Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III

Submitted To

Dr. Saima Dawood

Submitted By

Zaheer Ahmad

Roll No. 21

BS-V(Regular)

Session: 2019-2023

Centre for Clinical Psychology

University of The Punjab

Lahore
 Table of Contents

Summery..........................................................................................................................................4

Bio Data.......................................................................................................................................5

Reason and Source of Referral....................................................................................................5

Background Information..............................................................................................................5

Family History.............................................................................................................................5

General Home Environment........................................................................................................6

Personal History...........................................................................................................................6

Educational History.....................................................................................................................7

Sexual History.............................................................................................................................7

Interests and Hobbies...................................................................................................................7

Test Administration.....................................................................................................................8

Behavioral Observation...............................................................................................................8

Results..............................................................................................................................................9

Factor Analysis............................................................................................................................9

Quantitative Analysis...............................................................................................................9

Table 1.....................................................................................................................................9

Qualitative Analysis.................................................................................................................9

Scatter Analysis.........................................................................................................................11

Quantitative Analysis.............................................................................................................11
 Table 2...................................................................................................................................11

Qualitative Analysis...............................................................................................................11

Discrepancy Analysis on Composite Level...............................................................................12

Quantitative Analysis.............................................................................................................12

Table 3...................................................................................................................................12

Qualitative Analysis...............................................................................................................12

Discussion..................................................................................................................................13

Conclusion.................................................................................................................................15

Limitations and Suggestions......................................................................................................15

References......................................................................................................................................16
 Summery

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III was administered on Y.B. as part of the academic course

work of Psychological Assessment–II. Participant is a middle born 19 years old girl, who is

recently a student of BS Law and belongs to an educated family of middle-class socioeconomic

status. The test was administered in the well-lighted testing lab of the Centre for Clinical

Psychology. The instructions were given according to the manual. The result demonstrated that

the participant had below average intellectual ability with Full IQ being 75. She obtained Verbal

IQ and Performance IQ of 81 and 72 respectively, indicating below average verbal

comprehensive abilities and perceptual organizational abilities. Further factor, scatter analysis as

well as discrepancies analysis had given a detailed interpretation of the participant’s intellectual

ability in each subset.

Bio Data

Name Y. B

Age 19

Gender Female

Siblings 7

Birth Order 5th

Religion Islam

Education BS Law (3rd year in process)

Marital Status Single

Language Pushto

Reason and Source of Referral

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III (WAIS-III) was administered with the participant

for academic purpose.

Background Information

Family History

The participant's father is 55 years old. He has been teaching botany at a public university

for about 30 years. He had no history of illness or psychological issues. The father and the

participant get along well.

The participant's mother is 40 years old. Matric was her highest level of education. She is

a housewife. Like her husband, she likewise had no medical or psychological history. The two

enjoyed a friendly relationship.

The participant's parents got along well with one another.

 The participant has six siblings. Her siblings were all delivered normally. Her brother is

the oldest of her siblings. He is a practicing attorney. With him, she has a friendly relationship.

Her sister is the second child. Occupationally, she is a lecturer. Participant’s interaction

with her is cordial.

The third child is also her sister. She also works as a lecturer. The two are friendly with

one other.

The fourth child is also her sister. She has recently completed graduation in Doctor of

Physiotherapy (DPT) and is working at home right now. She and her are friendly with one

another.

The fifth child is the participant herself.

Sixth born after the participant is her brother. He is a second-year student. With him, the

she has a friendly relationship.

The seventh child is her brother. He is in the Matric class. Out of all her siblings, the

participant had an extremely cordial connection with her youngest brother.

General Home Environment

The participant came from a nuclear family. She was from a middle-class socio-economic

background. The household environment was described as being comfortable overall. The

participant's relationships with her family members were all fulfilling. Father acted as the head of

the household.

