WAPIS

Wechsler Adult Performance 1

Running Head: WECHSLER ADULT PERFORMANCE

Wechsler Adult Performance Performance Intelligence Scale (WAPIS -PR)

Lakshmi Saranya M. T. Roll No.: 1024216 IIIrd MPCL Christ University, Bangalore


1. Introduction

Intelligence is a capacity to profit from experience and to go beyond the given. Intelligence refers to cognitive ability of an individual to learn from experience, to reason well, and to cope effectively with the demands of daily living. It is the ability to acquire and apply knowledge. There are three types of intelligence in which one of the types emphasises on the adjustment of the individual to his t otal environment, second type defines the intelligence as the ability to learn and the third type says intelligence is an ability to carry out abstract thinking (Freeman, F. S, 1965). According to Wechsler, intelligence is a global or aggregate capacity of an individual to think rationally, act purposefully and to deal effectively to the environment (Baron, R, 2001).The concept of intelligence was brought by Alfred Binet in 1904, to detect those children who were too dull to profit from the ordinary schooling. In 1905, another psychologist named Simon collaborated to develop BinetSimon scale. Though they again revis ed their intelligence scale in 1911, in 1916, StanfordBinet version developed under the direction of L. M. T erman which served as t he dominant intelligence scale for the world. This scale provided the first application of the Intelligence Quotient concept recommended by Stern in the year 1912 as IQ = [MA/CA] x 100, where MA is the mental age and CA is the chronological age. There are different theories of intelligence which include factor approach and information processing approach. Spearman¶s two factor theory is a factorial approach in which there are both µg¶ andµs¶ factors. The µg¶ factor is the general factor andµs¶ factor is the specific factor. General factor is a mental capacity a nd the intelligence factor is determiner partly by this factor. It is t he core of what we call intelligence. Specific types of intelligence were called a s s1, s2 etc. according to spearman each s is different from others. µg¶ is fixed and permanent in each person but it varies from person to person. We cannot


change µg¶ but we can i mproveµs¶. Thurston¶s theory is a factorial a pproach theory which focused on seven distinct ability called as primary mental ability ±verbal, numerical, perceptual, memory, spatial, r easoning and vocabulary (Munn,N.L, 1967). Guilford¶s structure of intellect is another theory w hich describes the model of intellect which includes five contents, six operations and six products. The contents include visual, auditory, semantic, behavioural and figural concepts. The operations comprises of cognition, memory recording, memory retention, divergent production, convergent production and evaluation and the products are units, classes, relations, systems, i mplications and transformations. Thorndike¶s theory considers intelligence which comprises of comprehension skill, arithmetic skill, vocabulary skill, and ability to follow directions ability. Cattell¶s t heory of intelligence describes two types of intelligence the fluid intelligence and crystallized intelligence. The fluid intelligence is the inborn abilit y that allows us to think, reason, and acquire new knowledge. The crystallized intelligence represents the knowledge and understanding which we have acquired in our life by the process of learning. Information processing approach includes Piaget¶s theory, Gardner¶s theory and Sternberg¶s t heory (Feldman, R.S, 2002). Piaget described the cognitive development of an individual. The concept of multiple intelligence was brought by Howard Gardner in 1983. He considers intelligence which comprise of multiple intelligence skills in the areas of linguistic, logical mathematics, musical, spatial, bodily kinesthetics, interpersonal r elationships, intrapersonal relationships and naturalistic. Sternberg found the triarchic theory of cognitive process of intelligence-componential intelligence, practical intelligence and experiential intelligence. Wechsler¶s scale was first published in 1939 to measure the intelligence of individuals from age 10 to 60.the general factor theory was accepted requiring that there should be significant intercorrelations among the several subtests of the scale a nd that the scale as a


whole should provide a valid index of an individual¶s general intelligence. The test described six verbal and five performance tests. They are described as follows ( Kaplan, R.M., Saccuzzo,D.P,2001) : Verbal tests y

Information- long range retention, association and organization of experience.

y

Comprehension- reasoning with a bstractions, organization of knowledge and concept formation.

y

Arithmetic- test arithmetic reasoning t hrough verbal problem.

y

Similarities- analysis of relationships, verbal concept formation.

y

Vocabulary- language development and concept formation.

y

Digit span- immediate recall, auditory imagery and visual i magery at times.

Performance tests

y

Picture completion- visual perception: analysis visual imagery.

y

Digit symbol- visual motor integration and visual imagery.

y

Block design- perception of form, visual perception: analysis visual motor int egration.

y

Picture arrangement- visual perception: ana lysis visual imagery.

y

Object assembly- visual perception, visual motor integration and visual imagery.

