How precisely can cognitive abilities be measured? The distinction between composite and construct reliabilities in intelligence assessment exemplified with the Berlin Intelligence Structure Test;Wie Genau Können Kognitive Fähigkeiten Gemessen Werden? Die Unterscheidung von Gesamt- und Konstruktreliabilitäten in der Intelligenzdiagnostik für den Berliner Intelligenzstrukturtest

Diagnostica

Volumn 53, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 184-193

  Brunner, Martin ^a   Süß, Heinz Martin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LUXEMBOURG   (Luxembourg)

^b OTTO VON GUERICKE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Confirmatory factor analysis; Intelligence tests; Multidimensional measures; Reliability analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 38749112926     PISSN: 00121924     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1026/0012-1924.53.4.184     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Bacon, D. R., Sauer, P. L. & Young, M. (1995). Composite reliability in structural equation modeling. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 394-406.
2. Beckmann, J. F. & Guthke, J. (1999). Berliner Intelligenzstruktur- Test (BIS). Form 4. Diagnostica, 45, 56-61.
3. Bollen, K. A. ( 1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
4. Brunner, M. & Süß, H.-M. (2005). Analyzing the reliability of multidimensional measures: An example from intelligence research. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65, 227-240.
5. Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities - A survey of factoranalytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
6. Cattell, R. B. & Radcliffe, J. A. (1962). Reliabilities and validities of simple and extended weighted and buffered unifactor scales. The British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 15, 113-128.
7. Cattell, R. B. & Tsujioka, B. (1964). The importance of factortrueness and validity, versus homogeneity and orthogonality, in test scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24, 3-30.
8. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 98-104.
9. Cronbach, L. J. (1951 ). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
10. Grice, J. W. (2001). Computing and evaluating factor scores. Psychological Methods, 6, 430-450.
11. Gustafsson, J. E. (2002). Measurement from a hierarchical point of view. In H. I. Braun, D. N. Jackson & D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement (pp. 73-95). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. Gustafsson, J. E. & Balke, G. (1993). General and specific abilities as predictors of school achievement. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 407-434.
13. Hancock, G. R. & Mueller, R. O. (2001). Rethinking construct reliability within latent variable systems. In R. Cudeck, S. du Toit & D. Soerbom (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: present and future- A festschrift in honor of Karl Jöreskog (pp. 195-216). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
14. Hogan, T. P., Benjamin, A. & Brezinski, K. L. (2000). Reliability methods: A note on the frequency of use of various types. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 523-531.
15. Horn, J. L. & Noll, J. (1997). Human cognitive capabilities: GfGc theory. In D. P. Flanagan, J. L. Genshaft & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment. Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 53-91). New York: The Guilford Press.
16. Hu, L.-T. & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit Indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424-453.
17. Irvine, S. H. & Kyllonen, P. C. (Eds.). (2002). Item generation for test development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18. Jäger, A. O. (1982). Mehrmodale Klassifikation von Intelligenzleistungen. Experimentell kontrollierte Weiterentwicklung eines deskriptiven Intelligenzstrukturmodells. Diagnostica, 25, 195-226.
19. Jäger, A. O., Süß, H.-M. & Beauducel, A. (1997). Berliner Intelligenzstruktur-Test, Form 4. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
20. Kaplan, D. (1990). Evaluating and modifying covariance structure models: A review and recommendation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 137-155.
21. Kyllonen, P. C. (1994). Aptitude testing inspired by information processing: A test of the four-sources model. The Journal of General Psychology, 120, 375-405.
22. Lienert, G. A. (1989). Testaufbau und Testanalyse. München: Psychologie Verlags Union.
23. Lord, F. M. & Novick, M. R. ( 1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
24. Lubinski, D. (2004). Introduction to the special section on cognitive abilities: 100 years after Spearman's (1904) " 'General intelligence', objectively determined and measured". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 96-111.
25. Marsh, H. W., Baila, J. R. & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391-410.
26. Marsh, H. W., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Koller, O. & Baumert, J. (2005). Academic self-concept, interest, grades, and standardized test scores: Reciprocal effects models of causal ordering. Child Development, 75, 397-416.
27. McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
28. Muthén, L. K. & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2004). Mplus User's Guide. Third Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
29. Nunnally, J. C. & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
30. Raykov, T. (1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 173-184.
31. Raykov, T. & Shrout, P. E. (2002). Reliability of scales with general structure: Point and interval estimation using a structural equation modeling approach. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 195-212.
32. Sechrest, L. (1963). Incremental validity: A recommendation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 23, 153-158.
33. Snijders, T. A. B. & Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel Analysis An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London: SAGE Publications.
34. Süß, H.-M. (1996). Intelligenz, Wissen und Problemlösen. Kognitive Voraussetzungen für erfolgreiches Handeln bei computersimulierten Problemen. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
35. Süß, H.-M. (2001). Prädiktive Validität der Intelligenz im schulischen und außerschulischen Bereich. In E. Stern & J. Guthke (Hrsg.), Perspektiven der Intelligenzforschung. Ein Lehrbuch für Fortgeschrittene (S. 109-135). Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers.
36. Süß, H.-M. & Beauducel, A. (2005). Faceted models of intelligence. In O. Wilhelm & R. Engle (Eds.), Handbook of understanding and measuring intelligence (pp. 313-332). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
37. Süß, H.-M., Oberauer, K., Wittmann, W. W., Wilhelm, O. & Schulze, R. (2002). Working-memory capacity explains reasoning ability - and a little bit more. Intelligence, 30, 261-288.
38. Weis, S. & Süß, H.-M. (in Druck). Reviving the search for social intelligence. A multitrait-multimethod study of its structure and construct validity. Personality and Individual Differences.
39. Wiggins, J. S. (1973). Personality and prediction: Principles of personality assessment. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
40. Wittmann, W. W. (1988). Multivariate reliability theory: Principles of symmetry and successful validation strategies. In J. R. Nesselroade & R. B. Cattell (Eds.), Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology (2nd ed.) (pp. 505-560). New York: Plenum.
41. Wittmann, W. W. & Süß, H.-M. (1999). Investigating the paths between working memory, intelligence, knowledge, and complex problem-solving performances via Brunswik symmetry. In P. L. Ackerman, P. C. Kyllonen & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), Learning and individual differences. Process, trait and content determinants (pp. 77-108). Washington, DC: APA Books.