a functional analysis of Sara’s school refusal based on detailed reports from her mother (Figure 4.1). We can operationally define “school refusal” as Sara’s requests to avoid school because of at least one physical complaint (e.g., headache, nausea). Then, we will ask her mother to report the antecedents of her refusal. She says that Sara experiences physical problems only on school days (never on weekends) and only in the morning (never during school hours). Finally, we will try to identify the consequences of her refusal. How do her parents respond to her begging and tantrums? Her mother reports that she usually gives in to Sara’s requests and allows her to stay home. Her acquiescence quiets Sara, who tends to feel better by midday. These findings suggest that her mother’s decision to allow Sara to stay home negatively reinforces her behavior by allowing her to avoid an unpleasant stimulus (i.e., going to school). Consequently, Sara is more likely to refuse school in the future.
Review
Clinicians can observe children’s behavior during the diagnostic interview, while performing analog tasks at the clinic, or in naturalistic settings like school.
A functional analysis of behavior adopts the ABC model: (A) the antecedent that elicits the behavior, (B) the behavior itself, and (C) the consequence that maintains the behavior over time.
Clinicians can change children’s behavior by altering antecedents or consequences.
How Do Psychologists Assess Children’s Cognitive Functioning?
Intelligence
Children are often referred for testing because of questions regarding their cognitive functioning. For example, a parent might ask a psychologist to assess the intellectual abilities of a child with a developmental disability to determine the child’s cognitive strengths and weaknesses. A teacher might want to know if his struggling student has a learning disability. A physician might request testing for her patient who was involved in a bicycle accident and now experiences memory problems. In these cases, assessment will likely involve an intelligence test (Freeman & Chen, 2020).
Over the past century, considerable effort has gone into defining intelligence and developing tests to measure it. Nearly all theorists recognize that intelligence reflects some aspects of the person’s mental functioning that has its origins in genetics and biology but is shaped by education and experience. Albert Binet and Theodore Simon (1916), the developers of the first intelligence test, defined intelligence as the ability “to judge well, to comprehend well, and to reason well” (pp. 42–43). Years later, another important figure in the history of intelligence testing, David Wechsler (1958), described intelligence as “the capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment” (p. 7). Even more recently, John Carroll (1997) claimed that intelligence is “the degree to which, and the rate at which, people are able to learn and retain in long-term memory the knowledge and skills that can be learned from the environment, that is, what is taught in the home and in school, as well as things learned from everyday experience” (p. 44). Intelligence, therefore, is a broad construct that is related to people’s abilities to adapt to their environments, to solve problems, and to learn and use information accurately and efficiently (Snyderman & Rothman, 1987).
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth Edition (WISC–V; Wechsler, Raiford, & Holdnack, 2014) is the most frequently used intelligence test for children and adolescents. Wechsler began developing tests in the 1930s in an attempt to measure facets of adults’ intelligence and problem-solving abilities. Later, he created a simplified version of his adult test to measure children’s intellectual functioning. The first version of the WISC was created in 1949; the most recent version is only a few years old. The test is appropriate for children between 6 and 16 years of age. The WISC–V consists of a series of short subtests that are individually administered to children, either in paper format or digitally (Table 4.2).
Table 4.2 ■ WISC–V Sample Items
The WISC–V yields a full scale IQ (FSIQ) score, an estimate of the child’s overall intelligence (Kaufman & Raiford, 2016). The FSIQ reflects the child’s performance on all domains of the test; therefore, it gives an overall picture of the child’s cognitive abilities. Very often, children show areas of strength and weakness that can be missed if we look only at their FSIQ. Consequently, most psychologists examine performance on the five WISC–V indices, or broad subscales, to obtain a more detailed picture of the child’s functioning. Here is a description of these indices:
Verbal comprehension reflects the child’s word knowledge and her ability to use verbal information to express herself and to solve word or story problems. Everyday tasks that require verbal comprehension include sharing facts and information, knowing the meaning of words and phrases, and understanding verbal analogies and stories.
Fluid reasoning reflects the child’s ability to solve novel, largely nonverbal problems; to detect underlying patterns or relationships among objects; and to engage in abstract thinking. Everyday tasks that require fluid reasoning include the ability to detect patterns in numbers or objects and to use abstract thought to solve new problems.
Visual–spatial reasoning reflects the child’s ability to attend, organize, and interpret visually presented material and to use visual information to solve immediate problems. Everyday tasks that involve visual–spatial reasoning include the ability to solve puzzles and mazes.
Working memory reflects the ability to attend to information, retain and manipulate visual or auditory information in memory, and apply information when necessary. Everyday tasks that require working memory include remembering someone’s telephone number and solving math problems in one’s head.
Processing speed reflects the capacity to scan visual information, to make quick and accurate decisions, and to rapidly implement one’s decisions. Tasks that require processing speed include scanning a supermarket aisle for a specific product or engaging in activities that require matching and sorting.
Psychologists examine the child’s score on each index and note areas of relative strength and weakness. For example, a child might show an FSIQ within the average range, but his verbal comprehension score might be much lower than his perceptual and visual–spatial reasoning scores. The psychologist might predict that the child will have difficulty with traditional verbal instruction in school. He might recommend that teachers use visual demonstrations and hands-on practice to help the child learn (Weiss, Saklofske, Holdnack, & Prifitera, 2020).
Intelligence test scores fall on the normal distribution, with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 (Figure 4.2). The distribution of test scores in the general population is bell shaped, with most people earning scores relatively close to 100 and fewer people earning scores at the extremes. Approximately 95% of people earn scores within two standard deviations from the mean (e.g., IQ = 70–130). The remaining 5% earn scores at the extremes. Approximately 2.2% have scores less than 70, and they may qualify for the diagnosis of intellectual disability. Approximately 2.2% earn scores greater than 130, indicative of extremely high intellectual functioning, which some school districts consider “gifted” (Cohen, Swerdlik, & Sturman, 2013).
Figure 4.2 ■ The Normal Distribution or “Bell-Shaped Curve”
Note: Sara’s intelligence and academic achievement scores were within the average range indicating no cognitive problems.
Image courtesy of Wikipedia Commons
Academic Achievement
Academic achievement refers to the