Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Sep;48(5):639-62.
doi: 10.1080/00273171.2013.804398.

Bifactor Modeling and the Estimation of Model-Based Reliability in the WAIS-IV

Affiliations

Bifactor Modeling and the Estimation of Model-Based Reliability in the WAIS-IV

Gilles E Gignac et al. Multivariate Behav Res. 2013 Sep.

Abstract

Previous confirmatory factor analytic research that has examined the factor structure of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV) has endorsed either higher order models or oblique factor models that tend to amalgamate both general factor and index factor sources of systematic variance. An alternative model that has not yet been examined for the WAIS-IV is the bifactor model. Bifactor models allow all subtests to load onto both the general factor and their respective index factor directly. Bifactor models are also particularly amenable to the estimation of model-based reliabilities for both global composite scores (ω h ) and subscale/index scores (ω s ). Based on the WAIS-IV normative sample correlation matrices, a bifactor model that did not include any index factor cross loadings or correlated residuals was found to be better fitting than the conventional higher order and oblique factor models. Although the ω h estimate associated with the full scale intelligence quotient (FSIQ) scores was respectably high (.86), the ω s estimates associated with the WAIS-IV index scores were very low (.13 to .47). The results are interpreted in the context of the benefits of a bifactor modeling approach. Additionally, in light of the very low levels of unique internal consistency reliabilities associated with the index scores, it is contended that clinical index score interpretations are probably not justifiable.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources