TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of performance on two nonverbal intelligence tests by adolescents with and without language impairment
AU - Miller, Carol A.
AU - Gilbert, Erin
N1 - Funding Information:
Support for this research was provided by grant P50 DC02746 (J.B. Tomblin, PI) from the National Institute of Deafness and Other Communication Disorders of the National Institutes of Health. We are most grateful to Bruce Tomblin and his outstanding research team at the Child Language Research Center of the University of Iowa, and to the young people who participated. Thanks are also due to Laura DeThorne for helpful comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript. The study is based in part on an undergraduate honors thesis completed by the second author at The Pennsylvania State University.
PY - 2008/7
Y1 - 2008/7
N2 - Definitions of specific language impairment (SLI), for both research and clinical purposes, often state that nonverbal IQ scores must be within normal limits. This use of nonverbal IQ has been criticized on several grounds, including lack of equivalence between tests. In the current study, a sample of 204 adolescents with and without language impairment took two nonverbal IQ tests. Scores on the tests were compared, as was the classification of individuals into diagnostic categories according to the two tests. Results indicated that there were significant differences between test scores for clinical subgroups, and classification of individuals as having SLI varied substantially depending on the test used. The findings are interpreted as providing further evidence that nonverbal IQ should be used only cautiously, if at all, in defining SLI. Learning outcomes: Readers will (1) understand problems with the use of nonverbal IQ criteria in diagnosis of SLI and (2) be able to cite data showing that different nonverbal IQ tests can lead to different diagnoses.
AB - Definitions of specific language impairment (SLI), for both research and clinical purposes, often state that nonverbal IQ scores must be within normal limits. This use of nonverbal IQ has been criticized on several grounds, including lack of equivalence between tests. In the current study, a sample of 204 adolescents with and without language impairment took two nonverbal IQ tests. Scores on the tests were compared, as was the classification of individuals into diagnostic categories according to the two tests. Results indicated that there were significant differences between test scores for clinical subgroups, and classification of individuals as having SLI varied substantially depending on the test used. The findings are interpreted as providing further evidence that nonverbal IQ should be used only cautiously, if at all, in defining SLI. Learning outcomes: Readers will (1) understand problems with the use of nonverbal IQ criteria in diagnosis of SLI and (2) be able to cite data showing that different nonverbal IQ tests can lead to different diagnoses.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=42649095620&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=42649095620&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2008.02.003
DO - 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2008.02.003
M3 - Article
C2 - 18395219
AN - SCOPUS:42649095620
SN - 0021-9924
VL - 41
SP - 358
EP - 371
JO - Journal of Communication Disorders
JF - Journal of Communication Disorders
IS - 4
ER -