NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Showing all 4 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Kern, Margaret L.; Hampson, Sarah E.; Goldberg, Lewis R.; Friedman, Howard S. – Developmental Psychology, 2014
The present study used a collaborative framework to integrate 2 long-term prospective studies: the Terman Life Cycle Study and the Hawaii Personality and Health Longitudinal Study. Within a 5-factor personality-trait framework, teacher assessments of child personality were rationally and empirically aligned to establish similar factor structures…
Descriptors: Longitudinal Studies, Risk, Mortality Rate, Personality
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Ward, Kimberly E.; Rothlisberg, Barbara A.; McIntosh, David E.; Bradley, Madeline H. – Psychology in the Schools, 2011
The purpose of this study was to examine the factor structure of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition (SB-V), based on the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of intelligence using a sample of 200 preschool children. The CHC framework uses three different models: one similar to Spearman's "g", one similar to the…
Descriptors: Preschool Children, Intelligence Tests, Factor Structure, Cognitive Ability
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
McCallum, R. Steve; And Others – Contemporary Educational Psychology, 1988
Administration of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (fourth edition) to 60 elementary school students (in grades four, five, and six) resulted in means consistent with their gifted status. Factor analyses, including LISREL confirmatory analysis, offered only partial support to the Binet model. (TJH)
Descriptors: Academically Gifted, Construct Validity, Elementary Education, Elementary School Students
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Gridley, Betty E.; McIntosh, David E. – Journal of School Psychology, 1991
Studied structure of Stanford-Binet: Fourth Edition for normal children who were not part of standardization sample. Found that, for children aged 2-6 years, either 2- or 3-factor model could be supported. For students aged 7-11, neither of 2 models studied was supported. Alternative model with verbal reasoning, quantitative reasoning,…
Descriptors: Age Differences, Children, Construct Validity, Elementary Education