K L M N O L P Q R S K L M N O L L L T U V W X Y Z [ X R N \ X Y S U Z R K X ] \ ^ _ ` _

E E
   " . *  F  ,  " G  H    "     " I  J  )   "

6 7 8 9 : ; < 7 = > ? ? @ : ? A 7 : B A C 7 9 D @ 9 C 5 2 2 ' #  % & '

. / 0  1 2  1 1 3 3  1 2 & 3 2 4 % 3 2 4 5 & $ ' 1 '

(   " ) * "  +  ,  * " -   *   ,  *  )    "   -  "    

                    !   "   "   #  $  % & '

a   ) *      H 

b c c d e f f g g g h i j k l d m n o p q j c p r s i h q r t

 €  ‚ ƒ „ †  ‡ ˆ ‰ ‰ Š „ ‰ ‹  „ Œ ‹   ƒ Ž Š ƒ 

} }  ~  { w v ‘ ’ y “ ”  u y ’ v w }  w z { “ • v ~  { w z { “ u v w x y z { | w } v ~ 

ª  – — — ˜ ™ š š › œ  ž Ÿ œ ¡ ˜ ¢ £ ž ¤ ¥ ¦ š ¤ § š œ ¨ ¡ © — Ÿ

• v  ‘ ‘ y “ ~ ’ 

¬
– — — ˜ ™ š š › œ  ž Ÿ œ ¡ ˜ ¢ £ ž ¤ ¥ ¦ š Ÿ ¢ £ Ÿ ¤ © § ˜ — § ¥ « Ÿ

| x ’ u “  ­ ~  { w ’ 

± – — — ˜ ™ š š ® ® ® ž Ÿ œ ¡ ˜ ¢ £ ž ¤ ¥ ¦ š › ¥ ¢ © « œ ¨ Ÿ ¯ ¡ ˜ © § « — Ÿ ž « œ °

y ­ “  w ~ ’ 

³ – — — ˜ ™ š š ® ® ® ž Ÿ œ ¡ ˜ ¢ £ ž ¤ ¥ ¦ š › ¥ ¢ © « œ ¨ Ÿ ² ¡ © ¦ § Ÿ Ÿ § ¥ « Ÿ ž « œ °

y “ •  ’ ’  { w ’ 

º
– — — ˜ ™ š š › œ  ž Ÿ œ ¡ ˜ ¢ £ ž ¤ ¥ ¦ š ¤ ¥ « — ¡ « — š ´ š µ š ¶ · ¸ ž © ¡ ¹ Ÿ ž – — ¦ ¨

 ~ v ~  { w ’ 

À  ,  * " - Á   ,    1 4 ¿ 5 2 2 '

 Â

½ ¾

»    *  (  *  ¼

Ô Ò å Ó æ Ò Ã ß Õ ß ç Ù Ò × Ã ß à á Ã â Õ ã ä Ø à Ö Ò × Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê É Ë Ë Ì Í Ì Î Ç Ï Ð Ì Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö Õ × Ø Õ Ù Ú Ú Û Ú Ü Ý Ú
 Journal of Attention Disorders
Journal Calhoun
ARTICLE
10.1177/1087054705283616
Mayes, of Attention
/ WISC-IV
Disorders
and WISC-III in ADHD Volume 9 Number 3
February 2006 486-493
© 2006 Sage Publications
10.1177/1087054705283616
http://jad.sagepub.com
hosted at

WISC-IV and WISC-III Profiles in http://online.sagepub.com

Children With ADHD

Susan Dickerson Mayes
Susan L. Calhoun
Penn State College of Medicine

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 3rd and 4th editions (WISC-III n = 586 and WISC-IV n = 118), profiles were com-
pared for children with ADHD and normal intelligence. Mean Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI) and Perceptual Organiza-
tion/Perceptual Reasoning Index (POI/PRI) scores were significantly higher than Freedom From Distractibility/Working
Memory Index (FDI/WMI) and Processing Speed Index (PSI), and Symbol Search was higher than Coding. FDI/WMI and PSI
scores were similar on both tests, but VCI and POI/PRI were higher on the WISC-IV than on the WISC-III. Therefore, index
discrepancies were greater for the WISC-IV, suggesting that the WISC-IV might be better than the WISC-III in delineating the
strengths and weaknesses of children with ADHD. All children in the WISC-IV sample scored lowest on WMI or PSI, whereas
only 88% of the WISC-III children scored lowest on FDI or PSI. Thus, the WISC-IV may be more helpful in diagnosing
ADHD than the WISC-III. (J. of Att. Dis. 2006;9(3)486-493)

