This comparison may inform rehabilitation programs and/or educational intervention planning.
For other examinees with working memory and/or processing speed difficulties, it also may be clinically informative to evaluate the reduced impact of these abilities on an estimate of general cognitive ability by comparing the FSIQ and the GAI. Tables C.5–C.9 are provided for use in ability-achievement discrepancy comparisons between the WAIS–IV GAI and the WIAT–II. The WAIS–IV GAI may be used similarly to the WISC–IV GAI, as permitted by local and state education agencies. The use of the WISC–IV GAI in educational settings has been discussed in Raiford et al., 2005. The forthcoming WMS–IV Technical and Interpretive Manual (Wechsler, in press) will provide information regarding the use of ability-memory comparisons using the GAI. For example, if the referral question involves memory impairment, the GAI may be less sensitive to age-related cognitive decline than the FSIQ. When assessing an examinee who presents with potential neuropsychological issues, the GAI may be useful to clarify interpretation.
In these situations, the reduction in the FSIQ related to working memory and/or processing speed difficulties may complicate contextual interpretation of performance on other tests, such as measures of memory, executive function, or achievement. When to Use the GAI The impact of neuropsychological problems related to working memory and/or processing speed deficiencies is evident in Table C.4, which shows that FSIQ < GAI discrepancies were obtained by more than 65% of the examinees in the following WAIS–IV special group samples: Intellectual Disability-Mild Severity, Intellectual Disability-Moderate Severity, Borderline Intellectual Functioning, ADHD, TBI, Autistic Disorder, Asperger’s Disorder, and Probable Dementia of the Alzheimer’s Type-Mild Severity. The GAI does not replace the FSIQ, but it should be reported and interpreted along with the FSIQ and all index scores, including the WMI and PSI.
0 kommentar(er)
