Automated versus face-to-face intelligence testing: comparison of test-retest reliabilities

✍ Scribed by David L. Elwood

• Publisher: Elsevier Science
• Year: 1972
• Weight: 336 KB
• Volume: 4
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0020-7373
• DOI: 10.1016/s0020-7373(72)80009-9

✦ Synopsis

It was hypothesized that automated WAIS testing would yield higher test-retest correlations (rs) than face-to-face WAIS testing. Two samples were obtained: 24 subjects received automated WAIS testing, and 29 subjects received the usual face-to-face WAIS testing. The test-retest rs for the two groups of subjects were compared for significance of differences. The results of the experiment were that the rs of the automated and face-to-face groups were not significantly different except on the Digit Span subtest on which the face-to-face group r was higher. It was concluded that, at this point in research, the strongest arguments for continued development of automated intelligence testing systems rested on considerations such as savings of professional man-hours, reduced costs of testing, and increases in the number of objective behavioral measurements that automated testing could make available for clinical decision making.