Keywords: WISC-III; WISC-IV; ADHD

T here are substantial similarities and differences in the

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children 3rd and 4th
editions (WISC-III and WISC-IV). Both have four
A major WISC-IV change is that all four of the WMI and
PSI subtests are included in the calculation of FSIQ, as
opposed to only two of the four FDI and PSI subtests on
indexes or factors: Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI), the WISC-III. Verbal and performance IQs are no longer
Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI) on the WISC-IV and calculated on the WISC-IV.
Perceptual Organization Index (POI) on the WISC-III, Much has been written about WISC-R and WISC-III
Working Memory Index (WMI) on the WISC-IV and profiles in children with various clinical disorders. Aside
Freedom From Distractibility Index (FDI) on the WISC- from preliminary reports in the WISC-IV technical man-
III, and Processing Speed Index (PSI). Three of the four ual (Wechsler, 2003), no data are yet published on the
WISC-III VCI subtests (Similarities, Vocabulary, and WISC-IV. Although controversy exists regarding profile
Comprehension) were retained on the WISC-IV with analysis, it remains a popular practice among school and
some item changes. Information is now an optional clinical psychologists and neuropsychologists (Anastasi
WISC-IV subtest and is no longer included in VCI or Full & Urbina, 1998; Fiorello, Hale, McGrath, Ryan, & Quinn,
Scale IQ (FSIQ). The WISC-IV PRI also comprises three 2002; Pfeiffer, Reddy, Kletzel, Schmelzler, & Boyer,
subtests. Picture Completion, Picture Arrangement, and 2000). Many contend that composite or factor scores are
Object Assembly from the WISC-III were replaced with
two new untimed, motor-free, visual reasoning tests (Pic- Authors’ Note: We wish to thank the Wells Foundation, Oxford
ture Concepts and Matrix Reasoning), and Block Design Foundation, Pennsylvania School Psychology Foundation,
was retained. PRI now has only one timed visual-motor Children’s Miracle Network, and Penn State Children, Youth,
test (Block Design), in contrast to three on the WISC-III and Families Consortium for their generous support of this
research.
POI. WMI on the WISC-IV consists of Digit Span and Address correspondence to Susan Dickerson Mayes, Ph.D.,
Letter-Number Sequencing, in contrast to Digit Span and Department of Psychiatry H073, Milton S. Hershey Medical
Arithmetic on the WISC-III FDI. PSI on both the WISC- Center, P.O. Box 850, Hershey, PA 17033; telephone: (717)
IV and WISC-III is made up of Coding and Symbol Search. 531-6201; smayes@psu.edu.

486
Þ

Ô Ò å Ó æ Ò Ã ß Õ ß ç Ù Ò × Ã ß à á Ã â Õ ã ä Ø à Ö Ò × Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê É Ë Ë Ì Í Ì Î Ç Ï Ð Ì Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö Õ × Ø Õ Ù Ú Ú Û Ú Ü Ý Ú
 Mayes, Calhoun / WISC-IV and WISC-III in ADHD 487

reliable and meaningful and can be used in profile analy- dren with clinical disorders (n = 19 to 89) are consistent
sis with supporting data (Donders, 1996; Glutting, with previous WISC-III profile data. For children with
McDermott, Prifitera, & McGrath, 1994; McDermott, ADHD, LD, and autism, the lowest mean WISC-IV in-
Fantuzzo, & Glutting, 1990; Oh, Glutting, & McDermott, dexes are WMI and PSI, and Coding is lower than Symbol
1999). Others maintain that profile analysis at the subtest Search. For children with autism and for children with
level with corroborating evidence provides specific infor- Asperger’s disorder, Comprehension is the lowest of the
mation that is lost if analyses are based only on composite VCI subtests, and Block Design is the highest of the PRI
or factor scores (Kramer, 1993; Nyden, Billstedt, subtests. The lowest mean WISC-IV scores for children
Hjelmquist, & Gillberg, 2001). This more specific infor- with closed head injury are the nonverbal or performance
mation may be useful in understanding a child’s strengths subtests.
and weaknesses and in guiding treatment and educational The purpose of our study is to determine similarities
programming (Hale, Fiorello, Kavanagh, Hoeppner, & and differences in WISC-III and WISC-IV profiles for
Gaither, 2001; Kaufman, 1994; Sattler, 2002). children with ADHD. This information will have impor-
Distinct and reliable profiles have been reported for tant implications for (a) understanding the impact of
several diagnostic groups. Children with ADHD, learning ADHD on intellectual development and neurocognitive
disability (LD), and autism have lower mean scores on profiles, (b) identifying the cognitive strengths and weak-
WISC-III FDI and PSI than on VCI and POI and on the nesses of children with ADHD to help guide intervention
Coding versus Symbol Search subtest (Calhoun & and educational programming, and (c) using WISC-IV
Mayes, 2005; Mayes & Calhoun, 2003a, 2004; Mayes, scores to assist in screening for and diagnosing ADHD.
Calhoun, & Crowell, 1998a, 1998b; Mealer, Morgan, & Based on previous research, it is hypothesized that both
Luscomb, 1996; Naglieri, Goldstein, Iseman, & the WISC-III and WISC-IV will have distinct ADHD
Schwebach, 2003; Newby, Recht, Caldwell, & Schaefer, profiles.
1993; Nyden et al., 2001; Prifitera & Dersh, 1993;
Saklofske, Schwean, Yackulic, & Quinn, 1994; Schwean,
Method
Saklofske, Yackulic, & Quinn, 1993; Snow & Sapp,
2000; Wechsler, 1991). Children with traumatic brain
injury and children with spina bifida with hydrocephalus
Sample and Procedure
have lower scores on the WISC-R and WISC-III nonver- The 704 children in the study were consecutive refer-
bal or performance subtests than on the verbal subtests rals to our child psychiatry clinic who were diagnosed
(Donders & Warschausky, 1997; Fletcher et al., 1992; with ADHD and had FSIQs of 80 or higher on the WISC-
Friedrich, Lovejoy, Shaffer, Shurtleff, & Beilke, 1991; III (n = 586) or on the WISC-IV (n = 118). Children were
Hoffman, Donders, & Thompson, 2000; Jacobs, administered whichever test version was current at the
Northam, & Anderson, 2001; Kay & Warschausky, 1999; time the child was evaluated. The evaluation battery
Kinsella et al., 1995; Mayes & Calhoun, 2004; Mayes, included (a) the WISC-III and WISC-IV subtests com-
Pelco, & Campbell, 1989; Tremont, Mittenberg, & prising the four indexes: VCI, POI/PRI, FDI/WMI, and
Miller, 1999). For children with autism, the Comprehen- PSI; (b) teacher and parent questionnaires and the Pediat-
sion subtest is lower than the other VCI subtests, and ric Behavior Scale (PBS; Lindgren & Koeppl, 1987); (c) a
Block Design is the highest of the performance subtests computerized continuous performance test assessing
on both the WISC-R and WISC-III (Allen, Lincoln, & impulsivity, inattention, and distractibility (Gordon Diag-
Kaufman, 1991; Asarnow, Tanguay, Bott, & Freeman, nostic System [GDS]; Gordon, 1983); (d) child interview
1987; Ehlers et al., 1997; Happe, 1994; Lincoln, Cour- and self-report scale; (e) clinical observations of the
chesne, Kilman, Elmasian, & Allen, 1988; Mayes & child; and (f) review of the child’s developmental history,
Calhoun, 2003a, 2004; Nyden et al., 2001; Siegel, Min- school transcripts from kindergarten to the present, and
shew, & Goldstein, 1996). previous evaluations. Children prescribed medication to
Research is needed to determine how the WISC-IV treat ADHD were off medication for testing.
modifications will affect profile analysis. The WISC-IV To be included in the study, each child received a diag-
has retained most of the subtests and indexes that are key nosis of ADHD combined or predominantly inattentive
to the aforementioned profiles for children with ADHD, type by a licensed Ph.D. psychologist. Parent and teacher
LD, autism, and brain injury, but significant changes were ratings of ADHD, performance on the GDS, clinical
made in the composition of the indexes. Preliminary observations, and a review of records were used by the
WISC-IV data (Wechsler, 2003) on small samples of chil- psychologist to determine if the child met Diagnostic and

