Empirical assessment has been proposed as a process for evaluating the fairness of lineups in forensic settings. The mock witness paradigm, which asks a nonwitnesses to choose lineup members best fitting a given description, was used in a 2×2 ANOVA design (N=165) to evaluate two photospreads (same defendant, different foils) from an actual rape case. Two groups (context 1) were asked to pick the best matching photo from the two photospreads after hearing the real witnesses' description and to estimate the features of each foil. Two groups (context 2) were asked for feature estimates only. A significantcontext effect (p<.01) on height and weight estimates shows that hearing a description polarized the absolute values (higher) but not the relative distribution, which saw the defendant rated as the heaviest and tallest member. The defendant was chosen by 58% (p<.001), in one photospread rated as biased. Complications in the second photospread prompted critique of recommended fairness indicators.
The Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT), a new instrument for assessing cognitive functioning, is reviewed. This article provides a general description of the KAIT and its theoretical underpinnings. Evaluation of its technical qualities such as reliability, validity, standardization characteristics, and subtest and total test floors and ceilings is made according to specific criteria. The strengths and weaknesses of the KAIT are discussed in the context of their implications for advancing the field of intellectual assessment. It is concluded that the KAIT represents an advancement in cognitive assessment. However, the KAIT cannot be regarded as superior to existing intelligence measures until data are available to substantiate its diagnostic utility as well as demonstrate its treatment validity.
The Rey–Osterrieth complex figure (ROCF) and the free and cued selective reminding test (FCSRT) are frequently used in clinical practice. The ROCF assesses visual perception, constructional praxis, and visuospatial memory, and the FCSRT assesses verbal learning and memory. As part of the Spanish Normative Studies (NEURONORMA), we provide age- and education-adjusted norms for the ROCF (copy and memory) and for the FCSRT. The sample consists of 332 and 340 participants, respectively, who are cognitively normal, community dwelling, and ranging in age from 50 to 94 years. Tables are provided to convert raw scores to age-adjusted scaled scores. These were further converted into education-adjusted scaled scores by applying regression-based adjustments. Although age and education affected the score of the ROCF and FCSRT, sex was found to be unrelated in this normal sample. The normative data presented here were obtained from the same study sample as all other NEURONORMA norms and the same statistical procedures were applied. These co-normed data will allow clinicians to compare scores from one test with all the tests included in the project.
The objective of this study is to assist school psychologists and school districts in understanding the cost of implementing the Dual Discrepancy/Consistency (DD/C) method, which is the most widely used PSW method of SLD identification. A literature review was conducted to obtain national data on variables needed to estimate the cost of implementing DD/C (e.g., school psychologist to student ratio, a district's assessment infrastructure). A national survey of school psychologists was conducted to gather information not found in the literature. Based on the obtained data, we modified existing assumptions and recalculated the cost of implementing DD/C. Our literature review found only one study, authored by Williams and Miciak, that addressed the cost of PSW and it was specific to DD/C. Responses from 468 school psychologists revealed that most districts have an assessment infrastructure. Our recalculated cost of implementing DD/C is approximately $190,000 less than Williams and Miciak's estimate. Our recalculated cost of an evaluation ranged from $368.56 to $376.22, which is $1,671.24 and $1,570.55 lower than William and Miciak's estimates, respectively. Research on learning and learning disabilities indicates that specific cognitive processes are relevant to the acquisition and development of academic skills. Evaluations that follow DD/C encourage assessment of these cognitive processes. We conclude that the cost of adopting DD/C should be based primarily on the software needed to implement it ($65.00/ psychologist) and at least one day of professional development training. Because the cost seems reasonable for most districts, DD/C should be given serious consideration.
Adaptive behavior scales are vital in assessing children and adolescents who experience a range of disabling conditions in school settings. This article presents the results of an evaluation of the design characteristics, norming, scale characteristics, reliability and validity evidence, and bias identification studies supporting 14 norm-referenced, informant-based interviews and rating scales designed to measure adaptive behaviors. To derive these results, the manuals for each of these scales were reviewed using a standardized coding procedure, and information about each scale was double-coded by reviewers. Findings reveal that several evidence-based adaptive behavior scales are available to school psychologists. Concluding recommendations address selection and use of adaptive behavior scales as part of a comprehensive assessment, using the optimal methods of administration of adaptive behavior scales, and interpreting resultant scores that have demonstrated the highest levels of reliability and the largest body of validity evidence.