Personal History

The participant is 19 years old. She was born during a routine delivery. She reached each

of her developmental milestones at the proper ages. She has no history of mental or medical

conditions.
Educational History

Due to her residence in Waziristan, a region with limited development, her basic

schooling wasn't very excellent. She enrolled in school when she was 4 years old. She quickly

adapted to the new setting and had no academic difficulties. She performed around averagely in

school.

Due to the dearth of educational facilities in her province, KPK, she moved into a

dormitory. She struggled to settle in the hostel because she wasn't used to the setting. She had a

mediocre grade point average in F Sc. Throughout high school and college, she had been

respectful of her instructors.

The participant is currently living in girls’ hostel of University of the Punjab, for her

graduation. She is not having any problems adjusting there. She performed around averagely in

her class.

Sexual History

The participant claims that she achieved menarche at a late age of 13, while she was in

high school. She had no prior knowledge about menstruation. She was initially assisted by her

sister. The participant claimed that she had no issues with the modification, simply temporary

bewilderment regarding it.

Interests and Hobbies

When asked about her hobbies, the participant mentioned that she enjoyed creating and

fashion. She added that fashion and design continued to be her main priorities and spend more

time in this activity. She claimed that she has a good sense of photography too.
Test Administration

Two sittings were required to complete the test. Due of time constraints, the first test

wasn't given on picture completion. There were several groups present who were administering

the WAIS-III, so the environment in the testing room wasn't particularly comfortable. The room

wasn't completely silent. The distraction was reduced to the greatest extent possible. The test was

finished in two sessions by the subject in close to three hours. At the end of the test, the subject

was exhausted. Each subtest was thoroughly explained to the subject in accordance with the

manual's instructions. The subject and the examiner had a slight language barrier because the

subject was Pashto-speaking and had some difficulty comprehending English, while the

examiner spoke Urdu with ease. Pencil, eraser, response sheet, handbook, and any necessary

equipment for each subtest were the materials utilized.

Behavioral Observation

The subject's weight and height were adequate. She was dressed in Kurta Dupatta, a

seasonally and culturally suitable garment. She appeared really excited to administer the test. She

paid close attention to the directions. The subject became worried when the examiner flipped

pages during the image completion subtest without giving her a chance to respond because of the

time limit. She merely responded that she had never heard of the words on the vocabulary

subtest, and the test was terminated after seven straight skipped items. As the test went on, she

grew weary. At the conclusion of the exam, she was worn out. She replied in both English and

Urdu to objects. She also appeared to be least interested in completing the arithmetic subtest,

stating that she dislikes mathematics. She began to change the cards and blocks impulsively in

the subtest, block design, and picture arrangement, and at times she took too long to solve the

problem.
 Results

Factor Analysis

Quantitative Analysis

Table 1

Sum of Scaled Scores, Index Scores and Percentile Ranks

Scores VIQ PIQ FSIQ VCI POI WMI PSI

Sum of Scaled Scores 41 27 68 24 17 24 13

IQ/Index Scores 81 72 75 89 74 88 81

Percentiles 10 3 5 23 4 21 10

Confidence Intervals (%) 71-87 67-80 71-80 84-95 69-83 82-95 74-92
Qualitative Analysis

Table 1 shows that the subject's full scale IQ score is 68, with a corresponding percentile

rank of 5, indicating that she outperformed 4% of her age group while 95% are still ahead of her.

As a result, her intellectual ability is less than average, according to the results. The subject's

Verbal index score is 81, with a percentile rank of 10, indicating that she outperforms 9% of her

age group while 90% outperform her. As a result, the subject falls into the below-average

category. On performance subscales, the subject received a score of 72 and a percentile rank of

3, indicating that 2% of people scored lower than her and 97% scored higher.

We will now look at each factor separately. It was calculated that the subject's IQ on

verbal comprehension is 89, which corresponds to a percentile rank of 23rd. It denotes that the

subject's academic aptitude, concept formation, abstract thinking, and verbal learning ability are

above average.

