Frequently Asked Questions

FAQ: Does WISC-V UK have complementary subtests?

Answer: The U.S. edition of the WISC–V has complementary subtests that are not included in international versions of the WISC–V. The subtests are: Naming Speed Literacy, Immediate Symbol Translation, Naming Speed Quantity, Delayed Symbol Translation and Recognition Symbol Translation. These subtests from the U.S. edition are available for use through Q–interactive. Please contact customer services if you would like to access to them. The results must be interpreted accordingly, as these subtests are not adapted for local populations and do not use normative data based on local populations.


FAQ: Why are the sample sizes smaller in the WISC-V UK than in the previous edition?

Answer: Technical advances in norming procedures, such as inferential norming, allow today's researchers to accomplish high quality norms with fewer cases when re-validating a new edition of an existing test that measures the same constructs as the previous edition.  This is especially true when the revised test has already been validated in a country with a similar language and culture, such as other English speaking countries 

References: Zhu, J. & Chen, H-Y. (2011), Utility of Inferential Norming With Smaller Sample Sizes. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 29(6) 570-580, SAGE Publications

Bridges, A.J. & Holler, K.A. (2007), How Many Is Enough? Determining Optimal Sample Sizes For Normative Studies in Pediatric Neuropsychology. Child Neuropsychology, iFirst: 1-11, Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis Group

Information on UK validation study:
A UK validation study provides UK normative data on 415 children aged 6:0 to 16:11.

• The sample is stratified to match 2011 UK Census data based on gender, ethnicity, parental education level, and geographic region. • 

FAQ: Is the WISC-V UK linked to the WIAT-III UK?

Answer: The WIAT-IIIUK is linked to WISC-VUK through a sample of 387 children who were administered both tests.

The WIAT-III UK is linked to WISC-V UK through a sample of 387 children who were administered both tests. Although there is recent debate about the necessity of co-norming (Rohling, et al, 2015), measurement experts have often stressed the importance of using co-normed or linked ability and achievement batteries in clinical diagnosing and assessing special learning disabilities (Reynolds, 1990; Wechsler 2009).

Co-normed or linked test batteries use identical or mostly identical normative samples that are representative of the population of interest, which ensures the pattern of strengths and weaknesses analysis or ability-achievement analysis are based on the same or similar reference groups.

Reynolds, C. R. (1990). Conceptual and technical problems in learning disability diagnosis.

C. R. Reynolds & R. W. Kamphaus (Eds.), Handbook of psychological and educational assessment of children: Intelligence and achievement (PP. 571-592). New York: Guilford Press.

Rohling, M. L., Miller, R. M., Axelrod, B. N., Wall, J. R., Lee, A. J. H., & Kinikini, D. T. (2015). Is co-norming required? Archives of Clinical Newropsychology, 30, 611-633.Wechsler, D. (2009). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-Third edition. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.


What do you think?