Comparing Cattell-Horn-Carroll factor models: differences between bifactor and higher order factor models in predicting language achievement.

Previous research using the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of cognitive abilities has shown a relationship between cognitive ability and academic achievement. Most of this research, however, has been done using the Woodcock-Johnson family of instruments with a higher order factor model. For CHC theory to grow, research should be done with other assessment instruments and tested with other factor models. This study examined the relationship between different factor models of CHC theory and the factors' relationships with language-based academic achievement (i.e., reading and writing). Using the co-norming sample for the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children--4th Edition and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test--2nd Edition, we found that bifactor and higher order models of the subtests of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-4th Edition produced a different set of Stratum II factors, which, in turn, have very different relationships with the language achievement variables of the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test--2nd Edition. We conclude that the factor model used to represent CHC theory makes little difference when general intelligence is of major interest, but it makes a large difference when the Stratum II factors are of primary concern, especially when they are used to predict other variables.

[1]  Gary L. Canivez.  Construct validity of the WISC-IV with a referred sample: direct versus indirect hierarchical structures. , 2014, School psychology quarterly : the official journal of the Division of School Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[2]  W. H. Finch,et al.  JOINT CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS OF THE WOODCOCK‐JOHNSON TESTS OF COGNITIVE ABILITIES, THIRD EDITION, AND THE STANFORD‐BINET INTELLIGENCE SCALES, FIFTH EDITION, WITH A PRESCHOOL POPULATION , 2014 .

[3]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[4]  Aja Louise Murray,et al.  The limitations of model fit in comparing the bi-factor versus higher-order models of human cognitive ability structure , 2013 .

[5]  Gilles E. Gignac,et al.  Bifactor Modeling and the Estimation of Model-Based Reliability in the WAIS-IV , 2013, Multivariate behavioral research.

[6]  Dawn P. Flanagan,et al.  A cross-battery, reference variable, confirmatory factor analytic investigation of the CHC taxonomy. , 2013, Journal of school psychology.

[7]  Marley W. Watkins,et al.  Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the WISC-IV in a Hospital Referral Sample , 2013 .

[8]  T. Keith,et al.  Measurement and Statistical Issues in Child Assessment Research , 2013 .

[9]  T. Keith,et al.  Technical and Practical Issues in the Structure and Clinical Invariance of the Wechsler Scales , 2013 .

[10]  Timothy A. Brown,et al.  Latent Variable Measurement Models , 2013 .

[11]  Jianjun Zhu,et al.  WAIS-IV and Clinical Validation of the Four- and Five-Factor Interpretative Approaches , 2013 .

[12]  S. Reise,et al.  Scoring and Modeling Psychological Measures in the Presence of Multidimensionality , 2013, Journal of personality assessment.

[13]  Marley W. Watkins,et al.  Exploratory and higher order factor analysis of the WJ-III full test battery: a school-aged analysis. , 2013, Psychological assessment.

[14]  S. Reise.  The Rediscovery of Bifactor Measurement Models , 2012 .

[15]  Yves Rosseel,et al.  lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling , 2012 .

[16]  A Alexander Beaujean,et al.  The effects of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth Edition cognitive abilities on math achievement. , 2012, Journal of school psychology.

[17]  J. Laurenceau,et al.  Modeling general and specific variance in multifaceted constructs: a comparison of the bifactor model to other approaches. , 2012, Journal of personality.

[18]  K. McGrew,et al.  The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence. , 2012 .

[19]  Peter M. Bentler,et al.  Exploratory Bi-Factor Analysis , 2011, Psychometrika.

[20]  Dawn P. Flanagan,et al.  A CHC-based operational definition of SLD: Integrating multiple data sources and multiple data-gathering methods. , 2011 .

[21]  Marley W. Watkins,et al.  Exploratory and higher-order factor analyses of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV) adolescent subsample. , 2010 .

[22]  Marley W. Watkins,et al.  Structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children--Fourth Edition among a national sample of referred students. , 2010, Psychological assessment.

[23]  S. Reise,et al.  Bifactor Models and Rotations: Exploring the Extent to Which Multidimensional Data Yield Univocal Scale Scores , 2010, Journal of personality assessment.

[24]  Frank Rijmen,et al.  Formal Relations and an Empirical Comparison among the Bi‐Factor, the Testlet, and a Second‐Order Multidimensional IRT Model , 2010 .

[25]  J. B. Hale,et al.  Differential Ability Scales–II prediction of reading performance: Global scores are not enough , 2010 .