Ô Ò å Ó æ Ò Ã ß Õ ß ç Ù Ò × Ã ß à á Ã â Õ ã ä Ø à Ö Ò × Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê É Ë Ë Ì Í Ì Î Ç Ï Ð Ì Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö Õ × Ø Õ Ù Ú Ú Û Ú Ü Ý Ú
488 Journal of Attention Disorders

Table 1 a professional or managerial occupation for 36% of the

Mean Standard Scores for Children With ADHD on children in the WISC-III sample and 49% in the WISC-
2
the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 3rd and IV sample (c = 6.1, p = .014). The two groups differed
4th Editions (WISC-III n = 586; WISC-IV n = 118) somewhat in FSIQ (M WISC-III = 104 and WISC-IV =
WISC-III WISC-IV
108, t = 2.7, p = .008). Therefore, FSIQ was controlled in
data analyses that compared the WISC-III and WISC-IV
M SD M SD
groups. Many of the children in the WISC-III sample
Full Scale IQ 104 14 108 13 were in prior studies by the authors (Mayes et al., 1998a,
Verbal Comprehension 107 14 114 13 1998b, 2001; Mayes & Calhoun, 2004).
Perceptual Organization/
Reasoning 106 13 117 13
Freedom From Distractibility/ Data Analyses
Working Memory 94 14 93 13
Processing Speed 99 15 93 12
Dependent and independent t test, ANOVA, and
Information 10.8 3 Cohen’s d effect size statistics were calculated to investi-
Similarities 11.6 3 13.0 2 gate the significance of differences between pairs of test
Vocabulary 10.9 3 12.1 3 scores within and between the WISC-III and WISC-IV
Comprehension 11.5 3 12.2 2 groups. Chi-square was applied to determine differences
Picture Completion 11.2 3
in variable frequencies between the two groups.
Picture Arrangement 10.6 3
Object Assembly 10.5 3
Block Design 11.0 3 12.0 3 Results
Picture Concepts 13.1 3
Matrix Reasoning 13.1 3
Arithmetic 8.8 3 Profiles
Letter-Number Sequencing 8.6 3
Digit Span 8.6 3 Group profiles were similar for the WISC-III and
9.1 3 WISC-IV (Table 1). For both the WISC-III and WISC-IV,
Coding 9.1 3 8.2 3 VCI and POI/PRI were significantly higher than FDI/
Symbol Search 10.1 3 9.3 2
WMI and PSI (F = 583 and 115, Bonferroni p < .0001),
and effect sizes were very large for the WISC-IV (d = 1.6
to 1.9, M = 1.8) and medium to large for the WISC-III (d =
0.5 to 1.0, M = 0.7). For both the WISC-III and WISC-
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; Ameri- IV, VCI and POI/PRI were significantly higher than
can Psychiatric Association, 1994) criteria for ADHD. FSIQ (t = 4.0 to 8.4, p < .0001), and FDI/WMI and PSI
The children also met at least three of the following four were significantly lower than FSIQ (t = 9.7 to 22.7, p <
criteria: (a) independent diagnosis of ADHD from an- .0001).
other psychologist or a physician, (b) parent report of For both the WISC-III and the WISC-IV, the FDI/WMI
often or very much a problem on PBS ADHD symptoms, and PSI subtests (Digit Span, Arithmetic, Letter-Number
(c) teacher report of ADHD symptoms as often or very Sequencing, Coding, and Symbol Search) were the low-
much a problem on the PBS, and (d) a standard score 13 est of all the mean subtest scores. Scores on the FDI
or more points below FSIQ on the GDS. This is the GDS subtests (Digit Span and Arithmetic) did not differ signif-
cutpoint previously found to be most accurate in differen- icantly from each other (t = 1.7, p = .09, d = 0.1), and nei-
tiating children with and without ADHD (Mayes et al., ther did scores on the WMI subtests, Digit Span and Let-
2001). ter-Number Sequencing (t = 1.5, p = .14, d = 0.2). For both
Children administered the WISC-III and WISC-IV did the WISC-III and WISC-IV, scores were significantly
not differ significantly at the .01 level on demographic higher on Symbol Search than on Coding (which together
variables. Both groups ranged in age from 6 to 16 years comprise PSI), t = 7.7, p < .0001, d = 0.3 and t = 4.4, p <
(M = 9 years, SD = 2.4 to 2.7), t = 1.9, p = .06. The percent- .0001, d = 0.4.
age of males was 74 in the WISC-III sample and 64 in the In the WISC-IV sample, both WMI and PSI were
WISC-IV sample (c2 = 3.3, p = .04). Also, 92% of the lower than both VCI and PRI in 88% of the cases, and all
WISC-III children and 90% of the WISC-IV children children in the WISC-IV sample had WMI (55%) or PSI
were White, and the remaining children were Black, His- (45%) as their lowest index score. In contrast, only 88%
panic, or Asian (c2 = 0.6, p = .44). One or both parents had of the WISC-III sample scored lowest on FDI or PSI (c2 =

