{"title":"智力和发展量表的测量不变性——2跨语言版本、性别和年龄","authors":"Silvia Grieder, L. Visser, M. Timmerman, A. Grob","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000771","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: We examined the factor structure and measurement invariance of the intelligence and basic skills domains of the Intelligence and Development Scales – 2 (IDS-2) with the Dutch ( N = 1,665) and German ( N = 1,672) standardization samples. First, we tested five competing models using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the Dutch data: two empirically based, derived earlier from the German data, and three theoretically based (IDS-2 and two Cattell–Horn–Carroll-based). Subsequently, we evaluated the measurement invariance of the final model across the Dutch and German versions and gender using multiple-group CFA and across age using local structural equation modeling. A second-order model with six first-order factors best represented the Dutch IDS-2 structure. Five IDS-2 factors were confirmed, but Visual Processing and Abstract Reasoning, and the intelligence and basic skills domains were not separable. This model displayed full invariance across the language versions and was largely invariant across gender and age (7–20 years). Thus, scores derived according to this model are comparable across these language versions, gender, and age. The strong general intelligence factor and weak broad ability factors ask for precaution when basing clinical interpretation on the broad ability factors.","PeriodicalId":48018,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measurement Invariance of the Intelligence and Development Scales – 2 Across Language Versions, Gender, and Age\",\"authors\":\"Silvia Grieder, L. Visser, M. Timmerman, A. Grob\",\"doi\":\"10.1027/1015-5759/a000771\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract: We examined the factor structure and measurement invariance of the intelligence and basic skills domains of the Intelligence and Development Scales – 2 (IDS-2) with the Dutch ( N = 1,665) and German ( N = 1,672) standardization samples. First, we tested five competing models using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the Dutch data: two empirically based, derived earlier from the German data, and three theoretically based (IDS-2 and two Cattell–Horn–Carroll-based). Subsequently, we evaluated the measurement invariance of the final model across the Dutch and German versions and gender using multiple-group CFA and across age using local structural equation modeling. A second-order model with six first-order factors best represented the Dutch IDS-2 structure. Five IDS-2 factors were confirmed, but Visual Processing and Abstract Reasoning, and the intelligence and basic skills domains were not separable. This model displayed full invariance across the language versions and was largely invariant across gender and age (7–20 years). Thus, scores derived according to this model are comparable across these language versions, gender, and age. The strong general intelligence factor and weak broad ability factors ask for precaution when basing clinical interpretation on the broad ability factors.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48018,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Psychological Assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Psychological Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000771\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000771","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
Measurement Invariance of the Intelligence and Development Scales – 2 Across Language Versions, Gender, and Age
Abstract: We examined the factor structure and measurement invariance of the intelligence and basic skills domains of the Intelligence and Development Scales – 2 (IDS-2) with the Dutch ( N = 1,665) and German ( N = 1,672) standardization samples. First, we tested five competing models using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the Dutch data: two empirically based, derived earlier from the German data, and three theoretically based (IDS-2 and two Cattell–Horn–Carroll-based). Subsequently, we evaluated the measurement invariance of the final model across the Dutch and German versions and gender using multiple-group CFA and across age using local structural equation modeling. A second-order model with six first-order factors best represented the Dutch IDS-2 structure. Five IDS-2 factors were confirmed, but Visual Processing and Abstract Reasoning, and the intelligence and basic skills domains were not separable. This model displayed full invariance across the language versions and was largely invariant across gender and age (7–20 years). Thus, scores derived according to this model are comparable across these language versions, gender, and age. The strong general intelligence factor and weak broad ability factors ask for precaution when basing clinical interpretation on the broad ability factors.
期刊介绍:
The main purpose of the EJPA is to present important articles which provide seminal information on both theoretical and applied developments in this field. Articles reporting the construction of new measures or an advancement of an existing measure are given priority. The journal is directed to practitioners as well as to academicians: The conviction of its editors is that the discipline of psychological assessment should, necessarily and firmly, be attached to the roots of psychological science, while going deeply into all the consequences of its applied, practice-oriented development.