WMS-IV Reviews?

[erg923]

---

Members don't see this ad.

For any of us who have experience with assessment in grad school, or for those who are already practicing, what do you think of the new Wechsler Memory Scales-Fourth Edition (WMS-IV)?

I have been disappointed, frankly. The stimulus books are kinda awkward (no easel) and unnecessarily big IMO. I have no idea why they eliminated the 2nd repetition of story B, and the Spatial Addition subtest appears to demoralize patients even before we begin the test (not too mention that the things don't fit in the grid right and its a pain to administer anyway). Anyone have any gripes, or am i just being a baby about this?

Although I am not convinced we reallly needed a new WAIS, I am pretty happy with the WAIS-IV. Although I do remain concerned that the defintion of "intelligence" now appears to be in the hands of Pearson Inc and those making and adding new tests,(ie., figure weights, visual puzzles) as opposed to researchers studying the actual construct and developing tests from there.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

The general sentiment I've seen/heard in the neuropsych field mirrors your statements--the new WMS is somewhat cumbersome to administer, while the new WAIS is generally an improvement.

I haven't personally yet administered either to a client, although I've read through the administration manuals of both, and am working through the technical manual. I was definitely more excited about the WAIS than the WMS, but that might've just been because I hated object assembly.

 

[erg923]

I was definitely more excited about the WAIS than the WMS, but that might've just been because I hated object assembly.

You actually gave object assembly....?

 

[PrisonPsych]

You actually gave object assembly....?

I kind of enjoy object assembly because it gives me a chance to tally the other subsections while they're playing with pieces...

 

[AcronymAllergy]

You actually gave object assembly....?

Never to a client, no. The few times I had to administer it during training and assessment classes were enough to last a lifetime.

On a slightly-related aside, I was combing through an old WAIS-R a few months back, and I must say that it made me gain an increased appreciation for the construction quality of our current materials.

I've also come across Wechsler-Bellevue scoring forms when going through client records before. Now THAT was a true first-hand lesson in testing history.

 

[erg923]

Speaking of history.....We have an original Categories Test projector (glass tubes, slides, the bell and everything) from the Halstead-Retain in our testing closet..never given it though, just the booklet version.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Speaking of history.....We have an original Categories Test projector (glass tubes, slides, the bell and everything) from the Halstead-Retain in our testing closet..never given it though, just the booklet version.

Nice indeed. Coming across old materials like that and getting all giddy makes me feel like a true testing geek. We have some field of vision exam equipment in one of our labs which is pretty interesting, and probably a dynamometer or two from the '60's.

Amazing how that stuff all just sort of gets shuffled away and forgotten at some point.

 

[PrisonPsych]

Nice indeed. Coming across old materials like that and getting all giddy makes me feel like a true testing geek. We have some field of vision exam equipment in one of our labs which is pretty interesting, and probably a dynamometer or two from the '60's.

Amazing how that stuff all just sort of gets shuffled away and forgotten at some point.

We have an actual original WAIS floating around at work, too, gathering dust...all kinds of goodies...

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I haven't made the transition to the WAIS-IV yet, though I'm not a fan of what I've read about the rational for the "update".

And Object Assembly...., I haven't given that sub-test in forever.

 

[erg923]

I never really heard a scientific rationale other than brief mentioning of the flynn effect, which is controversial at best. Even then..why not just update WAIS-III norms? I never heard any clinician whine and complain about the WAIS-III actually.....

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I never really heard a scientific rationale other than brief mentioning of the flynn effect, which is controversial at best. Even then..why not just update WAIS-III norms? I never heard any clinician whine and complain about the WAIS-III actually.....

The time between each revision is getting shorter and shorter, and while it is possible that the Flynn effect could come in to play, I'm not sure about how probable it is in this case.

I just hope the adoption is slow because I use a different set of norms for most of my WAIS-III assessments (short forms). Blah.

 

[Psiguy]

Loring's review is the best I have seen thus far:
http://neurology.org/cgi/gca?allch=...&RESULTFORMAT=&gca=neurology;74/8/685&allchb=

 

[erg923]

Bert Russell has one this month in Applied Neuropsychology as well. PM me for a copy if interested.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I have a creeping suspicion that by the time the research on the WAIS-IV approaches the level currently existing on the WAIS-III, and clinicians are finally "sold" on the idea of switching over, we'll start seeing WAIS-V ads popping up.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Nice indeed. Coming across old materials like that and getting all giddy makes me feel like a true testing geek. We have some field of vision exam equipment in one of our labs which is pretty interesting, and probably a dynamometer or two from the '60's.

Amazing how that stuff all just sort of gets shuffled away and forgotten at some point.

I just gave a TAT the other day, and it was still in the original powder blue box from 1950 or so. Sadly the box had see better days, but I guess it has seen its share of use in the past 60 years.

 

[cara susanna]

I have no basis for comparison because I've only learned version IV, but I agree that the stimulus book is majorly awkward. Plus, yeah, the plastic grid is so cheap.