[26]  J. A. Low,et al.  Higher‐order factor structure of the Differential Ability Scales–II: Consistency across ages 4 to 17 , 2010 .

[27]  Dawn P. Flanagan,et al.  ENHANCING PRACTICE THROUGH APPLICATION OF CATTELL-HORN-CARROLL THEORY AND RESEARCH: A "THIRD METHOD" APPROACH TO SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY IDENTIFICATION , 2010 .

[28]  Barbara J. Wendling,et al.  Cattell–Horn–Carroll cognitive‐achievement relations: What we have learned from the past 20 years of research , 2010 .

[29]  Timothy Z. Keith,et al.  Cattell-Horn-Carroll Abilities and Cognitive Tests: What We've Learned from 20 Years of Research. , 2010 .

[30]  K. McGrew,et al.  Introduction to the special issue: Current research in Cattell–Horn–Carroll–based assessment , 2010 .

[31]  Virginia W. Berninger,et al.  Longitudinal Relationships of Levels of Language in Writing and between Writing and Reading in Grades 1 to 7. , 2010 .

[32]  Nicholas F. Benson,et al.  Independent examination of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV): what does the WAIS-IV measure? , 2010, Psychological assessment.

[33]  T. Keith,et al.  What Does the WISC-IV Measure?-Validation of the Scoring and CHC-based Interpretative Approaches , 2009 .

[34]  K. McGrew.  CHC theory and the human cognitive abilities project: Standing on the shoulders of the giants of psychometric intelligence research , 2009 .

[35]  Marley W. Watkins,et al.  Significant Factor Score Variability and the Validity of the WISC-III Full Scale IQ in Predicting Later Academic Achievement , 2008, Applied neuropsychology.

[36]  Martin Brunner,et al.  No g in education , 2008 .

[37]  Jeffrey J. Evans,et al.  THE RELATIVE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE CATTELL-HORN-CARROLL COGNITIVE ABILITIES IN EXPLAINING WRITING ACHIEVEMENT DURING CHILDHOOD AND ADOLESCENCE , 2008 .

[38]  Gilles E. Gignac.  Higher-order models versus direct hierarchical models: g as superordinate or breadth factor? , 2008 .

[39]  Gordon E. Taub,et al.  Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive abilities and their effects on reading decoding skills: g has indirect effects, more specific abilities have direct effects. , 2007 .

[40]  Marley W. Watkins,et al.  Validity of the Full-Scale IQ When There Is Significant Variability Among WISC-III and WISC-IV Factor Scores , 2007 .

[41]  Thomas W. Frazier,et al.  Historical increase in the number of factors measured by commercial tests of cognitive ability: Are we overfactoring? , 2007 .

[42]  Gilles E. Gignac.  Multi-factor modeling in individual differences research: Some recommendations and suggestions , 2007 .

[43]  Marley W. Watkins,et al.  Factor Structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fourth Edition Among Referred Students , 2006 .

[44]  J. B. Hale,et al.  Cognitive hypothesis testing and response to intervention for children with reading problems , 2006 .

[45]  Dawn P. Flanagan,et al.  Test Review: Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition (WISC-IV) , 2006 .

[46]  Marley W. Watkins,et al.  Distinctions Without a Difference , 2006 .

[47]  S. West,et al.  A Comparison of Bifactor and Second-Order Models of Quality of Life , 2006, Multivariate behavioral research.

[48]  Marley W. Watkins,et al.  Orthogonal higher order structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale For Children--fourth edition. , 2006, Psychological assessment.

[49]  Gordon E. Taub,et al.  Higher Order, Multisample, Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children--Fourth Edition: What Does It Measure?. , 2006 .

[50]  Renee Bergeron,et al.  Are Cattell—Horn—Carroll Broad Ability Composite Scores Exchangeable Across Batteries? , 2005 .

[51]  Catherine A. Fiorello,et al.  Research into practice: Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive assessment in practice: Eligibility and program development issues , 2005 .

[52]  Timothy Z. Keith,et al.  Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis to Aid in Understanding the Constructs Measured by Intelligence Tests. , 2005 .

[53]  K. McGrew.  The Cattell-Horn-Carroll Theory of Cognitive Abilities: Past, Present, and Future. , 2005 .

[54]  K. McGrew,et al.  The General (g), Broad, and Narrow CHC Stratum Characteristics of the WJ III and WISC-III Tests: A Confirmatory Cross-Battery Investigation. , 2005 .

[55]  Kit-Tai Hau,et al.  Goodness of fit in structural equation models , 2005 .