The test presented here is an Indian version of Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales to the Indian conditions and norms set up for Indian population by Ramalinga Swami in 1974. This is the final form of the test consisting of the performance scales of Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales namely picture completion, digit symbol, block design, picture arrangement and object assembly. Performance tests were first devised as a supplement to


or substitute for the Stanford Binet scale inorder to exa mine deaf, illiterate, or non English speaking people. Picture completion and picture arrangement tests have undergone extensive modifications by the author and rest all are same as in WAIS. As there were differences in the number of items Cronbach¶s coefficient Alpha was used to calculate the reliability of the picture completion, block design, picture arrangement and object a ssembly tests where Wechsler used split half technique for the same. T est retest reliability was calculated for the digit symbol test. Product moment formula was used to calculate the correlations between the subtests. In an effort to establish the validity of the test three techniques were used- construct validity, factorial validity and comparison of the results obtained by Wechsler for WAIS (WAPIS, 1974). The items of each of the tests will have to be scored as per the instructions given for each test in the manual and those scores from each of the tests are summed to calculate the raw scores. Each of the raw scores are converted to scaled scores and summed from which IQ is derived. The IQs can be determined by looking at the table given in the manual (age wise). Each of the total scaled score has a n IQ value which is considered as the IQ of the subject (WAPIS, 1974). There are different applications of the test as it helps to identify individuals with learning disability. It also helps to identify the mentally cha llenged individuals. Mainly it is used in clinical settings. Generally one could be aware about her IQ. Thus it is also used in the educational settings

2.

Administration

The examiner has to organise the materials, testing room and adequate time. The room should be well ±lighted and ventilated. T hus the subject should feel comfortable while


doing the test. The intern should also be in a comfortable position in order to pr esent the materials, observe the subject¶s performance and also to recor d the responses conveniently. A good rapport should be established with the subject .The subject¶s personal details should be asked and noted. The instructions are given for eac h of the performance tests, to the subject. The fatigue can have affect on the performance of the subject. External distractions also affect the performance of the client. The intern should make an effort to obtain cooperation and to maintain motivation of the subject. The order and the directions of administration of the tests in t he scale are as follows: y

Picture completion test- The intern has to start with card1,and ask the subject to report the important part which is missing and if she fails to report the intern has t o give the answer to make her understand about the process. The subject has to respond and similarly she has to respond for 26 items with a time limit of 20 seconds each. The intern has to allot 1 point for ea ch of correct response. The maximum score for this test is 26.

y

Digit symbol test- The material for this test is on the record form. The intern has to show the marks representing each of the numbers in the key. The subject is then asked to fill the empty boxes with marks which correspond to a particular number. The intern can demonstrate the first three and then ask the subject to do the sample portion of the test, consisting ten sample items. Then t he intern has to give a µstart¶ signal to begin the task. The time limit for this test is 90 seconds. One point is given for each square filled in correctly and half credit for any reversed symbols. The ten samples are not included in the score.

y

Block design- The intern has to show the blocks by explaining their nature like they are all alike with some sides red, some sides white and on some half red and on


other half white. The intern has to then demonstrate the first design without exposing card 1 to the subject. By leaving the model done by the intern intact, the subject has to make the same with other four blocks as trial1. Reversal of the design or inversion of the patterns of the block in design 1 is considered as an error. For the design 2 also same instructions are given. If the subject fails the intern has to demonstrate it again or else the subject has to continue the test. In 7th design, five other blocks are given to the subject. There are 10 designs and the subject is not allowed to rotate the card. For design 1-6, 60 seconds are given and for design 7-10, 120 seconds are given. The scoring of the test are as follows- 4 points each for the first trial in design 1 and 2; 2 points for second trial.3-6 designs, 4 point each. Design 7-10, 4 points for successful completion of each design and bonuses are also given if they complete within the time. Scores are based on correct solutions within the time limit, no marks are given for partially correct or incomplete designs. The test has a maximum score of 48 including the time bonuses for designs 7-10. y

Picture arrangement- the intern presents the three cards of item 1, NEST, in the order indicated by the numbers on the back of the cards, reading from the subject¶s left to right. The picture tells a story which occurs in events but the events are in wrong order. The subject is then asked to tell a story by putting the cards in a correct order. If the subject arranges them correctly within the time li mit, 4 points are given. Then the second sets of pictures are shown and if the subject fails to build up a story then the intern has to demonstrate the correct solution. Score 2 has to be given if the subject produces the correct arrangement within the time limit; 0 if she doesn¶t. In either case the subject has to go on to the next item. If the subject fails on both items 1 and 2, discontinue the test otherwise administer all the items. From item 3 to 9 no


demonstration is given to the subject. The exact time is recorded wit h the scoring of 1to 2 series: first trial 4 points, second trial: 2 points, series 3-9: 4 points for correct arrangement within time limit. The maximum score is 42. y

Object assembly- the subject is provided with the pictures of M anikilin, profile, hand and elephant. There are pieces for each item which t he subject has to arrange inorder to make the above said pictures. The subject is not allowed to see the picture of the completed figure. If the subject completes the test within t he time limit bonuses are given. One point for each correct juxta position is made within the time limit. The time limit for Manikilin and profile is 120 seconds each and for hand and elephant 180 seconds each If two ear pieces are assembled outside the head, 1 point is credited but if they are correctly put 3 points are given. The bonuses are provided in the manual and the maximum score for this test is 44.