Ô Ò å Ó æ Ò Ã ß Õ ß ç Ù Ò × Ã ß à á Ã â Õ ã ä Ø à Ö Ò × Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê É Ë Ë Ì Í Ì Î Ç Ï Ð Ì Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö Õ × Ø Õ Ù Ú Ú Û Ú Ü Ý Ú
 Mayes, Calhoun / WISC-IV and WISC-III in ADHD 489

Table 2 quencing = 9, Coding = 8 and 9, and Symbol Search = 9 and

Mean Full Scale IQ and Index Discrepancy Scores
on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children, 3rd and 4th Editions
(WISC-III n = 586; WISC-IV n = 118)
WISC-III
Verbal Comprehension - Freedom From
Distractibility/Working Memory
Verbal Comprehension - Processing Speed
Perceptual Organization/Reasoning -
Freedom From Distractibility/
Working Memory
Perceptual Organization/Reasoning -
Processing Speed
Full Scale IQ -
Verbal Comprehension
Full Scale IQ - Perceptual Organization/
Reasoning
Full Scale IQ - Freedom From
Distractibility/Working Memory
Full Scale IQ - Processing Speed
Note: All t tests comparisons between the WISC-III and WISC-IV are
significant at .0001 (t = 4.3 to 10.8).
14.1, p = .0001). As shown in Table 2, WMI and PSI were
more discrepant from VCI and PRI on the WISC-IV than
were FDI and PSI from VCI and POI on the WISC-III (t =
5.9 to 10.8, p < .0001). Furthermore, all the IQ-index dis-
crepancy scores were greater for the WISC-IV than for
the WISC-III (t = 4.3 to 9.2, p < .0001).
Relationship Between New WISC-IV
and Old WISC-III Subtests
Block Design is on both the WISC-III and WISC-IV
and did not differ significantly between the two groups
(F = 3.7, p = .054, d = 0.3). However, scores on the WISC-
IV Matrix Reasoning and Picture Concepts subtests were
significantly higher than on the WISC-III Picture Com-
pletion, Picture Arrangement, and Object Assembly sub-
tests (F = 41.9 to 79.6, p < .0001, d = 0.7 to 0.8, M = 0.8).
Because of these differences, WISC-IV PRI was higher
than WISC-III POI (F = 109.7, p < .0001, d = 0.8).
The Information subtest (which is no longer part of the
WISC-IV VCI) was the lowest mean VCI subtest in the
WISC-III sample, because of which VCI was higher on
the WISC-IV than on the WISC-III (F = 22.6, p < .0001,
d = 0.5). In contrast, mean scores on the WISC-III and
WISC-IV FDI/WMI and PSI subtests were similar for both
groups (Digit Span, Arithmetic, and Letter-Number Se-
10), and effect sizes were small (d = 0.1 to 0.3, M = 0.2).
Discussion
WISC-IV WISC-III and WISC-IV
Profile Similarities
13 21 Profiles of strengths and weaknesses for children with
8 21
ADHD were similar for the WISC-IV and WISC-III with
significantly lower mean scores on FDI/WMI and PSI
12 24 than on VCI and POI/PRI. Furthermore, within the PSI
index, Coding was significantly lower than Symbol
7 24 Search on both the WISC-III and WISC-IV. These find-
ings are consistent with previous WISC-III and WISC-IV
–3 –6
studies of children with ADHD, LD, and autism (Calhoun
–1 –9 & Mayes, 2005; Mayes & Calhoun, 2003a, 2004; Mayes
et al., 1998a, 1998b; Mealer et al., 1996; Naglieri et al.,
11 15 2003; Newby et al., 1993; Nyden et al., 2001; Prifitera &
5 15 Dersh, 1993; Saklofske et al., 1994; Schwean et al., 1993;
Snow & Sapp, 2000; Wechsler, 1991, 2003), suggesting
that these children have strengths in verbal and visual rea-
soning and weaknesses in attention, processing speed,
and graphomotor skills.
Although many factors (e.g., psychological conditions
and variable test behavior) can influence test profiles, our
findings and those of other studies suggest a neurological
basis for the ADHD profile. This specific profile of
strengths and weaknesses has been reported for children
with ADHD, LD, and autism but not for children with
other disorders, such as anxiety, depression, oppositional-
defiant disorder, and adjustment disorder (Mayes &
Calhoun, 2003b). ADHD, LD, and autism have a neuro-
logical basis (Fiedorowicz et al., 2001; Hooper, Boyd,
Hynd, & Rubin, 1993; Hooper & Tramontana, 1997; Learn-
ing Disabilities Roundtable, 2002; Light, Pennington,
Gilger, & DeFries, 1995; Seidman et al., 1995; Stevenson,
Pennington, Gilger, DeFries, & Gillis, 1993; Tramontana,
Hooper, Curley, & Nardolillo, 1990). Therefore, low
scores on the FDI/WMI and PSI subtests may be indica-
tors of neurological dysfunction because of their consis-
tent and reliable association with neurological disorders.
Other researchers (Saklofske, Prifitera, Weiss, Rolfhus,
& Zhu, 2005) also contend that the WISC-IV WMI and
PSI “are important neurocognitive factors” (p. 41).
WISC-III and WISC-IV
Profile Differences
For children with ADHD, profile patterns were the
same for the WISC-III and WISC-IV, but the magnitude

