The validity of certain subtests of the ITPA, WISC, and stanford-binet as measures of analogical reasoning

✍ Scribed by Philip J. Levinson; Robert L. Carpenter

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 1975
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 300 KB
• Volume: 12
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0033-3085
• DOI: 10.1002/1520-6807(197507)12:3<326::aid-pits2310120316>3.0.co;2-1

✦ Synopsis

Certain subtests of the LVISC, ITPA, and Stanford-Binet are used as measures of analogical reasoning. Because several facts suggested t,hat the form of analogy used on these subtests does not require subjeck t.o engage in true analogical reasoning, t,he validity of these sub s as measures of analogical reasoning was investigated. Two forms of verbal analogies were used: quasianalogies (the form used on the \VISC, ITPA, and Stanford-Binet) which presented the problem in sentence form (a bird uses air; a fish uses . . .); and true analogies which presented the problem in the form cf a proportion (bird is to air as fish is to . . .). Subjects were 9-, 12-, and 15-year old children. These ages were used because children below 12 years of age do not appear to have the cognitive skills necessary for analogical reasoning. Nine-year old subjects obtained significantly higher scores on quasi-analogies in comparison to true analogies. There were no significant differences for the older subjects. Because of this it was suggested that the"analogy" items on the WISC, ITPA and Stanford-Binet are inappropriate t,est, items for assessing analogical reasoning.