Reference

Baron,R.A (2001 ) Psychology (5th ed.). New Delhi:Prentice Hall of India Feldman,R.S

th

(2002). Understanding psychology (6 ed.).New Delhi: Tata Mc Graw Hill

Hall Freeman, F.S (1965). Theory and practice of psychological testing (3rd ed.). New Delhi: Oxford & IBH Kaplan, R.M., Saccuzzo,D.P (2001). Psychological Testing (5thed.).Singapore: Thomson Learning Munn,N.L (1967). Introduction to psychology.New Delhi: Oxford & IBH Ramalingaswamy .P (1974).WAPIS Form-PR. Manual of Indian Adaptation of WAIS Performance Scale. New Delhi: Manasayan


Performa of the client

1.

Background

Information

Name

: A.F

Age

: 21

Gender

: female

Education

: Bcom student

Marital status

: single

2.

Referred by: The intern administered the test for an academic purpose.

3.

Referred For: The subject was randomly selected based on a ccessibility to understand

her intelligence in the performance test for an academic purpose. She was referred for assessing intelligence test so that she can understand herself better and make use of the information. 4.

Presenting Complaints: The subject didn¶t come with any presenting symptoms. This

test was carried for academic purpose to meet the course requirement. The subject was unaware about her intelligence in performance tasks. Usually she couldn¶t perform well in the exams even though she had studied well. She was confused about this aspect. 5.

Test

administered: The Wechsler Adult Performance Intelligence Scale (WAPIS-PR)

was conducted to assess her intelligence. This is an Indian version of WAIS performance test found in the year 1974. 6.

Date

of administration: 19

th

June, 2011


7.

Behavioural

Observation

The subject was appropriately dressed according to her cultural norms. As it was a working day she was not free during the morning hours, but she was relaxed and comfortable in the evening to do the test. She was ready to take the test which could enable her to know herself. She was motivated and co-operative while doing the test. The subject was clearing the doubts whenever required. She was feeling relaxed and comfortable while performing the test. There was no distraction in the environment so she was free to perform the test.

8.

Test

Result

The results obtained by the subject are shown in table 1. Table 1 s hows the raw scores and scaled scores of the subject obtained in different tests along with their IQ score. The subject has raw scores 11, 47, 29, 20 and 23 for picture completion, digit symbol, block design, picture arrangement and object assembly respectively. The scaled scores for these are 9, 11, 12, 10 and 10 respectively. The subject has an IQ of 100. Scoring sheet is attached at the end of the report. Table 1 Subject A¶s raw scores and scaled scores in different tests of the WAPIS and her IQ Sl.no Test

Raw score Scaled score

1

Picture completion 11

9

2

Digit symbol

47

11

3

Block design

29

12

4

Picture assembly

20

10


5

Object assembly Total score

9.

23

10 52

IQ= 100

Interpretation

The aim of the test was to test the intelligence of the individual using Wechsler Adult Performance Intelligence Scale (WAPIS-PR). The test was conducted by the intern for t he academic purpose. A good rapport was built with the subject. The subject was motivated and co-operative while doing the test. The results of the tests were scored using the instructions provided in the manual. The raw scores were obta ined for each of the tests from which their scaled score were also found. The scaled scor es resulted in the understanding of the IQ of the subject. This made both the intern and the subject aware of her intelligence. The test was hand scored using the instructions from the manual. The subject has a raw score of 11 in picture completion test, 47 in digit symbol, 29 in block design, 20 in picture arrangement and 23 in object assembly (refer table 1). The scaled scores are 9, 11, 12, 10 and 10 respectively. The sum of the scaled scores gives the Intelligence Quotient (IQ). The subject¶s IQ is 100. The subject has an average intelligence. Picture completion test -The results reveal that the subject has an average awareness of

how to deal with ambiguous situations in life. She is average in her perceptual a nd conceptual abilities and the ability to differentiate essential from non-essential details (Freeman, F.S,1965) Digit

symbol test-The result of average intelligence reveals that she has a n average

ability to learn an unfamiliar task, visual-motor dexterity, degree of persistence, speed of


performance, visual acuity and information processing as per her performance in digital symbol test (Freeman, F.S,1965) . Block

design test - The subject has an average performance in reasoning, analysing

integrating visual and motor functions, nonverbal concept formation, abstract thinking, and spatial relationships (Freeman, F.S,1965) Picture arrangement- The results of the subject reveal that she has an average reasoning

ability and she must be average in planning and noticing cause effect relationship. She has an average ability to comprehend and evaluat e a total situation without the use of language (Freeman, F.S,1965) Object assembly test- The subject¶s performance in this test reveals that she has an

average visual analysing skill and coordination with simple assembly skills (Freeman, F.S,1965).

10. Impression

The results of the subject revealed that she has an average intelligence. The IQ of t he subject is 100 (refer table 1). She has an average reasoning and planning ability. She has an average skill in motor ability and conceptualizing of different concepts.

11. Recommendations

The subject scored an average IQ and did not indicate disability in intelligence. This intern therapist agrees the result based on interview and clinical observation. *************

WAPIS

Recommend Documents