Her Perceptual Organization index score is 72, with a percentile rank of 4th, indicating

that she outperformed 3% of her age group, while 96% outperformed her. This indicates that the
subject's nonverbal reasoning ability, fluid reasoning ability, spatial ability, ability to organize or

interpret visually perceived material within a time limit, and ability to integrate perceptual

stimuli relevant motor responses are insufficient and fall into the borderline category.

For Working Memory, her index score and percentile rank are 88 and 21st , respectively,

indicating that she outperformed 20% of her age group while the remaining 79% outperformed

her. It indicates that the subject's short-term memory, concentration level, mental alertness, and

numerical manipulation are below average.

The index score for the Processing Speed factor is 81, and the percentile rank is 10th. It

demonstrates that she outperformed 9% of her age group, while the remaining 90% outperformed

her. This meant that the subject's visual-motor coordination, mental and motor speed, ability to

plan, develop, and organize relevant strategies, and ability to work under pressure were all below

average.
Scatter Analysis

Quantitative Analysis

Table 2

Scaled score, Mean, Difference from mean, Statistical significance Value at 0.5 level and

Strengths and Weaknesses of Subject on Subtests

Subtest Scaled Mean Difference Significanc Strengths weaknesses

Score From Mean e
Value at 0.5
Verbal -
Vocabulary 9 7.14 1.86 2.31 -
Similarities 7 7.14 -0.14 3.14 -
Arithmetic 6 7.14 -1.14 2.47 -
Digit Span 9 7.14 1.86 2.68 -
Information 6 7.14 -1.14 2.61 -
Comprehension 4 7.14 -3.14 3.37 -
Letter-Number 9 7.14 1.86 3.62 -
Sequencing
Performance -
Picture Completion 4 5.14 -1.14 3.49 -
Digit Symbol-Coding 6 5.14 0.86 3.33 -
Block Design 6 5.14 0.86 3.21 -
Matrix Reasoning 7 5.14 1.86 2.77 -
Picture Arrangement 4 5.14 -1.14 4.22 -
Symbol Search 7 5.14 1.86 3.95 -
Object Assembly 2 5.14 -3.14 4.56 -
Qualitative Analysis

According to the overall scatter analysis, the participant did not have any significant

strengths. Verbal and performance, both were found to be significant weaknesses. Her results
show that in addition to the subject's poor social judgement capacity to assess prior experiences,

as shown by her comprehension results. Her performance on the object assembly test reveals that

she has poor visual-motor organization, synthesis, the ability to distinguish between familiar

configurations, manipulative speed, and perceptual speed.

Discrepancy Analysis on Composite Level

Quantitative Analysis

Table 3

Discrepancy comparisons, Difference and statistical significance value at 0.01 level

Discrepancy Comparisons Score 1 Score 2 Difference Statistical

Significance
0.05 Level
Verbal IQ- Performance IQ VIQ PIQ 9 9.38
81 72
Verbal Comprehension- VCI POI 15 10.47
Perceptual Organization 89 74
Verbal Comprehension- VCI WMI 1 8.92
Working Memory 89 88
Perceptual Organization- POI PSI -7 13.75
Processing Speed 74 81
Verbal Comprehension- VCI PSI 8 12.44
Processing Speed 89 81
Perceptual Organization- POI WMI 14 10.68
Working Memory 74 88
Working Memory- WMI PSI 7 12.62
Processing Speed 88 81
Qualitative Analysis

According to the table 3, there is a significant difference of 9 points between Verbal and

Performance IQs (V > P) as it is almost equal to 9.38 points (at 0.05 level). This difference may
indicate participant’s difficulty working with practical tasks, deficits in performance abilities,

poor visual-motor integration, a slow, deliberate, reflective work style that resulted in relatively

lower scores on timed tests (but higher scores on verbal tests).

Perceptual Organization Index is 7 points lower than her Processing Speed Index (POI<

PSI), this significant difference clearly exceeds the .05 level, indicating that the participant has

poor nonverbal, fluid reasoning, attention to detail and inaccurately responds to the visual-spatial

material presented to her and at the same time she has reduced mental and motor speed with

which a person cannot solve nonverbal problems.

There is also a significant discrepancy between verbal comprehension and processing

speed (8) which indicate that the participant’s conceptualization of verbal information or

expression in words is much better than her mental and motor speed of solving the non-verbal

problems. And at the same time, she also has poor short-term memory and concentration level as

compared to her ability to conceptualize the verbal information (VCI>WMI=-1).

Moreover, the discrepancy of significant level can also be seen between working memory

and processing speed i.e., 7 showing her poor short term memory, attention and concentration

level as compared to her ability to plan, organize and speedily process nonverbal material.

Discrepancy between perceptual organization and working memory is 14 which is also

worth considering and indicates the participant’s integration of non-verbal material is less than

her ability to concentrate and make mental shifts.

Discussion

The scores of the subject on Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale associate well with the

subject’s history, and are strengthened by supporting references from the previous literature.
Considering the standard deviation of 15, her IQ falls in the below average category (Wechsler,

1997).

Subject’s personality, educational history, family background, and socioeconomic status

all contribute well as we interpret the scores of the subject. A study by Lepper and Greene (2000)

reveals that a great number of internal and external factors such as interest, quality of

instructions, social and cultural environment along with background determine the actual

performance of the participant.

Quantitative and qualitative analysis shows that subject’s IQ is 75 meaning that she has

below average intelligence. This can correlate with the birth order of the subject i.e., 5 th.

Empirical research showed a slight decline in intelligence from earlier-born to later-born.

(Rohrer, Egloff, & Schmukle, 2015).

Subject obtained below average score on Processing Speed Index. This can be attributed

to the testing conditions showing that there were a few distractions which interrupted subject’s

concentration. Moreover, subject got extremely tired at the end which slowed down her

performance.

Subject performed below average on both verbal and performance scales and there is no

significant discrepancy. Her verbal scale IQ correlates with her background information

indicating that she loved and spend more time in photography and fashion designing skills.

It also matches up with her personal history indicating her love to spend more time in

familiar environment. According to a study, openness to experience correlated strongly with

verbal intelligence (r=0.44) in a sample of 335 adults (Schretlen, van der Hulst, Pearlson, &

Gordon, 2010). Her performance scale IQ can be attributed to her participation in cocurricular

activities.
 The fact that participant lives in rular area where there are less educational opportunities

which affected her educational performance. It also contributes in the results achieved by the

subject in the test. Intelligence test scores and education are positively correlated (Ritchie &

Tucker-Drob, 2018). In participants’ history it is stated , her basic schooling wasn't very

excellent.

Conclusion

Subject obtained an IQ of 75 on Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-III) indicating

that subject has below average intelligence.

Limitations and Suggestions

 The test was lengthy which caused fatigue effect in subject despite having some break.

 Distractions should be completely removed.

 As the test was administered by the examiner for the first time as part of course work, so

there is a chance of error.

 For further intelligence assessment, Slosson Intelligence Test can be administered.

 References

Lepper, M. R., & Greene, D. (2000). Turning play into work: Effects of adult surveillance and

extrinsic rewards on children’s intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 31(3), 479–486. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076484

Marnat, G.G (2003). Handbook of Psychological Assessment (4th ed). John Wiley & Sons.

Ritchie, S. J., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2018). How much does education improve intelligence? A

meta-analysis. Psychological Science, 29(8), 1358–1369.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797618774253

Rohrer, J., Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. (2015). Examining the Effects of Birth Order on

Personality. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2704310

Schretlen, D., van der Hulst, E., Pearlson, G., & Gordon, B. (2010). A neuropsychological study

of personality: Trait openness in relation to intelligence, fluency, and executive

functioning. Journal Of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 32(10), 1068-1073.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13803391003689770

Wechsler, D. (1997), Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (3rd Ed.). Administration and Scoring

Manual. London: The Psychological Corporation.