Since 2002, 4 million visitors plus:
hit counters
search engine optimization service

  Appletcollection Vertical Menu java applet, Copyright 2003 GD

Differential Ability Scales (DAS)


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aylward, G. P. (1992). Review of the Differential Ability Scales. In J. J. Kramer & J. C. Conoley (Eds.), Eleventh mental measurements yearbook (pp. 281-282). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Bain, S. K. (1991). Review of the Differential Ability Scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 9, 372-378.

Bass, S. A., Giesbrecht, T., Othman, O., & Singley, J. (year unknown). Preschool performance on the Differential Ability Scale and the K-ABC. Unpublished manuscript, University of Wisconsin-River Falls.

Compared the performance of 25 non-handicapped preschool children on the DAS and K-ABC. Strong correlations were found with Mental Processing Composite/GCA r=.78 and Global Intelligence composite/GCA r=.75. "These substantial correlations indicate consistency in measuring similar abilities between the tests."

Bass, S. A., Giesbrecht, T., Othman, O., & Singley, J. (year unknown). Second and third grade performance on the Differential Ability Scale and the K-ABC. Unpublished manuscript, University of Wisconsin-River Falls.

Compared the performance of 58 regular education second and third grade children on the DAS and K-ABC. Strong correlations were found between the global scales of the two tests with Mental Processing Composite/GCA r=.66 and Global Intelligence composite/GCA r=.74. "...ascribing validity to the DAS as an acceptable measure of cognitive functioning in school age children." Differences were noted between the scores obtained on the SEQ-V, SEQ-NV, and SEQ-Spatial scales "thereby suggesting that these scales may be statistically independent and may thus be measuring different constructs." "The substantial correlations between the GCA and ACH, which was greater than the MPC-GCA correlation, suggests that the DAS core subtests may well be measuring acquired knowledge and prior learning as well as immediate problem solving ability. Similarly high GCA-VIC and GCA-GIC correlations may also reflect the achievement related task demands of the DAS core subtests, suggesting that the GCA may also measure achievement of school age children."

Braden, J. P. (1992). The Differential Ability Scales and special education. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 10, 92-98.

A review of the DAS with special emphasis on how well it may be used to identify and to plan for children with learning disabilities. "Extensive data, meticulously provided in the Technical Manual, suggest that the instrument is a psychometric improvement over existing techniques for measuring intellectual abilities and for determining intra-cognitive and aptitude-achievement discrepancies."

Byrd, P. D., & Buckhalt, J. A. (1991). A multitrait-multimethod construct validity study of the Differential Ability Scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 9, 121-129.

Cagnina, P. A. (1991). A study of the construct validity of the Differential Ability Scales (DAS) for children with language impairments. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Central Florida.

Cross, D. L. (1993). DAS and WISC-III: Response pattern and cognitive profiles among children with ADD symptomatology, Unpublished Masters Thesis

Dumont, R., Cruse, C. L., Price, L., & Whelley, P. (1996). The relationship between the Differential Ability Scales (DAS) and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition (WISC-III) for students with learning disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 33, 203-209.

The DAS and WISC-III was administered to a sample of 53 children identified as having a learning disability. Each of the children had been administered the WISC-III and approximately 3 years later, was administered the DAS. For this group, all of the DAS composites correlated moderately with the WISC-III Full Scale IQ (range .64 to .78). There was a high (.78) correlation between the DAS GCA and the WISC-III Full Scale IQ. The DAS Verbal score correlated highest with the WISC-III Verbal IQ (.77), while the DAS Nonverbal Reasoning score correlated higher with the WISC-III Performance than with the Verbal (.55 vs. .65). The DAS Spatial cluster correlated highest with the WISC-III Performance scale (.67). The DAS Verbal, Nonverbal, Spatial, and GCA scores were slightly lower than the WISC-III Verbal, Performance, and Full Scales. The average difference between the GCA and the Full Scale IQ was 2.4 points (87.2 vs. 89.7) and may reflect the differences in the constructs measured by the two tests.

Dumont, R., Willis, J. O., Farr L. P., McCarthy, T., & Price, L. (2000) The relationship between the Differential Ability Scales (DAS) and the Woodcock-Johnson Revised-Cognitive (WJ-R COG) for a Sample of Referred Children. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 18, 27-38.

