Is the Demise of IQ Interpretation Justified? A Response to Special Issue Authors

Abstract

Standardized testing of intellectual and cognitive functioning remains a critical component of psychological assessment despite widespread criticism of the practice. Although most standardized intellectual measures are some of the best tools available to practitioners, opponents of intellectual assessment argue the traditional use of global IQ-achievement discrepancy has little diagnostic utility or treatment validity. It is time to move beyond the academic rhetoric of global intelligence to make standardized intellectual assessment meaningful for individual children. In this paper, we respond to special issue authors by presenting clinical and statistical arguments that support idiographic interpretation of intellectual measures for children with disabilities and variable test profiles, and offer recommendations for practice that demonstrate the clinical utility of such approaches. If practitioners move beyond global IQ interpretation, and methods for objective idiographic interpretation are established, the practice of intellectual assessment will be once again valued and respected among those in clinical and educational practice.