Ô Ò å Ó æ Ò Ã ß Õ ß ç Ù Ò × Ã ß à á Ã â Õ ã ä Ø à Ö Ò × Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê É Ë Ë Ì Í Ì Î Ç Ï Ð Ì Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö Õ × Ø Õ Ù Ú Ú Û Ú Ü Ý Ú
490 Journal of Attention Disorders

of the profile differences was greater for the WISC-IV tion and performance speed. The strong visual and verbal
than WISC-III. In our WISC-IV sample, WMI and PSI strengths revealed on the WISC-IV for children with
were significantly more discrepant from VCI and PRI ADHD may have implications for educational program-
than were WISC-III FDI and PSI from VCI and POI. Fur- ming (i.e., teaching to the visual and verbal strengths
thermore, 100% of the children in the WISC-IV sample while compensating for the attention, writing, and per-
scored lowest on WMI or PSI, whereas this was the case formance speed weaknesses).
for only 88% of children in the WISC-III group, suggest- Mean scores on FDI/WMI and PSI were similar for the
ing that the WISC-IV may have greater sensitivity to WISC-III and WISC-IV. POI and VCI were significantly
ADHD symptoms than the WISC-III. If future studies higher than FDI and PSI on the WISC-III, but PRI and
support the enhanced distinctiveness of the low WMI and VCI were even higher than WMI and PSI on the WISC-
PSI and high VCI and PRI WISC-IV profile in children IV. Therefore, FSIQ in children with ADHD may be posi-
with ADHD, this may be diagnostically and clinically tively affected by a potential increase in PRI and VCI
useful. For example, if low WMI/FDI or PSI was used to scores on the WISC-IV relative to the WISC-III. How-
help diagnose or screen for ADHD, 100% of our WISC- ever, this appears to be counterbalanced by the inclusion
IV children would be correctly identified, but 12% of the of all four WMI and PSI subtests in calculating FSIQ on
WISC-III children would have been missed. the WISC-IV (vs. only two on the WISC-III).
Further research is needed to determine whether the
Effect of WISC-IV Changes WISC-IV FSIQ or the VCI/PRI composite is the best
indicator of global intelligence for children with ADHD
Changes in subtests were made on three of the WISC- and for children with other neurological disorders who
IV indexes: WMI, VCI, and PRI. Letter-Number are also likely to perform poorly on WMI and PSI. For
Sequencing was substituted for Arithmetic, which does the latter children, the General Ability Index (based on
not appear to have affected WMI in comparison to FDI. VCI and PRI) may be a more valid measure of intelli-
The Information subtest was deleted from VCI on the gence than FSIQ (Saklofske et al., 2005; Weiss, Sak-
WISC-IV and not replaced with another subtest. Informa- lofske, Prifitera, Chen, & Hildebrand, 1999). A study
tion was the lowest mean VCI subtest in the WISC-III using the WISC-III standardization sample showed that
sample, and its elimination may have increased VCI in FSIQ “does not adequately represent global intellectual
children with ADHD. In our samples, VCI was signifi- functioning for either typical children with significant
cantly greater on the WISC-IV than on the WISC-III. profile variability or children with disabilities” (Fiorello
The greatest WISC-IV subtest changes are on PRI. et al., 2002, p. 115).
Picture Completion, Picture Arrangement, and Object The study by Fiorello et al. (2002) also showed that
Assembly were replaced with Matrix Reasoning and Pic- VCI and POI accounted for the majority of FSIQ variance
ture Concepts. Thus, two timed visual-motor subtests in children with ADHD, LD, and uneven subtest profiles.
were eliminated and two untimed motor-free tests of This was the case in our WISC-III and WISC-IV ADHD
visual reasoning were added. This may prove to be an samples as well. VCI and POI/PRI accounted for 67% to
advantage for children with ADHD, who tend to have 79% of the FSIQ variance, compared to only 31% to 59%
problems with psychomotor speed and coordination for FDI/WMI and PSI. If WMI and PSI are less related to
(Carte, Nigg, & Hinshaw, 1996; Gillberg & Kadesjo, intelligence than VCI and PRI, they should not be given
2000; Hellgren, Gillberg, Gillberg, & Enerskog, 1993; equal weight in the calculation of FSIQ. Furthermore,
Karatekin, Markiewicz, & Siegel, 2003; Piek, Pitcher, & many children with ADHD have dysgraphia or problems
Hay, 1999; Pitcher, Piek, & Hay, 2003; Tannock, 2000; with handwriting (Marcotte & Stern, 1997). Both our
Whitmont & Clark, 1996). In our samples, scores on ADHD samples scored low on Coding relative to Symbol
Matrix Reasoning and Picture Concepts were signifi- Search, and Coding had the lowest overall correlation
cantly higher than scores on Picture Completion, Picture with FSIQ. Coding also had the lowest correlation with
Arrangement, and Object Assembly, and PRI was signifi- FSIQ in the WISC-IV standardization sample (Wechsler,
cantly higher than POI. Matrix Reasoning and Picture 2003). It may not be advisable for a subtest heavily con-
Concepts were among the three highest mean WISC-IV founded by graphomotor ability to be used in the deter-
subtest scores. The WISC-IV findings suggest that chil- mination of FSIQ, especially for children who have a
dren with ADHD have a relative strength in visual reason- specific weakness in this area. The Psychological Corpo-
ing, which was not apparent on the WISC-III because the ration (2002) stated that if Coding is significantly lower
nonverbal subtests were confounded by motor coordina- than the other performance scores on the WISC-III, then