The Differential Ability Scales (DAS) and the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Ability - Revised (WJ-R COG standard battery) were administered to 81 children referred for Special Education services evaluation. The WJ-R BCA-STD correlated .65 with the DAS GCA, .64 with the DAS Verbal, .50 with the DAS Nonverbal Reasoning, and .51 with the DAS Spatial clusters. Mean differences (DAS vs. WJ-R BCA-STD) were -2.80 (GCA), -0.74 (Verbal), -6.07 (Nonverbal Reasoning), and 0.84 (Spatial). Dumont et al. (2000, p. 36) characterized the correlation between the CGA and BCA-STD as significant, but only moderate. Some, but not all of the correlations between DAS and WJ-R subtests conformed to predictions based on broad and narrow ability classifications from the McGrew, Flanagan, and Ortiz Integrated Carroll/Cattell-Horn Gf-Gc theory (McGrew & Flanagan, 1998). Dumont et al. caution against the assumption that subtests purporting to measure the same broad and narrow abilities will actually yield comparable scores for any individual.

Elliott, C. D. (1990). The nature and structure of children's abilities: Evidence from the Differential Ability Scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 376-390.

Topics: The problem with "intelligence"; Focus and assumption; The nature of psychometric g; The structure of abilities, Specificity of cluster and subtest scores.

Elliott, C.D. (1993). Differential Ability Scale (DAS). Child Assessment News, 3(2), 1-10.

Elliott, C.D., Daniel, M.H., & Guiton, G. (1991). Preschool cognitive assessment with the Differential Ability Scales. In B. A. Bracken (Ed.), The Psychoeducational Assessment of Preschool Children, (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

A comprehensive review of the DAS for preschool assessment. Topics: Description of the DAS; preschool level of the cognitive battery; Description and interpretation of the core subtests; Description and interpretation of the diagnostic subtests; Technical Characteristics; Factor structure; Correlations to other tests; An approach to Interpretation.

Elliott, C. D. (1997). The Differential Ability Scales. In D. F. Flanagan, J. L. Genshaft, & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 183-208). New York: Guilford.

Elliott, S. N. (1990). The nature and structure of the DAS: Questioning the test's organizing model and use. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 406-411.

Flanagan, D. P., & Alfonso, V. C. (1995). A critical review of the technical characteristics of new and recently revised intelligence tests for preschool children. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 13, 66-90.

Gridley, B. E., & McIntosh, D. E. (1992). Review of the Differential Ability Scales. In D. J. Keyser & R. C. Sweetland (Eds.), Test Critiques (Vol. 9, pp. 167-183). Kansas City, MO: Test Corporation of America.

Hansen, C. R., & Olsen, J. (1993). Fra WISC til DEP (1) [From WISC to DEP (1)]. Psykologisk Paedagogisk Radgivning, 30, 363-371.

Holland, A. M., & McDermott, P. A. (1996). Discovering core profile types in the school-age standardization sample of the Differential Ability Scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 14, 131-146.

Hull, T., & Mason, H. (1995). The conversion of a psychometric test for use with the blind. Educational Psychology in Practice, 10, 220-224.

Irvin, M. G. (1992). Preschool assessment with the Differential Ability Scales (DAS). Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 10, 99-102.

Topics: Why Test Preschoolers; Theoretical Construct; Technical Qualities; Other Test Choice Considerations. "Given its heuristic theoretical orientation, the solid psychometric properties of the test, and its economy of testing time in its use with young children, an early investment of money and time to master the DAS appears warranted."

Keith, T. Z. (1990). Confirmatory and hierarchical confirmatory analysis of the Differential Ability Scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 8, 391-405.

This study determined whether the DAS measures the same constructs across its wide age range, and what constructs and abilities were being measured by the DAS. "...suggested that the constructs measured by the DAS are quite consistent across overlapping age ranges. ... suggested that the DAS first provides a good measure of g, general intelligence."

Keith, T. Z., Quirk, K. J., Schartzer, C., & Elliott, C. D. (in press). Construct bias in the Differential Ability Scales? Confirmatory and hierarchical factor structure across three ethnic groups. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment.

Kercher, A. C., & Sandoval, J. (1991). Reading disability and the Differential Ability Scales. Journal of School Psychology, 29, 293-307.

Lynn, R. (1996). Racial and ethnic differences in intelligence in the United States on the Differential Ability Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 271-273.

McDermott, P. A. (1995). Sex, race, class, and other demographics as explanations for children's ability and adjustment: A national appraisal. Journal of School Psychology, 33, 75-91.

McDermott, P. A., & Glutting, J. J. (1997). Informing stylistic learning behavior, disposition, and achievement through ability subtests: Or, more illusions of meaning? School Psychology Review, 26, 163-175.

McGhee, R. (1993). Fluid and crystallized intelligence: Confirmatory factor analyses of the Differential Ability Scales, Detroit Tests of Learning Aptitude-3, and Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery-Revised. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment [Monograph Series: Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery-Revised monograph], 20-38.

