Clinical assessment of child and adolescent intelligence, 2nd ed.

By R. Kamphaus. 2005

138 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0beae78688343f857a1b2ea3cd519d0483adf2f4

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Differential Ability Scales – Second Edition (Neuro)psychological Predictors of Math Performance for Typical Children and Children with Math Disabilities (2008, background): “As a result, several authorities (e.g., Groth-Marnat, Gallagher, Hale, & Kaplan, 2000; Hale & Fiorello, 2004; Kamphaus, 2001; Kaufman, 1994; Lezak, 1995; Miller, 2007; Miller & Hale, 2008; Prifitera, Weiss, & Saklofske, 1998; Sattler, 2001) offer methods and tables to assist practitioners in examini”
Exploratory bifactor analysis of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fifth Edition with the 16 primary and secondary subtests (2015, methodology): “The failure to find a Verbal Comprehension factor is inconsistent with the theoretical structure presented in theWISC-V Technical and InterpretiveManual and with the extant literature regarding the Wechsler scales (Boake, 2002; Kamphuas, 2005), and is a more unusual and perplexing finding.”
Higher Order, Multisample, Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children--Fourth Edition: What Does It Measure?. (2006, methodology): “In previous versions of the WISC, Arithmetic was hypothesized to require also substantial working memory and short-term memory (Kamphaus, 2001; Kranzler, 1997), and the memory demands were increased for the WISC-IV.”
Essentials of Psychological Testing (2005, background): “• Kamphaus, R. W. (2001). Clinical assessment of child and adolescent intelligence (2nd ed.”
Distinctions Without a Difference (2006, background): “The inherent assumption underlying the interpretation of lower order subtest scores and factor indexes is that they offer practical diagnostic or treatment benefits not available from the general intelligence (g) estimate (Kamphaus, 2001; Kaufman, 1994; Sattler, 2001).”
After the Demise of the Discrepancy: Proposed Learning Disabilities Diagnostic Criteria (2004, background): “Norm-referenced achievement tests are increasingly available in a variety of different forms (Kamphaus, 2001).”