Ô Ò å Ó æ Ò Ã ß Õ ß ç Ù Ò × Ã ß à á Ã â Õ ã ä Ø à Ö Ò × Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê É Ë Ë Ì Í Ì Î Ç Ï Ð Ì Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö Õ × Ø Õ Ù Ú Ú Û Ú Ü Ý Ú
 Mayes, Calhoun / WISC-IV and WISC-III in ADHD 491

“POI is a better indicator of nonverbal reasoning ability Donders, J., & Warschausky, S. (1997). WISC-III factor index score
than the PIQ score” (p. 158). patterns after traumatic head injury in children. Child Neuro-
psychology, 3, 71-78.
Ehlers, S., Nyden, A., Gillberg, C., Sandberg, A. D., Dahlgren, S.,
Limitations and Future Research Hjelmquist, E., et al. (1997). Asperger syndrome, autism and atten-
tion disorders: A comparative study of the cognitive profiles of 120
Our study is limited because the WISC-III and WISC- children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 207-
IV comparisons are based on two different groups of chil- 217.
dren. Therefore, study findings could be attributed to Fiedorowicz, C., Benezra, E., MacDonald, W., McElgunn, B., Wilson,
actual differences between the groups and not differences A., & Kaplan, B. (2001). Neurobiological basis of learning disabil-
between the WISC-III and WISC-IV. Ideally, a future ities: An update. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Jour-
nal, 11, 61-74.
study should administer both the WISC-III and WISC-IV
Fiorello, C. A., Hale, J. B., McGrath, M., Ryan, K., & Quinn, S. (2002).
to the same group of children to replicate our findings. IQ interpretation for children with flat and variable test profiles.
Further research is also needed to determine if the WISC- Learning and Individual Differences, 13, 115-125.
III and WISC-IV profile similarities and differences sug- Fletcher, J. M., Francis, D. J., Thompson, N. M., Brookshire, B. L.,
gested by our study hold true for other samples of chil- Bohan, T. P., Landry, S. H., et al. (1992). Verbal and nonverbal skill
dren with ADHD, as well as to investigate possible dif- discrepancies in hydrocephalic children. Journal of Clinical and
Experimental Neuropsychology, 14, 593-609.
ferences between children with ADHD combined type Friedrich, W. N., Lovejoy, M. C., Shaffer, J., Shurtleff, D. B., & Beilke,
versus predominantly inattentive type. Preliminary R. L. (1991). Cognitive abilities and achievement status of children
WISC-IV data (Wechsler, 2003) support our findings and with myelomeningocele: A contemporary sample. Journal of Pedi-
reveal a profile similar to ours for children with ADHD as atric Psychology, 16, 423-428.
well as for children with LD and autism. Last, it is impor- Gillberg, C., & Kadesjo, B. (2000). Attention-deficit hyperactivity dis-
order and developmental coordination disorder. In L. L. Greenhill
tant to acknowledge individual variability and recognize
(Ed.), Learning disabilities: Implications for psychiatric treatment
that findings for groups of children with ADHD do not (pp. 393-406). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
necessarily apply to all children with ADHD. The profile Glutting, J. J., McDermott, P. A., Prifitera, A., & McGrath, E. A.
that characterizes children with ADHD as a group is not (1994). Core profile types for the WISC-III and WIAT: Their
necessarily found in every child with ADHD. However, it development and application in identifying multivariate IQ-
is striking that all 118 children with ADHD who were achievement discrepancies. School Psychology Review, 23, 619-
639.
administered the WISC-IV had either Working Memory Gordon, M. (1983). The Gordon diagnostic system. DeWitt, NY:
or Processing Speed as their lowest index score. Gordon Systems.
Hale, J. B., Fiorello, C. F., Kavanagh, J. A., Hoeppner, J. B., & Gaither,
R. A. (2001). WISC-III predictors of academic achievement for
References children with learning disabilities: Are global and factor scores
comparable? School Psychology Quarterly, 16, 31-55.
Allen, M. H., Lincoln, A. J., & Kaufman, A. S. (1991). Sequential and Happe, F. G. E. (1994). Wechsler IQ profile and theory of mind in
simultaneous processing abilities of high-functioning autistic and autism: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychia-
language-impaired children. Journal of Autism and Developmental try, 35, 1461-1471.
Disorders, 21, 483-502. Hellgren, L., Gillberg, C., Gillberg, I. C., & Enerskog, I. (1993). Chil-
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical dren with deficits in attention, motor control and perception
manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. (DAMP) almost grown up: General health at 16 years. Develop-
Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1998). Psychological testing (7th ed.). mental Medicine and Child Neurology, 35, 881-892.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hoffman, N., Donders, J., & Thompson, E. H. (2000). Novel learning
Asarnow, R. F., Tanguay, P. E., Bott, L., & Freeman, B. J. (1987). Pat- abilities after traumatic head injury in children. Archives of Clini-
terns of intellectual functioning in non-retarded autistic and cal Neuropsychology, 15, 47-58.
schizophrenic children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychia- Hooper, S. R., Boyd, T. A., Hynd, G. W., & Rubin, J. (1993). Defini-
try, 28, 273-280. tional issues and neurobiological foundations of selected severe
Calhoun, S. L., & Mayes, S. D. (2005). Processing speed in children neurodevelopmental disorders. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychol-
with clinical disorders. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 333-343. ogy, 8, 279-307.
Carte, E. T., Nigg, J. T., & Hinshaw, S. P. (1996). Neuropsychological Hooper, S. R., & Tramontana, M. G. (1997). Advances in the neuro-
functioning, motor speed, and language processing in boys with psychosocial bases of child and adolescent psychopathology. In
and without ADHD. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 24, T. H. Ollendick & R. J. Prinz (Eds.), Advances in clinical child psy-
481-498. chology (Vol. 19, pp. 133-175). New York: Plenum.
Donders, J. (1996). Cluster subtypes in the WISC-III standardiza- Jacobs, R., Northam, E., & Anderson, V. (2001). Cognitive outcome in
tion sample: Analysis of factor index scores. Psychological Assess- children with myelomeningocele and perinatal hydrocephalus: A
ment, 8, 312-318. longitudinal perspective. Journal of Developmental and Physical
Disabilities, 13, 389-405.

Ô Ò å Ó æ Ò Ã ß Õ ß ç Ù Ò × Ã ß à á Ã â Õ ã ä Ø à Ö Ò × Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê É Ë Ë Ì Í Ì Î Ç Ï Ð Ì Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö Õ × Ø Õ Ù Ú Ú Û Ú Ü Ý Ú
492 Journal of Attention Disorders

Karatekin, C., Markiewicz, S. W., & Siegel, M. A. (2003). A prelimi- Mealer, C., Morgan, S., & Luscomb, R. (1996). Cognitive functioning
nary study of motor problems in children with attention-deficit/ of ADHD and non-ADHD boys on the WISC-III and WRAML: An
hyperactivity disorder. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 97, 1267- analysis within a memory model. Journal of Attention Disorders, 1,
1280. 133-147.
Kaufman, A. S. (1994). Intelligent testing with the WISC-III. New Naglieri, J. A., Goldstein, S., Iseman, J. S., & Schwebach, A. (2003).
York: John Wiley. Performance of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disor-
Kay, J. B., & Warschausky, S. (1999). WISC-III Index growth curve der and anxiety/depression on the WISC-III and Cognitive Assess-
characteristics following traumatic brain injury. Journal of Clinical ment System (CAS). Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment,
and Experimental Neuropsychology, 21, 186-199. 21, 32-42.
Kinsella, G., Prior, M., Sawyer, M., Murtagh, D., Eisenmajer, R., Newby R. F., Recht, D. R., Caldwell, J., & Schaefer, J. (1993). Com-
Anderson, V., Bryan, D., et al. (1995). Neuropsychological deficit parison of WISC-III and WISC-R IQ changes over a 2-year time
and academic performance in children and adolescents following span in a sample of children with dyslexia. In B. A. Bracken & R. S.
traumatic brain injury. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 20, 753-767. McCallum (Eds.), Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children: Third
Kramer, J. H. (1993). Interpretation of individual subtest scores on the edition (pp. 87-93). Brandon, VT: Clinical Psychology Publish-
WISC-III. Psychological Assessment, 5, 193-196. ing Co.
Learning Disabilities Roundtable. (2002). Specific learning disabili- Nyden, A., Billstedt, E., Hjelmquist, E., & Gillberg, C. (2001).
ties: Finding common ground. Washington, DC: U.S. Department Neurocognitive stability in Asperger syndrome, ADHD, and read-
of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. ing and writing disorder: A pilot study. Developmental Medicine
Light, J. G., Pennington, B. F., Gilger, J. W., & DeFries, J. C. (1995). and Child Neurology, 43, 165-171.
Reading disability and hyperactivity disorder: Evidence for a com- Oh, H., Glutting, J. J., & McDermott, P. A. (1999). An epidemiologi-
mon genetic etiology. Developmental Neuropsychology, 11, 323- cal-cohort study of DAS processing speed factor: How well does it
335. identify concurrent achievement and behavior problems? Journal
Lincoln, A. J., Courchesne, E., Kilman, B. A., Elmasian, R., & of Psychoeducational Assessment, 17, 362-375.
Allen, M. (1988). A study of intellectual abilities in high-function- Pfeiffer, S., Reddy, L., Kletzel, J., Schmelzler, E., & Boyer, L. (2000).
ing people with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Dis- The practitioner’s view of IQ testing and profile analysis. School
orders, 18, 505-524. Psychology Quarterly, 15, 377-385.
Lindgren, S. D., & Koeppl, G. K. (1987). Assessing child behavior Piek, J. P., Pitcher, T. M., & Hay, D. A. (1999). Motor coordination and
problems in a medical setting: Development of the Pediatric kinaesthesis in boys with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder.
Behavior Scale. In R. J. Prinz (Ed.), Advances in behavioral assess- Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 41, 159-165.
ment of children and families (pp. 57-90). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Pitcher, T. M., Piek, J. P., & Hay, D. A. (2003). Fine and gross motor
Marcotte, A. C., & Stern, C. (1997). Qualitative analysis of graph- ability in males with ADHD. Developmental Medicine and Child
omotor output in children with attention disorders. Child Neuro- Neurology, 45, 525-535.
psychology, 3, 147-153. Prifitera, A., & Dersh, J. (1993). Base rates of WISC-III diagnostic
Mayes, S. D., & Calhoun, S. L. (2003a). Analysis of WISC-III, subtest patterns among normal, learning-disabled, and ADHD
Stanford-Binet: IV, and academic achievement test scores in chil- samples. In B. A. Bracken & R. S. McCallum (Eds.), Wechsler
dren with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, Intelligence Scale for Children: Third edition (pp. 43-55). Bran-
33, 329-341. don, VT: Clinical Psychology Publishing Co.
Mayes, S. D., & Calhoun, S. L. (2003b, May). Learning disabilities in Psychological Corporation. (2002). Wechsler Individual Achievement
children with psychiatric disorders. Paper presented at the annual Test second edition examiner’s manual. San Antonio, TX: Author.
meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, San Francisco. Saklofske, D. H., Prifitera, A., Weiss, L. G., Rolfhus, E., & Zhu, J.
Mayes, S. D., & Calhoun, S. L. (2004). Similarities and differences in (2005). Clinical interpretation of the WISC-IV FSIQ and GAI. In
WISC-III profiles: Support for subtest analysis in clinical referrals. A. Prifitera, D. H. Saklofske, & L. G. Weiss (Eds.), WISC-IV clini-
Clinical Neuropsychologist, 18, 559-572. cal use and interpretation (pp. 33-65). New York: Elsevier.
Mayes, S. D., Calhoun, S. L., & Crowell, E. W. (1998a). WISC-III Saklofske, D. H., Schwean, V. L., Yackulic, R. A., & Quinn, D. (1994).
Freedom From Distractibility as a measure of attention in children WISC-III and SB: FE performance of children with attention defi-
with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Journal of cit hyperactivity disorder. Canadian Journal of School Psychology,
Attention Disorders, 2, 217-227. 10, 167-171.
Mayes, S. D., Calhoun, S. L., & Crowell, E. W. (1998b). WISC-III pro- Sattler, J. M. (2002). Assessment of children. Behavioral and clinical
files for children with and without learning disabilities. Psychology implications (4th ed.). San Diego: Jerome M. Sattler.
in the Schools, 35, 309-316. Schwean, V. L., Saklofske, D. H., Yackulic, R. A., & Quinn, D. (1993).
Mayes, S. D., Calhoun, S. L., & Crowell, E. W. (2001). Clinical valid- WISC-III performance of ADHD children. In B. A. Bracken &
ity and interpretation of the Gordon Diagnostic System in ADHD R. S. McCallum (Eds.), Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children:
assessments. Child Neuropsychology, 7, 32-41. Third edition (pp. 56-70). Brandon, VT: Clinical Psychology Pub-
Mayes, S. D., Pelco, L. E., & Campbell, C. (1989). Relationships lishing Co.
among pre- and post-injury intelligence, length of coma and age in Seidman, L. J., Biederman, J., Faraone, S. V., Milberger, S., Norman,
individuals with severe closed-head injuries. Brain Injury, 3, 301- D., Seiverd, K., et al. (1995). Effects of family history and
313. comorbidity on the neuropsychological performance of children
McDermott, P. A., Fantuzzo, J. W., & Glutting, J. J. (1990). Just say no with ADHD: Preliminary findings. Journal of the American Acad-
to subtest analysis: A critique on Wechsler theory and practice. emy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 1015-1024.
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 290-302.