McGrew, K. S., & Flanagan, D. P. (1998). The Intelligence Test Desk Reference (ITDR): Gf-Gc Cross-Battery Assessment. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

McIntosh, D. E., Brown, M. L., & Ross, S. L. (1995). Relationship between the Bracken Basic Concept Scale and the Differential Ability Scales with an at-risk sample of preschoolers. Psychological Reports, 76, 219-224.

McIntosh, D. E., & Gridley, B. E. (1993). Differential Ability Scales: Profiles of learning-disabled subtypes. Psychology in the Schools, 30, 11-24.

Wardís method of cluster analysis was used to group 83 school verified children with learning disabilities from the standardization sample. Six subgroups were identified. "The study provided evidence of the DASís ability to diagnose the learning disabled differentially and provide distinct profiles of LD subgroups."

McIntosh, D. E., Mulkins, R., Pardue-Vaughn, L., Barnes, L. L., et al. (1992). The canonical relationship between the Differential Ability Scales Upper Preschool Verbal and Nonverbal clusters. Journal of School Psychology, 30, 355-361.

McIntosh, D. E., Wayland, S. J., Gridley, B., & Barnes, L. L. B. (1995). The relationship between the Bracken Basic Concept Scale and the Differential Ability Scales with a preschool sample. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 13, 39-48.

Olinger, E.J. (1992). Teaching Differential Ability Scales tasks according to Sternberg's theory of human intelligence. Unpublished master's thesis, Wichita State University.

Platt, L. O., Kamphaus, R. W., Keltgen, J., & Gilliland, F. (1991). An overview and review of the Differential Ability Scales: Initial and current research findings. Journal of School Psychology, 29, 271-277.

Topics: Purpose and Design; Rationale and Theoretical Background; Psychometric Properties; Conclusions. "These features of the DAS may be harbingers of the future of intelligence testing. The DAS appears to have promise as a useful addition to the field of intelligence testing and seems to be worthy of at least trail clinical and research use."

Reinehr, R. C. (1992). Review of the Differential Ability Scales. In J. J. Kramer & J. C. Conoley (Eds.), Eleventh mental measurements yearbook (pp. 282-283). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.

Riccio, C. A., Ross, C. M., Boan, C. H., Jemison, S., & Houston, F. (1997). Use of the Differential Ability Scales (DAS) Special Nonverbal Composite among young children with linguistic differences. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 15, 196-204.

Sandoval, J. (1992). Using the DAS with multi-cultural populations: Issues of test bias. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 10, 88-91.

This is an excellent, short article addressing the issues of Bias and face Validity, Bias and Content Validity, Bias and the Test Construct, and Bias and Predictive Validity. "My overall conclusion is that the DAS is one of the least obviously biased tests available today. The test development and the test results have resulted in a relatively culturally fair measure...I for one believe that having a diagnostic test such as the DAS will be important for all children and that, as we learn more about it, we will be able to use it with increasing levels of confidence."

Shapiro, S. K., Buckhalt, J. A., & Herod, L. A. (1995). Evaluation of learning-disabled students with the Different Ability Scales (DAS). Journal of School Psychology, 33, 247-263.

Spelling, K. (1992). Dansk evneprove [Danish Ability Test]. Psykologisk Paedagogisk Radgivning, 29, 127-132.

Stone, B. J. (1992). Prediction of achievement by Asian-American and White children. (1992). Journal of School Psychology, 30, 91-99.

Stone, B. J. (1992). Joint confirmatory factor analysis of the DAS and WISC-R. Journal of School Psychology, 30, 185-195.

A 4 factor solution emerged, consisting of Verbal conceptual, Visual Spatial, Attention-Quantitative, and Processing Speed.

Using The Differential Ability Scales in ADHD Assessment, (Author unknown)

The DAS was administered to 55 children, 18 identified as ADHD on the basis of DSM-III-R criteria while 37 were randomly selected and not receiving any special education services. Discrepancies based upon T test comparisons were made. "As a group the children classified as ADHD scored lowest on the three subtests whose tasks are most dependent on sustained attention (Seq & Quant. Reasoning, Recall of Digits, Speed of Information Processing)." Discriminate analysis indicated that 70.6% of the ADHD group were correctly identified by a linear combination of SEQ, RD, and SIP.

Youngstrom, E.A., Kogos, J.L. & Glutting, J.J. (1999). Incremental efficacy of Differential Ability Scales factor scores in predicting individual achievement criteria. School Psychology Quarterly, 14, 26-39.

http://www.cc.emory.edu/EMORY_REPORT/erarchive/1996/August/ERaug.26/8_26_96mervis.html Psychologist, team first to link gene to cognitive trait

http://www.rasch.org/rmt/rmt42.html Differential Ability Scales, M Daniel

BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENT