Revisiting measurement invariance in intelligence testing in aging research: Evidence for almost complete metric invariance across age groups.

Q2 Psychology
Journal for Person-Oriented Research Pub Date : 2017-01-01 Epub Date: 2018-03-11 DOI:10.17505/jpor.2017.08
Briana N Sprague, Jinshil Hyun, Peter C M Molenaar
{"title":"Revisiting measurement invariance in intelligence testing in aging research: Evidence for almost complete metric invariance across age groups.","authors":"Briana N Sprague, Jinshil Hyun, Peter C M Molenaar","doi":"10.17505/jpor.2017.08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objectives: </strong>Invariance of intelligence across age is often assumed but infrequently explicitly tested. Horn and McArdle (1992) tested measurement invariance of intelligence, providing adequate model fit but might not consider all relevant aspects such as sub-test differences. The goal of the current paper is to explore age-related invariance of the WAIS-R using an alternative model that allows direct tests of age on WAIS-R subtests.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cross-sectional data on 940 participants aged 16-75 from the WAIS-R normative values were used. Subtests examined were information, comprehension, similarities, vocabulary, picture completion, block design, picture arrangement, and object assembly. The two intelligence factors considered were fluid and crystallized intelligence. Self-reported ages were divided into young (16-22, <i>n</i> = 300), adult (29-39, <i>n</i> = 275), middle (40-60, <i>n</i> = 205), and older (61-75, <i>n</i> = 160) adult groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results suggested partial metric invariance holds. Although most of the subtests reflected fluid and crystalized intelligence similarly across different ages, invariance did not hold for block design on fluid intelligence and picture arrangement on crystallized intelligence for older adults. Additionally, there was evidence of a correlated residual between information and vocabulary for the young adults only. This partial metric invariance model yielded acceptable model fit compared to previously-proposed invariance models of Horn and McArdle (1992).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Almost complete metric invariance holds for a two-factor model of intelligence. Most of the subtests were invariant across age groups, suggesting little evidence for age-related bias in the WAIS-R. However, we did find unique relationships between two subtests and intelligence. Future studies should examine age-related differences in subtests when testing measurement invariance in intelligence.</p>","PeriodicalId":36744,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Person-Oriented Research","volume":" ","pages":"86-100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5983042/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Person-Oriented Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17505/jpor.2017.08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/3/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/objectives: Invariance of intelligence across age is often assumed but infrequently explicitly tested. Horn and McArdle (1992) tested measurement invariance of intelligence, providing adequate model fit but might not consider all relevant aspects such as sub-test differences. The goal of the current paper is to explore age-related invariance of the WAIS-R using an alternative model that allows direct tests of age on WAIS-R subtests.

Methods: Cross-sectional data on 940 participants aged 16-75 from the WAIS-R normative values were used. Subtests examined were information, comprehension, similarities, vocabulary, picture completion, block design, picture arrangement, and object assembly. The two intelligence factors considered were fluid and crystallized intelligence. Self-reported ages were divided into young (16-22, n = 300), adult (29-39, n = 275), middle (40-60, n = 205), and older (61-75, n = 160) adult groups.

Results: Results suggested partial metric invariance holds. Although most of the subtests reflected fluid and crystalized intelligence similarly across different ages, invariance did not hold for block design on fluid intelligence and picture arrangement on crystallized intelligence for older adults. Additionally, there was evidence of a correlated residual between information and vocabulary for the young adults only. This partial metric invariance model yielded acceptable model fit compared to previously-proposed invariance models of Horn and McArdle (1992).

Conclusion: Almost complete metric invariance holds for a two-factor model of intelligence. Most of the subtests were invariant across age groups, suggesting little evidence for age-related bias in the WAIS-R. However, we did find unique relationships between two subtests and intelligence. Future studies should examine age-related differences in subtests when testing measurement invariance in intelligence.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

重新审视老龄化研究中智力测验的测量不变性:跨年龄组几乎完全度量不变的证据。
背景/目的:不同年龄的智力不变量经常被假定,但很少被明确测试。Horn 和 McArdle(1992)测试了智力的测量不变性,提供了充分的模型拟合,但可能没有考虑到所有相关的方面,如分测验的差异。本文的目的是使用一个替代模型来探索 WAIS-R 与年龄相关的不变量,该模型允许直接测试 WAIS-R 分测验的年龄:方法:使用WAIS-R标准值中940名16-75岁参与者的横截面数据。考察的分测验包括信息、理解、相似性、词汇、图片完成、图块设计、图片排列和物体组合。考虑的两个智力因素是流体智力和结晶智力。自报年龄分为青年组(16-22 岁,n = 300)、成年组(29-39 岁,n = 275)、中年组(40-60 岁,n = 205)和老年组(61-75 岁,n = 160):结果:结果表明部分度量不变性成立。虽然大多数分测验在不同年龄段对流体智力和晶体智力的反映相似,但对老年人来说,在流体智力的分块设计和晶体智力的图片排列方面,不变量并不成立。此外,有证据表明,只有年轻人的信息量和词汇量之间存在相关残差。与 Horn 和 McArdle(1992 年)以前提出的不变量模型相比,这个部分公因子不变量模型的模型拟合度可以接受:结论:双因素智力模型几乎具有完全的公因子不变性。大多数分测验在不同年龄组之间是不变的,这表明 WAIS-R 中与年龄有关的偏差证据很少。然而,我们确实发现了两项分测验与智力之间的独特关系。今后的研究在测试智力的测量不变性时,应研究与年龄有关的子测题差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal for Person-Oriented Research
Journal for Person-Oriented Research Psychology-Psychology (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
23 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信