3 ms·

I think this is the paper, unfortunately, it's behind a pay wall. http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=search.displayRecord&uid=2008-12082-007 http://psycnet.ap

• gwern 17y ago
  I have a copy. The .99 correlation seems to be coming from this: > Paired sample t-tests showed that children diagnosed as gifted in this study (N = 44) achieved equal scores on the HAWIK-IV (M = 126.9, SD = 7.1) and the IDS (M = 128.9, SD = 8.2), t(43) = –1.30, p = .20. Average nongifted children (N = 69) scored equal as well on the HAWIK-IV (M = 101.2, SD = 8.5) and the IDS (M = 99.86, SD = 0.03), t(68) = 1.42, p = .16. (IDS is this new line/weight-based test, the HAWIK-IV the usual IQ battery.)
  • tokenadult 17y ago
    Thanks for the reference and for the quotation (to the parent and grandparent of this reply). Yes, the HAWIK would be the usual child IQ battery in a German-speaking country. I'm not following the statistics shown there completely, but I note the sample size. Did the same group of test-givers give both tests? Were they "blind" as to the results of each test when giving the other? I appreciate the references. I'm still doubtful that the general finding would be that the five-minute test would be strongly correlated with full scale child IQ batteries, e.g. the WPPSI. The way to find out would be for other groups of test-givers to attempt to replicate the result.