of cognitive abilities. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, D. M. (2013). A four- and five-factor structural model for Wechsler tests: Does it really matter clinically? Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31(2), 175–185. doi:10.1177/0734282913478038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snow, R. E. (1980). Aptitude, learning, and instruction: Vol I. Cognitive process analyses of aptitude. In R. E. Snow, P.-A. Federico, & W. E. Montague (Eds.), Aptitude processes (pp. 27–63). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Spearman, C. (1904). “General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. The American Journal of Psychology, 15(2), 201–292. doi:10.2307/1412107
   Google Scholar
• Spearman, C. (1923). The nature of intelligence and the principles of cognition. New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man: Their nature and measurement. New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Spearman, C. (1930). “G” and after—A school to end schools. In C. Murchison (Ed.), Psychologies of 1930 (pp. 339–366). Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spearman, C. (1938). Proposed explanation of individual differences of ability by “sampling”. British Journal of Psychology, 29, 182–191.
   Google Scholar
• Spearman, C. (1939). Thurstone’s work re-worked. Journal of Educational Psychology, 30(1), 1–16. doi:10.1037/h0061267
   Google Scholar
• Spearman, C., & Wynn Jones, L. (1950). Human ability: A continuation of “The Abilities of Man”. London, England: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Stuebing, K. K., Barth, A. E., Trahan, L. H., Reddy, R. R., Miciak, J., & Fletcher, J. M. (2015). Are child cognitive characteristics strong predictors of responses to intervention? A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(3), 395–429. doi:10.3102/0034654314555996
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stuebing, K. K., Fletcher, J. M., LeDoux, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2002). Validity of IQ-discrepancy classifications of reading disabilities: A meta-analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 469–518. doi:10.3102/00028312039002469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Thorndike, E. L. (1901). The evolution of the human intellect. Popular Science Monthly, 60(5), 58–65.
   Google Scholar
• Thorndike, E. L. (1948). The future of measurements of abilities. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 18, 21–25. doi:10.1111/bjep.1948.18.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorndike, R. L. (1994). g. [Editorial]. Intelligence, 19, 145–155. doi:10.1016/0160-2896(94)90010-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorndike, R. L., Hagen, E. P., & Sattler, J. M. (1986). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (4th ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Thurstone, L. L. (1935). The vectors of mind: Multiple-factor analysis for the isolation of primary traits. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thurstone, L. L. (1940). Current issues in factor analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 37(4), 189–236. doi:10.1037/h0059402
   Google Scholar
• Thurstone, L. L. (1946). Theories of intelligence. The Scientific Monthly, 62(2), 101–112.
   Google Scholar
• Thurstone, L. L. (1948). Psychological implications of factor analysis. The American Psychologist, 3(9), 402–408.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thurstone, L. L. (1952). L. L. Thurstone [Autobiography]. In E. G. Boring, H. Werner, H. S. Langfeld, & R. M. Yerkes (Eds.), A history of psychology in autobiography (Vol. 4, pp. 295–321). Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thurstone, L. L., & Thurstone, T. G. (1941). Factorial studies of intelligence (Psychometric Monographs, No. 2). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Undheim, J. O. (1981). On intelligence IV: Toward a restoration of general intelligence. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 22, 251–265. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.1981.tb00401.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vellutino, F. R., Fletcher, J. M., Snowling, M. J., & Scanlon, D. M. (2004). Specific reading disability (dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decades. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(1), 2–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., & Lyon, G. R. (2000). Differentiating between difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: More evidence against the IQ-achievement discrepancy definition for reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 223–238. doi:10.1177/002221940003300302
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wasserman, J. D. (2013). Identification of gifted learners: Traditional assessment methods. In C. S. Neville, M. M. Piechowski, & S. S. Tolan (Eds.), Off the charts: Asynchrony and the gifted child (pp. 292–346). Unionville, NY: Royal Fireworks Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wasserman, J. D., & Kaufman, A. S. (2016). A history of mental ability tests and theories. In W. B. Barr & L. A. Bielauskas (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of history of clinical neuropsychology. Retrieved from http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199765683.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199765683-e-32
   Google Scholar
• Watkins, M. W. (2003). IQ subtest analysis: Clinical acumen or clinical illusion? The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice, 2, 118–141.
   Google Scholar
• Wechsler, D. (1939). The measurement of adult intelligence. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins.
   Google Scholar
• Wechsler, D. (1958). The measurement and appraisal of adult intelligence (4th ed.). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins.
   Google Scholar
• Wechsler, D. (1991). Wechsler intelligence scale for children (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Wechsler, D. (2014). Wechsler intelligence scale for children (5th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Wolfle, D. (1956). Louis Leon Thurstone: 1887-1955. American Journal of Psychology, 69(1), 131–134.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodcock, R. W. (1977). Woodcock-Johnson psycho-educational battery (Technical report). Boston, MA: Teaching Resources.
   Google Scholar
• Woodcock, R. W. (1990). Theoretical foundations of the WJ-R measures of cognitive ability. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 231–258. doi:10.1177/073428299000800303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodcock, R. W. (1998). The WJ-R and Baterìa-R in neuropsychological assessment (Research report number 1). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Woodcock, R. W., & Johnson, M. B. (1989). Woodcock-Johnson psycho-educational battery – Revised. Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.
   Google Scholar
• Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III tests of cognitive abilities. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
   Google Scholar