Ô Ò å Ó æ Ò Ã ß Õ ß ç Ù Ò × Ã ß à á Ã â Õ ã ä Ø à Ö Ò × Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê É Ë Ë Ì Í Ì Î Ç Ï Ð Ì Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö Õ × Ø Õ Ù Ú Ú Û Ú Ü Ý Ú
 Mayes, Calhoun / WISC-IV and WISC-III in ADHD 493

Siegel, D. J., Minshew, N. J., & Goldstein, G. (1996). Wechsler IQ pro- Wechsler, D. (2003). WISC-IV technical and interpretive manual. San
files in diagnosing high-functioning autism. Journal of Autism and Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Developmental Disorders, 26, 389-406. Weiss, L. G., Saklofske, D. H., Prifitera, A., Chen, H.-Y., &
Snow, J. B., & Sapp, G. L. (2000). WISC-III subtest patterns of ADHD Hildebrand, D. (1999). The calculation of the WISC-III General
and normal samples. Psychological Reports, 87, 759-765. Ability Index using Canadian norms. Canadian Journal of School
Stevenson, J., Pennington, B. F., Gilger, J. W., DeFries, J. C., & Psychology, 14, 1-10.
Gillis, J. J. (1993). Hyperactivity and spelling disability: Testing Whitmont, S., & Clark, C. (1996). Kinaesthetic acuity and fine motor
for shared genetic aetiology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psy- skills in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A
chiatry, 34, 1137-1152. preliminary report. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology,
Tannock, R. (2000). Language, reading, and motor control problems 38, 1091-1098.
in ADHD. In L. L. Greenhill (Ed.), Learning disabilities: Implica-
tions for psychiatric treatment (pp. 231-295). Washington, DC:
American Psychiatric Press. Susan Dickerson Mayes, Ph.D., is chief psychologist and a professor
Tramontana, M. G., Hooper, S. R., Curley, A. D., & Nardolillo, E. M. in the Department of Psychiatry at Penn State College of Medicine.
(1990). Determinants of academic achievement in children with She is a certified school psychologist and has 30 years experience in
psychiatric disorders. Journal of the American Academy of Child the evaluation of children, has developed and published child assess-
and Adolescent Psychiatry, 29, 265-268. ment measures, and has more than 50 publications.
Tremont, G., Mittenberg, W., & Miller, L. J. (1999). Acute intellectual
effects of pediatric head trauma. Child Neuropsychology, 5, 104- Susan L. Calhoun has a Ph.D. in school psychology, is senior research
114. associate in the Department of Psychiatry at Penn State College of
Wechsler, D. (1991). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (3rd Medicine, and has numerous research publications on assessment and
ed.). New York: Psychological Corporation. child clinical disorders.

Ô Ò å Ó æ Ò Ã ß Õ ß ç Ù Ò × Ã ß à á Ã â Õ ã ä Ø à Ö Ò × Ã Ä Å Æ Ç È É Ê É Ë Ë Ì Í Ì Î Ç Ï Ð Ì Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ö Õ × Ø Õ Ù Ú Ú Û Ú Ü Ý Ú