Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:48:08.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Validation Report of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale 4th Edition: An Appropriate Instrument for Assessment of Children with Intellectual Disabilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2015

Anna Bower
Anna Bower*
Affiliation:
School of Early Childhood, Queensland University of Technology
*
School of Early Childhood, Queensland University of Technology, Locked Bag 2, RED HILL Q 4059
Get access

Abstract

This paper reviews the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale 4th Edition (SB-4) and compares and contrasts it with the instrument it supersedes, the Stanford-Binet 3rd Edition (L-M) (SB-3). Specific emphasis is placed on the use of the SB-4 with children and adolescents with intellectual disability. It can differentiate between intellectually disabled children and adolescents who have Down syndrome, and those who have other etiologies.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Educational and Developmental Psychologist , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , May 1993 , pp. 22 - 26
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Psychological Society 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aiken, A.R. (1987). Assessment of intellectual functioning. Boston: Allen & Bacon.Google Scholar
Atkinson, L. (1991). Short forms of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Fourth Edition, for children with low intelligence. Journal of School Psychology, 29, 177–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckley, S. (1985). Attaining basic educational skills: Reading writing and number. In Lane, D. & Stratford, B. (Eds.), Current approaches to Down syndrome (pp. 315–343). London: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Carvajal, H., & Gerber, J. (1987). 1986 Stanford-Binet abbreviated forms. Psychological Reports, 61, 285–286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calteli, R.B. (1963). Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 1–22.Google Scholar
DeLamatre, J.E., & Hollinger, C.L. (1990). Utility of the Stanford-Binet VI abbreviated form forplacing exceptional children. Psychological Reports, 67, 973–974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Lemos, M M. (1990). The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (Fourth Edition): Australian adaptation and trial testing. Psychological Test Bulletin, 3, 3–12.Google Scholar
Glutting, J.J., & Kaplan, D. (1990). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale 4th Edition: Making a case for reasonable interpretations. In Reynolds, C.R. & Kamphaus, R.W. (Eds.), Handbook of psychological and educational assessment of children: Intelligence and achievement (pp. 277–295). NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
Gridley, B.E., & McIntosh, D.E. (1991). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Stanford- Binet: Fourth Edition for a normal sample. Journal of School Psychology, 29,237–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hallinan, P. (1988). Is that turkey Australian? Cultural questions concerning the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (4th Edition). The Australian Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 11, 23–25.Google Scholar
Hollinger, C.L., & Baldwin, C. (1990). The Stanford-Binet, Fourth Edition: A small study of concurrent validity. Psychological Reports, 66, 1331–1336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keith, T.Z., Cool, V.A., Novak, C.G., White, L.J., & Pottenbaum, S.M. (1988). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Stanford-Binet 4th Edition: Testing the theory test match. Journal of School Psychology, 26,253–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kline, R.B. (1989). Is the fourth edition Stanford-Binet a four factor test? Confirmatory factor analyses of alternative models for ages 2 through 23. Journal of Psycho educational Assessment, 7, 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, B.C., Baker, E.H., & Minder, C.C. (1990). Concurrent validity of the Stanford- Binet: Fourth Edition and Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children with learning disabled students. Psychology in the Schools, 27, 116–120.3.0.CO;2-S>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurent, J., Swerdlik, M., & Ryburn, M. (1992). Review of validity research on the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition. Psychological Assessment, 4, 102–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu kens, J. (1988). Comparison of the fourth edition and the L-M edition of the Stanford-Binet used with mentally retarded persons. Journal of School Psychology, 26, 87–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lukens, J. (1990). Stanford-Binet Fourth Edition and the WISC-R for children in the lower range of intelligence. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 70,819–822.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marceli, M.M., & Armstrong, J. (1982). Auditory and visual sequential memory of Down syndrome and non-retarded children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 87, 86–95.Google Scholar
McCall, V.W., Yates, B., Hendricks, S., Turner, K., & McNabb, B. (1989). Comparison between the Stanford-Binet: L-M and the Stanford-Binet: Fourth Edition with a group of gifted children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 14, 93–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDade, H.L., & Adler, S. (1980). Down syndrome and short-term memory impairment: A storage or retrieval deficit? American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 84, 561–567Google ScholarPubMed
Reynolds, C.R. (1987). Playing IQ roulette with the Slanford-Binet 4th Edition. Measurement and Evaluation in Counselling and Development, 20, 139–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, C.R. (1988). Sympathy not sense: The appeal of the Stanford-Binet 4th Edition. Measurement and Evaluation in Counselling and Development, 21,45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, C.R., Kamphaus, R.W., & Rosenthal, B.L. (1988). Factor analysis of the Stanford-Binet Fourth Edition for ages 2 years through 23 years. Measurement and Evaluation in Counselling and Development, 21, 52–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, J.C. (1986, March – April ). Coefficients of correlation of IQs on the WA1S-R with Standard Age Scores on the Stanford-Binet 4th Edition for previously identified mentally handicapped adolescents. Paper presented at the 64th Annual Meeting of the Council for Exceptional Children, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
Rothlisberg, B.A. (1988). Comparing the SB-4 to the WISC-R: A concurrent validity study. Journal of School Psychology, 27, 193–195.Google Scholar
Rothlisberg, B.A. (1990). The relation of the Stanford-Binet: Fourth Edition to measures of achievement: A concurrent validity study. Psychology in the Schools, 27, 120–125.3.0.CO;2-5>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvia, J., & Ysseldyke, J.E. (1988). Assessment in special and remedial education (4th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.Google Scholar
Satller, J.M. (1988). Assessment of children (3rd ed.). San Diego: Jerome Saltier.Google Scholar
Smith, D.K. (1987, April). Youngchildren’s performance on three measures of ability. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Stratford, B. (1985). Learning and knowing: The education of Down syndrome children. In Lane, D. & Stratford, B. (Eds.), Current approaches to Down syndrome (pp. 149–166). London: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Stratford, B., & Metcalf, J.A. (1982). Recognition, reproduction and recall in children with Down syndrome. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 8, 125–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorndikc, R.L., Hagen, E.P., & Saltier, J.M. (1986). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition. Technical Manual. Chicago: Riverside Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Walker, N.W. (1987). The Stanford-Binet 4th Edition: Haste does seem to make waste. Measurement and Evaluation in Counselling and Development, 20, 135–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, W.M. (1992). The Stanford-Binet: Fourth Edition and Form L-M in assessment of young children with mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 30, 81–84.Google ScholarPubMed