William Cope
May Thet Khine Nyein
Obie Ellmoos.png "Nathan Luise")
Nathan Luise
Olive SabiitiAssessment for Learning MOOC’s Updates
Understanding the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) – A Widely Used Intelligence Test
One widely recognized intelligence test is the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), developed by David Wechsler. It is one of the most commonly used tests to measure adult intelligence and is currently in its fourth edition (WAIS-IV).
How It Works
The WAIS is a standardized, individually administered test designed to assess a person's intellectual ability. It is composed of four index scores:
- Verbal Comprehension – measures verbal reasoning and understanding.
- Perceptual Reasoning – evaluates nonverbal and fluid reasoning.
- Working Memory – assesses attention, concentration, and mental control.
- Processing Speed – tests the ability to quickly and correctly scan, sequence, or discriminate simple visual information.
Each subtest within these indices contributes to a Full-Scale IQ (FSIQ) score, which is the overall measure of cognitive ability. The test typically takes between 60 to 90 minutes to administer.
Strengths
One of the key strengths of WAIS is its comprehensive approach. It does not merely measure general intelligence (g), but also explores specific cognitive domains, offering a more nuanced understanding of a person's intellectual strengths and weaknesses. It is widely validated and culturally adapted, making it suitable for clinical, educational, and occupational contexts.
Weaknesses
Despite its strengths, the WAIS has some limitations. First, it may not fully capture creative or practical intelligence as described in Sternberg’s Triarchic Theory. Second, it can be culturally biased for individuals from non-Western or lower socio-economic backgrounds, potentially impacting fairness. Also, the test is time-consuming and requires trained professionals to administer and interpret results, which may limit accessibility.
Conclusion
While the WAIS remains a powerful tool in intelligence assessment, it’s important to recognize that intelligence is multi-dimensional. Relying solely on standardized IQ tests can overlook essential aspects of human potential such as emotional intelligence, creativity, or adaptability.
References:
Wechsler, D. (2008). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – Fourth Edition (WAIS–IV). Pearson.
Kaufman, A. S. (2009). IQ Testing 101. Springer Publishing Company.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence. Cambridge University Press.
Neisser, U., et al. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51(2), 77–101.
Fagan, J. F., & Holland, C. R. (2007). Equal opportunity and racial differences in IQ. Intelligence, 35(4), 306–322.
While the WAIS is often regarded as a gold standard for measuring adult intelligence, its use is not without significant limitations and ethical concerns.
First, the WAIS is built upon a narrow, psychometric definition of intelligence, primarily focused on cognitive processing speed, working memory, verbal comprehension, and perceptual reasoning. This framework excludes other vital dimensions of human intelligence, such as emotional intelligence, creative thinking, cultural knowledge, and practical problem-solving. The result is an incomplete and sometimes misleading picture of a person’s intellectual capacity, especially in non-academic or real-world contexts. The WAIS, therefore, reinforces a limited and culturally specific notion of intelligence, which may not align with the lived realities or adaptive capacities of many individuals.
Second, although the WAIS is often described as standardized and validated, it still exhibits cultural and linguistic bias. Verbal subtests, for example, may favor individuals from Western, middle- or upper-class educational backgrounds, leading to underestimation of intelligence in individuals from different linguistic, socio-economic, or cultural groups. This is particularly problematic in multicultural societies or when used in cross-national assessments. Despite efforts at cultural adaptation, the WAIS remains rooted in a Western psychological paradigm, raising questions about epistemic fairness and representational equity.
Third, the high-stakes use of WAIS scores in clinical diagnosis, educational placement, and legal decisions (e.g., determining intellectual disability in capital punishment cases) gives these scores disproportionate weight. Overreliance on WAIS results can lead to labeling, gatekeeping, and institutional exclusion, especially when scores are interpreted rigidly without regard for contextual, emotional, or motivational factors that may affect performance. For example, test anxiety, fatigue, or unfamiliarity with testing environments can depress scores and misrepresent cognitive functioning.