Development of Norms of the Adapted Verbal Comprehension Index Subtests of WISC-IV for Pakistani Children
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The study was designed to develop norms for the adapted subtests of Verbal Comprehension Index (Ambreen & Kamal, 2011) of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, UK Fourth edition (WISC-IV UK; Wechsler, 2004) for Pakistan. It was also aimed to examine the differences in scores of children when Pakistan's and UK norms were used.Intelligence is considered a culturally dependent construct as there is evidence from various disciplines that there is a strong influence of culture on cognitive development or intelligence of human beings (as cited in Paniker, Hirisave, & Subbakrishna, 2006). An individual's performance on any task is influenced by multiple factors including the demand of the task itself; and the learning experiences and characteristics the individual brings into the task. Intelligence testing of children has wide educational and clinical applications. Especially for children the importance for a comprehensive, well-standardized intelligence assessment tool is multifold. Intellectual ability needs to be assessed to predict child's learning potential and it is of great utility in clinical and research fields as well.For psycho-educational assessment the importance of intelligence testing for children is gaining much attention even in developing countries like Pakistan. Few efforts have been made to develop intelligence tests for children in Pakistan and much of these tests were for pre-school and primary school children (for example: Mahmud, 1990; Naheed, 1993; Syed, 1993 as cited in Ambreen, 2008; Abbas & Israr, 1990). Some intelligence tests were developed for high school children too (for example: Hussain, 1993, 2001; & Gardezi, 1994, 2001 as cited in Ambreen). Similarly few efforts have been made to adapt and/or translate already developed cognitive assessment tools for children of Pakistan (Sheikh, 1982; Ansari & Iftikhar, 1984; Ain, 1985 as cited in Ambreen, 2008; Aziz, 1997). Many of these tests are lacking in their psychometric strength or are not properly validated and standardized. Further more, they do not follow the recent intelligence testing trends. This necessitated the need of an indigenous or indigenized intelligence assessment tool. Considering the cultural and contextual dissimilarities in the west and our country, indigenization of tests developed in western cultures is needed (Raza & Sheikh, 1991). Indigenization of a tool for a certain culture involves both adaptation and norms development for the people living in that culture.Scores on test do not have any meaning without an interpretive framework, which is provided by norms. Most of the tests of intellectual development are norm-referenced tests comparing the child performance with the performance of other children, so it becomes even more important to develop regional/national norms for any assessment tool that has been developed and standardized in different culture even if it is adapted (items have been modified or replaced for becoming culturally appropriate) for the new culture (Watkins & Canivez, 2004).WISC-IV is considered as one of the most widely used intelligence test for children throughout the world. Besides its strong psychometric strength and clinical utility issues have often been raised regarding item and test score bias. Being a norm-referenced test, differences in performance on the test may be attributed to various cultural factors such as use of culturally-appropriate stimuli; previous learning experiences; and training at home. Research comparing Intelligence Quotient (IQ) scores of the American standardization sample when applied to children from Canadian standardization sample showed a significant increase in scores in the latter group (as cited in Paniker et al, 2006). When applied to Navajo children, there was a significant drop in scores (Tempest, 1998). There have been many translations and adaptations of the WISC-IV, and norms have been established for a number of countries and languages, for example, Spanish (U. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».