[56]  Dawn P. Flanagan,et al.  The Impact of the Cattell-Horn-Carroll Theory on Test Development and Interpretation of Cognitive and Academic Abilities. , 2005 .

[57]  Florian Schmiedek,et al.  Toward an alternative representation for disentangling age-associated differences in general and specific cognitive abilities. , 2004, Psychology and aging.

[58]  John B. Carroll,et al.  The Higher-stratum Structure of Cognitive Abilities: Current Evidence Supports g and About Ten Broad Factors , 2003 .

[59]  Corwin Boake,et al.  From the Binet–Simon to the Wechsler–Bellevue: Tracing the History of Intelligence Testing , 2002, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[60]  Michael C. Neale,et al.  An Algorithm for the Hierarchical Organization of Path Diagrams and Calculation of Components of Expected Covariance , 2002 .

[61]  Jeffrey J. Evans,et al.  The Relations Between Measures of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Cognitive Abilities and Reading Achievement During Childhood and Adolescence , 2002 .

[62]  E. Youngstrom,et al.  Factor and Subtest Discrepancies on the Differential Ability Scales , 2002, Assessment.

[63]  T. Keith,et al.  The contribution of general and specific cognitive abilities to reading achievement , 2002 .

[64]  Craig K. Enders,et al.  The Relative Performance of Full Information Maximum Likelihood Estimation for Missing Data in Structural Equation Models , 2001 .

[65]  On the hierarchical structure of ability and personality. , 2001 .

[66]  D. R. Smith,et al.  CHAPTER 6 – Wechsler Individual Achievement Test , 2001 .

[67]  J. B. Hale,et al.  WISC-III Predictors of Academic Achievement for Children with Learning Disabilities: Are Global and Factor Scores Comparable?. , 2001 .

[68]  Dawn P. Flanagan,et al.  Essentials of Cross-Battery Assessment , 2000 .

[69]  Dawn P. Flanagan,et al.  Wechsler-Based CHC Cross-Battery Assessment and Reading Achievement: Strengthening the Validity of Interpretations Drawn from Wechsler Test Scores , 2000 .

[70]  Dawn P. Flanagan,et al.  The Wechsler Intelligence Scales and Gf-Gc Theory: A Contemporary Approach to Interpretation , 1999 .

[71]  R. P. McDonald,et al.  Test Theory: A Unified Treatment , 1999 .

[72]  P. Bentler,et al.  Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : Conventional criteria versus new alternatives , 1999 .

[73]  David Thissen,et al.  On the relationship between the higher-order factor model and the hierarchical factor model , 1999 .

[74]  D. Joanes,et al.  Comparing measures of sample skewness and kurtosis , 1998 .

[75]  Dawn P. Flanagan,et al.  The intelligence test desk reference (ITDR): Gf-Gc cross-battery assessment. , 1998 .

[76]  T. Keith,et al.  Beyond "g": The Impact of "Gf-Gc" Specific Cognitive Abilities Research on the Future Use and Interpretation of Intelligence Test Batteries in the Schools. , 1997 .

[77]  J. Carroll.  Theoretical and Technical Issues in Identifying a Factor of General Intelligence , 1997 .

[78]  Stanley A. Mulaik,et al.  First Order or Higher Order General Factor , 1997 .

[79]  J B Carroll,et al.  On Methodology in the Study of Cognitive Abilities. , 1995, Multivariate behavioral research.

[80]  K. McGrew,et al.  The Relationship between the WJ-R Gf-Gc Cognitive Clusters and Mathematics Achievement across the Life-Span , 1995 .

[81]  P. Bentler,et al.  Evaluating model fit. , 1995 .

[82]  A. Jensen,et al.  What is a good g , 1994 .

[83]  A. Satorra,et al.  Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. , 1994 .

[84]  J. Gustafsson,et al.  General and Specific Abilities as Predictors of School Achievement. , 1993, Multivariate behavioral research.

[85]  J. Carroll.  Human Cognitive Abilities-a sur-vey of factor-analytic studies , 1993 .

[86]  R. Little.  A Test of Missing Completely at Random for Multivariate Data with Missing Values , 1988 .

[87]  C Loehlin John,et al.  Latent variable models: an introduction to factor, path, and structural analysis , 1986 .

[88]  R. Cattell,et al.  Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallized general intelligences. , 1966, Journal of educational psychology.

[89]  Lloyd G. Humphreys,et al.  The organization of human abilities. , 1962 .

[90]  John Schmid,et al.  The development of hierarchical factor solutions , 1957 .

[91]  K. Holzinger,et al.  The Bi-factor method , 1937 .